Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“I believe CGI is getting worse even as the tech advances.”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 47 posts

Re: “I believe CGI is getting worse even as the tech advances.”

#11

Post by eyelidlessness »

tracerbulletx wrote: post #8

All the examples look to me like they might have been made to intentionally look like theatrical back drops.

I agree it appears intentional. A reply on Twitter says it looks like they intend a stylized 50s look/feel, and that’s definitely plausible to me.

Granted I don’t watch a lot of movies, but the production quality of TV I watch has improved by leaps and bounds over the last couple decades and continues to do. I don’t know if that automatically extrapolates to movies but I’d be shocked if they’ve had such sharply different trajectories. If anything, I was expecting this to be some kind of an uncanny valley sort of complaint… not a pretty obvious creative choice.

It seems like what keeps getting worse as the technology improves is the pervasive, uncharitable hot takes.

Re: “I believe CGI is getting worse even as the tech advances.”

#13

Post by thatswrong0 »

Disagree. CGI is getting "easier" in the sense that even low budget films can do things that used to only be reserved for large budgets. And there's so much CGI in use that you don't notice these days because it's so seamless / not the center of attention (e.g. check out this before/after about Wolf of Wall Street: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP2sJqoZD7g).

But at the end of the day, you still need good direction and editing that involves understanding the limitations of doing things on the computer vs. in camera. I think this video about Dune provides great examples: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIKupTibxKQ. One example provided is that using green screen can sometimes result in "flat" unrealistic lighting because the camera doesn't expose the image the same if representative lighting isn't used to actually capture the shot.

Re: “I believe CGI is getting worse even as the tech advances.”

#15

Post by adamredwoods »

There is a saying in film production: "We'll fix it in post!"

The high number of compositors in the credits of a film shows you how many people were needed to fix 'fake' looking scenes such as this. Compositors easily smooth this out, and add fake environment, hair, clothing, or even limbs to hide the excess green-screen cropping. Also, a well-placed cut to a close-up shot can hide awkward actor movements on poor sets.

Re: “I believe CGI is getting worse even as the tech advances.”

#17

Post by viraptor »

thatswrong0 wrote: post #13

Disagree. CGI is getting "easier" in the sense that even low budget films can do things that used to only be reserved for large budgets. And there's so much CGI in use that you don't notice these days because it's so seamless / not the center of attention (e.g. check out this before/after about Wolf of Wall Street: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP2sJqoZD7g ). But at the end of the day, you still need good direction…

I really don't get the part around 1:20 with the house swap. It's not some crazy location - why would they CGI that? Cutting the cost of actually filming away from the studio?

Re: “I believe CGI is getting worse even as the tech advances.”

#18

Post by lc9er »

thatswrong0 wrote: post #13

Disagree. CGI is getting "easier" in the sense that even low budget films can do things that used to only be reserved for large budgets. And there's so much CGI in use that you don't notice these days because it's so seamless / not the center of attention (e.g. check out this before/after about Wolf of Wall Street: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP2sJqoZD7g ). But at the end of the day, you still need good direction…

I think you can see a similar effect in the music industry. Technology has practically eliminated the barrier to entry for recording. On top of that, sales are down, recording budgets are slashed. Why spend valuable studio time tweaking amp settings and mic positioning when you can record direct and scroll through a list of plugins - or so the logic goes.

Re: “I believe CGI is getting worse even as the tech advances.”

#19

Post by russellbeattie »

The advances they've made in virtual production studio backdrops are amazing. Camera-linked floor-to-ceiling 180° LED screens and synced lighting is just amazing. The stuff they're able to do in The Mandalorian is incredible. Though once you know what to look for (the camo hiding the floor/wall seam) you can tell they're using it a bit too much. But still it's incredible.

https://youtu.be/gUnxzVOs3rk

Re: “I believe CGI is getting worse even as the tech advances.”

#20

Post by DoctorOW »

viraptor wrote: post #17
thatswrong0 wrote: post #13

Disagree. CGI is getting "easier" in the sense that even low budget films can do things that used to only be reserved for large budgets. And there's so much CGI in use that you don't notice these days because it's so seamless / not the center of attention (e.g. check out this before/after about Wolf of Wall Street: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP2sJqoZD7g ). But at the end of the day, you still need good direction…

I really don't get the part around 1:20 with the house swap. It's not some crazy location - why would they CGI that? Cutting the cost of actually filming away from the studio?

Exactly. Film equipment is heavy and expensive. Why pay everyone to move however far away the desired house is, for a few shots of the exterior?
Post reply on HN