this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
42 points (90.4% liked)

Movies and TV Shows

5229 readers
7 users here now

General discussion about movies and TV shows.


Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.

Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title's subject matter.

Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown as follows:

::: your spoiler warning
the crazy movie ending that no one saw coming!
:::

Your mods are here to help if you need any clarification!


Subcommunities: The Bear (FX) - [[email protected]](/c/thebear @lemmy.film)


Related communities: [email protected] [email protected]

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Andrew Jackson reflects on creating the Manhattan Project's Trinity Test, for which he says no CG was involved.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Practical effects age better. Compare The TRex in Jurassic Park vs any of the effects George Lucas added to Star Wars. Even with 5 more years of computer advancement the TRex looks great today and the special editions look like bantha dung.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The CGI that removed cars in the background will still have removed cars in the background and you wouldn't have noticed.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That’s true. I was speaking more to additive CGI.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Removal is additive.

They have to add stuff to where the cars are. If they only removed the car there would be a blank spot where the car was.

You won't believe how much is invisibly added digitally in seemingly simple movies these days.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Now I feel lied to even more by hollywood.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Jurassic Park's T-Rex also used CGI. This video explains a little. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4UuQxjFpfU Good CGI is wonderful as are good practical effects. A great team working together from the start so results look believable is key. Bad CGI often comes from not preparing scenes ahead of time to include it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=l4UuQxjFpfU

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ageing badly fascinates me because the effect itself doesn't change, our perception of it does.

My memories of Morrowwind are of an amazing landcape; but if I fire it up I'm looking at a bunch of dingy polygons.

[–] Deftdrummer 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A perfect example of this is in Terminator 1, the brief shot of Arnold in the mirror of the hotel. It's so obviously inconsistent with the animatronics that, had they just spent more time on Arnold's makeup they would have nailed it.

I know for a fact practical effects were up to par in 1984.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Can't say I remember that, but I will look out for it next time I watch.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Indeed compare the original Star Wars 3 films compared to episodes 1, 2, 3.

The practical effects are much more seamless