>CGI from 1993 is still the best we have ever seen
How?
>CGI from 1993 is still the best we have ever seen
How?
Other urls found in this thread:
It definitely is not. There's 10 year old cgi on tv that bests jurassic park.
>No feathers
It's the combination of practical effects that makes it realistic
>a static object like a spaceship with some shitty cgi clouds around it is the same as a moving dinosaur
nigga pls
the body is cg and head is animatronic.
computers from 1993 are still the same as they are today, numb-nuts.
Because dinosaurs didn't exist, you have no frame of reference for what they look like, so you have no reason to question how good or bad the CGI is.
Because its shot in a way that the lighting compliments the cgi and its paired well with animatronics instead of full cgi. The cgi for the trex took 4 fucking months to complete
1. Most of the impressive shots in JP were real.
2. It's easier to do realistic CGI in darkness and rain.
>Because dinosaurs didn't exist, you have no frame of reference for what they look like, so you have no reason to question how good or bad the CGI is.
nice meme
>Music from 1813 is still the best we have ever heard
How?
Orcs didn't exist either, but I can still tell that blue eyed Orc from the Hobbit is fake as hell
You can see the limits of the earyl 90s CGI in pic related.
Yeah but that was a close up shot in daylight
Of course it looks like shit
so bueno babe
But that's an actual dinosaur
That's exactly my point.
It still looks like shit today
Why would you circle that? The rest doesn't look much better.
you just proved my point
How does posting a bad example of CGI in Jurassic park diminish the good CGI?
was your point that the movie has shitty CGI by todays standards?
Then Yes. I. Did.
a movie with 90% bad CGI and 10% good CGI is not a good CGI movie.
all clear now?
>dinosaurs didn't exist
This thread is about the single best moment of CGI though
Cant you read
Most of the good CGI was not CGI tho.
You sound like a fuckin homo lmao
>not a good CGI movie.
Did anyone make this claim?
In that scene when the raptors first enter the kitchen you can see the guys operating the suit push the raptor tail down lower
point out the person trying to assert the whole movie was good CGI, rather than this one bit being some of the best ever to exist.
We're waiting
that a static fucking object in cgi made with modern cgi is not a comparison to living moving animals made almost 25 years ago as "improvement".
>T-Rex climb out of the enclosure
>later on its shown to be a 100 foot drop where the T-Rex climbed through
How?
>clearly hasn't heard Queen
>>CGI from 1993
OP made the claim, the clue was in the "CGI from 1993" part.
if you need any more spoonfeeding just let me know.
The part of the enclosure the Rex was in was closer to the people.
maybe the guys are CGI too
because they used a life-size T-Rex robot in the movie
the only thing that's CGI in OP's pic are the legs, and you can tell
CGI
ok dad
That one instance is CGI is from 1993 you mong.
He's saying that one bit from 1993 is the best.
OP BTFO.
>pic of Louie
>Leopold's brat's name in the title
For what purpose?
and the lighting/weather
that's what real dinosaurs looked like without feathers
>Robot
>falling for the feather meme
>>/reddit/
How is that a meme.
>"How is that a meme."
The same goes for the Raptors. It's okay to admit the film is dated. The Dinos are stiff and non fluid. It's extremely noticeable with higher definition videos.
Not even the guy you originally replied to. How is that a meme. I think you're just being autistic
Jurassic Park suffers a lot from this. They really tried to hide the feet of the animals as much as possible. However, the lighting was mostly spot on hiding the CG.
>he doesn't notice copypasta threads
WEW.
For a film made 24 years ago
It looks pretty fucking good
>Falling for bait
Back to facebook with you.
still pisses me off that they killed the dinosaurs off after the movie was finished why not release them into Africa
Compare the two. Op's is 100% CGI.
Because they were lysine deficient dumb dumb they would have died off
>something literally nobody but fedora tippers gives a single shit about
90s CGI couldnt have handled that much rendering. You can tell the face has some organic textures that CGI today could possibly replicate, but not in 1993. Realistic rendering was still limited to hard surfaces and partial diffuse lighting.
Its mostly in the teeth, tounge and eyes. It takes a close eye to indentify the light sources and how they are reflecting off of surfaces
Models.
OPs is CGI m8
...
It's a total reddit meme though
>Did you like know that dinosaurs had feathers and all the movies got it wrong?
>IIII knew that!
>Trying to shittalk the visual fidelity of an actual dinosaur
Fucking plebs I swear to God
Holy shit. Nobody gives a fuck about it. Fuck off with your pathetic reddit fixation and lay off the internet for a while, ass-whipe.
Because it wasn't all CGI.
Lmao I feel embarrassed for you
THIS
People just look the pic from the scene and say it's not cgi.
youtube.com
At the beginning you can see it's the animatronic eating, but when it breaks the fence and roars it's clearly 100% cgi.
2001: A Space Odyssey came out in 1968 and it has some of the best CGI to date.
...