Windows 10 wallpaper was physically built and photographed (2015)

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 23, 2024, 1:55 PM UTC

kqr wrote: post #105

esjeon wrote: post #82

I've been spending a lot of time on photography (though mostly w/ film cameras) during recent years, and only recently realized this is actually photographed. (It took long because I'm a long-time Linux user, so I barely seen the image.) Many people say this would've been easier with VFX, but I disagree. The image has highly convincing details that would take a long time even for highly talented VFX artists to nail.…

Which details are you thinking of? I was under the impression that with ray tracing, physically based materials, and fluid dynamics our computers wouldn't be hard-pressed to realistically render a static scene with light (of varying coherence and other properties) going through a piece of plastic and hitting swirling fog. The parameters of the scene need to be set up, yes, but then it would be just as easy to generat…

Post by bombcar » Thu, May 23, 2024, 2:02 PM UTC

jcl wrote: post #195

bombcar wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People don’t hate CGI - they hate bad CGI. It’s hard to explain, but you know it when you see it. Bad practical effects do exist, but even when bad they don’t look “unnatural”.

I recall Amazon’s Lord of the Rings title sequence [1] received some criticism for looking fake, even though they filmed it practically [2]. I’d guess it was due to folks assuming title sequences are CGI, combined with the fact that few people really know what poured liquid metal is supposed to look like. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV-dDyYgwkc [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZEpWvQFXqQ

Post by MarioMan » Thu, May 23, 2024, 2:17 PM UTC

ecjhdnc2025 wrote: post #194

MarioMan wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is basically how product photography works if you’re on a budget. You keep the camera fixed in place but adjust the lighting between shots. Then, in post, choose your favorite components of each image and composite them together in Photoshop. I like watching a YouTube channel called “workphlo” that does this. The core process is the same for all of the items, but it’s quite enjoyable to see him vary the techniqu…

Compositing like this is a nearly inevitable part of almost all product photography, I think? Anything that has motion will lean towards compositing for all the surrounding elements. Except those incredible people who built motion rigs for burger drop ads. Capture One (the kinda sorta still industry standard tethering/photography capture software in the marketing industry, for all the high-end kit) has a really nice…

Post by theeandthy » Thu, May 23, 2024, 2:21 PM UTC

starstripe wrote: post #174

esjeon wrote: post #82

I've been spending a lot of time on photography (though mostly w/ film cameras) during recent years, and only recently realized this is actually photographed. (It took long because I'm a long-time Linux user, so I barely seen the image.) Many people say this would've been easier with VFX, but I disagree. The image has highly convincing details that would take a long time even for highly talented VFX artists to nail.…

I would have used VFX for this as I'm pretty sure it would have been more cost effective to achieve a similar result. Most people, like me, probably just assumed this was VFX anyway. But I'm glad Microsoft didn't though, as this is a fascinating story and case study.

Post by sanderjd » Thu, May 23, 2024, 2:27 PM UTC

sanderjd wrote: post #166

schmidt_fifty wrote: post #78

I hope someone will one day talk about me the way corporate america talks about its logos.

Yeah when I read things like this, I always sit in awed wonder for a moment, trying to figure out where these people are totally full of crap, or whether they really think about things this way, and are just very different than me.