Why because your too much of a dumbass to understand?
Accept I don’t
It was elder predsy spinning the wheels and my insistent on certain claims is because of your inability to even respond to them, hence the repeat. If you can’t respond that’s not my fault.
If you just responded to everything with “Why” instead of semantics, I think everyone’s comprehension of your babbling would increase tenfold.
My guy you will spin the wheels endlessly in the bug report section of all things. Bet.
like you aren’t even replying to anything above rn wtf is this post? Why even hit reply?
As you don’t answer why
Also imagine being too dumb to understand a basic insult and painting it as semantics
Seriously all your doing is throwing big words out there trying to break down my comment when it still boils down to a basic insult and you making comments about it being comprehensible is nonsensical to the actual message for it’s simplicity is quite frank
But if Shallow wording is what you want then game the last paragraph
Or I guess you can’t understand
So?
People don’t stop being stupid because they comment somewhere
Well I’ve stopped caring about prey and started caring about your bitchiness.
you know that jaws picture is not cgi, right? that was actually, “practical effects”
joke’s on you
Its a shark on a stick infront of a green screen haphazardly edited like a college project.
Everyone was at fault here including the exploding window.
You aren’t talking about anything at all.
I would say maybe I don’t understand wtf you’re trying to say because you were trying to handcraft an insult (about disney?) on top of not actually responding to the subject matter, but this is always the case. You are always babbling in circles basically spamming “WHY” for 200 replies bringing nothing to the conversation besides random tangents.
so is Disney cheaping out on cgi or not? I take it we’ve established why cgi transformers look better than cgi spiderman & fx look better with smoke+mirrors to hide inevitable human error
inb4 WHY
Thing is, practical effects are not only not practical, more often than not, they don’t look that good no matter what you believe or say. Just because it works on some examples (really dark movie settings and just glimpses of it) doesn’t mean it works better “all the time”. It just doesn’t.
Have you seen what a man in a bear costume looks like? Tell me how “real” it looks, I dare you. “Why not train a real bear to do it?” … Not even going to answer that, as it shows ignorance in both animal rights and movie making finance and insurance.
Even the original alien movie the alien looked goofy as fuck and is shown glimpses, in dark settings, where it barely moves. The suit kept breaking and it looked horrible.
Case in point, 90% of the the time CGI looks better, more real, and some things are simply impossible to make with practical effects. CGI is good enough to give directors creative freedom as they are no longer limited to the technology of the past, nor to budget constraints.
Making Star Wars took hundreds of hours to create scaled sets, hundreds of hours filming and editing just the spaceship sequences that were just a few minutes long. CGI looks just as convincing, if not better, for a fraction of the time and cost.
And obviously… can you compare old school Godzilla movies and tell me that shit looks better and more real than the newer ones with “muh cgi”… come the fuck on…
Shut up and go to the kitchen where you belong
Bruh you still haven’t figured that out yet?
I’ll let you think on that
Ya but the old ones are bad practical effects so they’re so bad they’re good -fine probably
The Revenant’s got the only good cgi bear fight in existence and its because they brought a hundred things on set as lighting/material reference, made the bear in like three something layers in a time consuming, costly fashion, added some smoke, and limited shots of the bear instead of going “fuck it people will watch it anyway and get the gist.” Because the director stated that quality of the bear scene would make or break the movie.
Again, skill issue.
It takes a real hack to just plant the camera behind a log and just show an animated bear clipping through itself in all its glory. Even the dead bear is cgi, gtf outta here. Compare it to the dead horse prop in Revenant and tell me you can’t tell the difference.
Stop bringing horses on sets btw. Btw stop having a set at all. /s
No one’s asking you to make a practical effects transformers with metal and some wires. Giant things look better cgi because it screws with your frame of reference, ergo they’re “larger than life” and then take years and millions to mocap and animate anyways because if you’re watching a 90% cgi movie it better not look and move like ass.
You can go “durrr alien was dark, the puppet wasnt even good” a million times and I can point to a bunch of overused cgi from the CGI CAN DO ANYTHING era everyone thought looked great at the time and was peak human achievement lmao. We’re currently in the shitty quality control era for entertainment in general.
Truely filmmaking has been released from its shackles. Your brain on video game physics. Touch grass.
In reality, stories that are written and storyboarded with absolutely no regard to feasibility for visual effect artists are a problem in and of itself. Hackery.
no shit?
What like the indian fight? lmao. yeah really pushing the boundaries of technical filmmaking there…how did we survive before the era of cgi fistfights, unfathomable
Acting like no one’s made a movie with a suit since 1979.
Skill issue.
Despite Top Gun 2 easily being able to shit out some soulless cgi they went the extra mile and opted for majority practical stuntwork, imagine that. And hopped in a fucking jet.
And yet you are here talking about how impossible suit scenes are.
G i t
g u d
I see you still have no actual input here and continue to mash the reply button
So are you, unless you want to say that dig at me was different, in which case stay delusional
Might as well give the respect of a proper reply
Completely unrelated, I was using that as an example torwards my eye on lighting
Regardless using proper lighting is a part of film making
You think practical effects work in any light? Often times practical effects have to be partially hidden in the same manner of CGI.
The same is true of practical effects though. Hell they make practical effects that are only partial parts of a body to be used during scenes and rely on the animotronics to be hidden.
You can make physics apply to animations though by changing . And they directly have the reference material next to it to compare.
If have wind blowing why can’t you simulate cloth blowing?
Depends on the cgi as good cgi like say the eagles from LOTR or even the orchestra from the hobbit work
That’s quite a presumption
It was sarcasm used to communicate that Disney was cheaping out
Even this example is bad as star wars speeder chase is a better example let alone the hobbit which I didn’t even know Gandalf was in front of a green screen half the time
A general problem you have is that you take the worst examples of cgi and set them up as the only way to use cgi. “No it’s not good cgi, it’s this crappy cgi that was already outdated by the release day by several years”
The Indian fight alone shows the predator move faster than humanly possible. The choreography would have to take a hit or you do it cgi
I will make this plan and clear
Disney sucks ass and so do their movies. That spiderman cgi was outclassed years ago
So cgi can be good, and all that practical effect work sounds, no what I legitimately said practical effect accidentally because that set up sounds like practical effect work.
I mean what do you want an animatronic bear?
It takes skill to use cgi the same it takes practical effects
Somebody has had their weetabix today
If you are feeling froggy
Take a leap jabroni
We already discussed this.
You can attempt to imitate physics through the use of contact points and conservative camera work, its still visibly off.
But thats not what happens, in reality the producer just goes “you’re already suspending your disbelief whats more wonky physics going to do? More room for hastily made animations!” Since quality control has kind of died after they acknowleged they can’t get physics down perfectly for a film, why go the extra mile at all? End result = more laziness and short production windows. Props don’t have that problem because everyone’s not in the room trying to imagine an apple.
ok so the millions in production is cheaping out here good to know
Not once did I reference the scorpion king lmao. There’s just endless examples of awful cgi due to the infinite capacity for human error, whereas I can point to a horse in a western from the 60’s and it will always be a tangible object because it is - especially compared to cursed animated horses.
Lmfao that part of jaws 3 was so bad lol “omg hes coming this way” then the glass breaking was terrible cgi that part always stuck with me as a example of terrible fx
3D was a cursed phase of human history
The only 3D I know of…
For me its 4D, where they’d shake the chairs and spray water at you
That’s that sea world 4D theatre treatment right there
