2017 CGI

>2017 CGI

What happened?

Increase in resolution and frame rate does not improve narrative or cinematography but help to detect cheap effects and imperfections. More than fullHD and >25fps, out of videogames and sports and documentaries, is a mistake.

It's all done by chinks now.

Why couldn't they just build a set? The ships wood looks atrocious.

>2006 CGI

Well, it is supposed to be a sunken ship, and they are dead

I don't know OP, the trailer looked pretty neat, and the series in general has always had A game CGI

I don't know exactly what's happening but I think it's been clear for a number of years now that as CGI has gotten cheaper, the quality that studios will accept has decreased.

Maybe it's just that amateurs can pose as animation studios
Maybe it's the chinks
Almost certainly Hollywood Jews are to blame

Either CGI has been bastardized or studios have the mistaken assumption that they're free to replace all practical effects with CGI now.

Don't get me wrong I love the series but OP's pic just looks like a video game and not believable at all.

Daily reminder

Sup Forums is that way

Still the best CGI in cinema as of yet. How did they do it?

Time and effort

Rubbery textures work really well in CGI because fakey CGI tends to look like plastic. It has less to do with the actual work itself and more to do with what they're making with it.

It's less like a video game and more like a themepark prop

>2006
when will we get cgi to look this good again?

ILM becoming too obsessed with having more and more moving parts in a single image.

In the past 15 years there has been an insane surge in the number of CGI houses in the world thanks to reduction in distributed computing costs, to the point where the industry has turned it into a "lowest bidder wins the contract" type affair for CGI.

Go back to 2005 and you could see the same 5 or so CGI house names on every major Hollywood film (Rainmaker, WETA, ILM, Digital Domain and Blur Studio usually) now you read the credits these days and it's some new literal who company every time that has some 1996 tier website and a portfolio that is 2 movies long.

That "underwater" effect looks fucking great.
A shame DC isnt using this for Aquaman.

By mixing make up and CGI

This. The Pajeets have took over, and they destroy every industry they're involved with.

2017, minatures and practical look better than CGI again.

There was no make up. He was in a blue suit.

When you pay garbage for good CGI, driving all the good studios out of business, this is what you get

Bring back Quantel Paintbox.

What makeup?

CGI never looked better than good minatures and practical.

For sure, man. Realest shit right here, honestly thought they had a giant lizard wrecking Tokyo until I went and checked and saw the city was fine.

>mistaken assumption that they're free to replace all practical effects with CGI now.

Until movie's start losing money because they are using CGI over practical effects it isn't a mistaken assumption. You can make the argument that artistically it's a mistake but the industry isn't gonna change shit for artistic integrity

ok, I misworded that a bit.

>mistaken assumption that all CGI can look as good as practical effects do

Now that's something we can agree too. It's even more fucked up that CGI actors are going to be playing a bigger role in movies in the next few years, hopefully this actually crashes and fails a few projects.

Why is it a problem if a frozen image looks bad?

Not trying to shill or anything, but don't moving scenes look worse frame by frame as a rule?

I said GOOD miniatures you retard.

Tsuburaya's effect work during WW2 actually convinced the Allied forces what they were seeing was real. Besides the giant dinosaur his work was top of the line for 1954.

Can't wait for James Cameron's underwater scenes in Avatar 2 with all the amazing alien sea creatures
I'll finally see good cgi again

There was no makeup cupcake

Some orc faces in Warcraft already did. Unfortunately it wasn't consistent throughout the movie. But unlike Pirates it was hundreds of orcs not just one guy, so much tougher and more expensive to do at such a high level

Keeping Bill Nighy's real eyes was a HUGE step in making Davy Jones look real. Having a non-human face also helped. Alien/monster faces are easier than human to CGI as well, because the human eye is SO ingrained to spot real human faces that a CG face that might be damn near perfect still looks weird. (Looking at you, Tarkin)
Another thing was that they were trying to make Jones look REAL. They weren't trying to make him look CGI. It's hard to explain, but I feel like we're becoming accustomed to just accepting CGI as "correct" within the movie's universe. So a character like the Scorpion King didn't have bad CGI. That's actually how the real physical Scorpion King should look and move WITHIN the movie's universe.
It's almost like the cheats in an animated movie. No, a character doesn't really squash and stretch like that, but in the universe of the animated movie, it really happens. So we accept it as accurate in the movie universe.
We're becoming blase about CGI and just treat it the way we used to treat obvious matte paintings or rubber masks. We know it's bullshit, but it's the movie's reality, not ours, so we let it slide. There's no sense of "HOLY SHIT, HOW DID THEY DO THAT?!" in movies anymore. Those 3 letters answer that question every time. I find myself unimpressed by actual physical stunts now. Tom Cruise actually hung off the side of an airplane and climbed the Burj Khalifa for the Mission Impossible movies, but so what? He could just as easily been photoshopped into the scene and safe and cozy in a studio. Those stunts were incredible! And dangerous as hell! And Cruise actually did them!! And a digital stuntman could have done it just as well. Shit. It probably was all CGI.

Firdt half your post was good but then it went to shit.

Scorpion King was unfinished CGI due to time and budget constraints, a behind the scenes doc showcased this. It wasn't intended to look that way.

Tom Cruise stunts are real and they have real footage showing him doing it. It wasn't "probably all CGI".

The funniest and dumbest trend today is so many people are on a crusade against CGI that sometimes there's even a backlash on things that end up being actually REAL. Thats when you know people are just complaining to complain and the bias has gone too far. I feel people should take a step back and stop being such faggots about it all the goddamn time

there are literally no movies in 2017 with a higher frame rate

35mm is higher resolution than HD/2K/4K digital.
Movies are still 24 fps.
Are you pretending to be retarded?

>1993
>Smart use of CGI in combination with animatronics
>Smart use of lighting to mask possible flaws

physical media doesn't have a "resolution" holy shit you're dumb.

what ps3 game is this?
this is overrated it doesn't look realistic at all, if you zoom in on some of the little details it's actually ps3 quality too

that said i'm a practical purist and refuse to enjoy anything with cgi for anything other than backdrops or distant shots of creatures

...

Is that movie any good? I stopped playing just before Pandas and it had become a meme at that point as it was "coming soon" for years, I didn't think it could live up to the hype and after a while I just lost interest.

they've realized that it makes no difference to the bottom line

i watched fast and the furious 8 and there were scenes where they didn't even render textures on the cgi. The movie will make the exact same amount of money regardless.

Hello George. The reason everyone says your shit looks fake is because you "just touch it up" with CGI which catches the eye and tells the viewer that it's all fake even if only a bit of it is.

>Zooming in on a low resolution image and thinking it has anything to do with CGI
Jesus christ mate

Is this an epic new Sup Forums meme or are you just genuinely stupid?

Thats not George. George hasn't used real things since RotJ

35mm isn't higher than 4K

35mm negative might be about at 4K (when talking about detail retention), but 35mm prints are barely 2K

uh oh, someone genuinely doesn't know they're a retard!!

It had good parts and cringe worthy parts. In a nutshell everything orc related was decent, but the humans bits were mediocre at best. Worth a watch if you've ever been a fan of the game but don't expect a masterpiece or anything

most visual effects are done in Vancouver due to tax breaks

Uh oh, it's an analogue retard who thinks the fact there isn't an objective measurement for resolution of your media that it's unlimited

>there isn't an objective measurement for resolution of your media that it's unlimited
this is literally fact.

resolution is measured by pixels. celluloid... isn't made of pixels...

you can SCAN celluloid to create a representation of an image using pixels, but that process is fundamentally limited to the technology you're using to scan it. physical media has near infinite resolution because you can keep scanning it to molecular, atomic, or sub-atomic levels.

This is why I don't watch modern movies all that much anymore. They just CG damn near everything and it all looks fake as hell.

>the term applies to ... film images

image.jpg

>thinking that has anything to do with resolution

jesus christ look at the textures and low poly models the corals aren't even attached to him on any obvious way, they just sit on top of the very low resolution fabric texture, they don't grow through holes in the fabric or even on the fabric (the latter wouldn't make sense anyway) they just sit on top of it, not attached in any realistic way

pic related, coral's going on davy's body like in the movie and through holes in the fabric like they would

Those are barnaclesdon'thitme

>"I'm retarded" the post

you are literally wrong and stupid

Arnold //Zbrush

>someone objectively wrong says something is wrong
so I'm right. thank you.

Couldn't be further from the truth.

They blew their budget making Johnny Depp look like he did before hanging out with Hunter S. Thompson.

This cgi sucks

Bardem looks like shit

It hasn't gotten cheaper. Render times have gotten faster yet animators and suits ramp up the complexity of scenes due to Blinn's law. It's got nothing to with a cost metric because it's always high. This is why pipelines are split between compositors and the render quadrant because compositing onto tracked CGI takes double the amount of time than just native rendering due to rendering pass redundancy.

If you don't mind the cheesiness of really generic fantasy, it's pretty fun.

pretty much what said. the cgi and orc acting is good but all the human acting is from shit tier z list actors.
Idk anything about the vidya but I guess if you are a fan of the vidya, like any vidya flick it will be automatically ruined for you.
I liked it, have watched it a few times as a flick to crash out to.

Nah.

sorry m8 wrong poster

It looks like they copypasted the face on that body and photoshooped it a bit.

It's a shame everything else is utter shit.

You can clearly see how their armours/weapons and the background are rubber and plastic, it is honestly pathetic for something of that scale.