How the fuck is this CGI?

How the fuck is this CGI?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=fV34mT5m0bM
youtu.be/eJt9narRaf4
youtube.com/watch?v=pY_HlCaY_eo&t=25s
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

a computer made it

youtube.com/watch?v=fV34mT5m0bM

We need to stop CGI. This is getting out of hand. I dont want the next president tonne a CGI puppet and not realize it.

That shit takes an obscene amount of work. It will be decades before this can be done on the fly.

fucking kek

It's matter of time. sooner or later actors will be thing of past.
CGI can do everything they do + more. Doesn't complain, can perform dangerous stuff, can be edited in any way.
Find any objective flaw, other than 'uncanny valley' yet.

It's the same CGI quality as that which made Leia and Tarkin in Rougue One, it's just Dennis knows how lighting works so Young Sean looks a lot more natural.

It looks almost perfect here:
youtu.be/eJt9narRaf4

CGI is becoming literal sorcery

she had green eyes reeeeeeeeeee

This was AMAZING in IMAX. Couldn't believe it wasn't Sean Young. Best VFX Oscar should be a lock.
(Blew away the similar work done on Leia in Rogue One last year.)

>next

user...

X24 still looked the best.

w-what

>tfw no holographic Audrey Hepburn gf

Who is this "Dennis"?

By the way, isn't there a scene where Joi and K are standing next to each other in this landscape and it goes:
Joi: I love you.
K: You don't need to say that.
Joi: I know.

Was that not included in the film? It's not in my version.

didnt know that was cg, pretty crazy. i thought they just got an actress that looked a lot like the original rachel and touched her up with good make-up and subtle CGI. guess not.

they say that on the rooftop of Goose's apartment.

No I saw a preview clip before the movie came out and i'm sure they are in the orange landscape. Now i have to try and find it to make sure i'm not crazy.

>CGI of a dead girl
Uh, why is this allowed?

HERE! I knew I wasn't crazy.

youtube.com/watch?v=pY_HlCaY_eo&t=25s

Think of the porn potential. When can hentai animators get a hold of this technology?

Oh nice, deleted scene?

good question really. you couldnt use the likeness of fucking mickey mouse, tom and jerry, or any other fictional character without the permission of giant corporations but you can do whatever the fuck you want with the image of a dead girl, good shit

these are trademarks/intelectual properties
turning people into trademark properties would be kinda not right

i mean you already cant do that, but in the us it varies from state to state whether you can use someones likeness after they've died. it doesn't exist at all in new york i believe. seems perfectly reasonable to me to have to require the explicit permission of a deceased person's estate before you feature them. i know i wouldnt want me likeness to be used to sell shitty cheeseburgers or cigarettes or something after i've died

;_;

i think it's public image
people like actors, singers, politicians and other public figues can be photographed (paparazzi) and their image can be used without any special permission

Didn't we say this when final fantasy spirits within came out?

Maybe. As You can see, it's slowly making into movies, with better (BR) or worse (Leia/Tarkin) effects. It's just matter of time.

It's a needlessly complicated and expensive fix to a problem that doesn't exist, performances will become either increasingly stale or more cartoony because of the effort required to create subtle human behavior from the ground up, it's dependent on and primarily beneficial for movie studios who have billions of dollars tied up in computer based vfx infrastructure and will be impossible to do effectively without it

>decades
young man, you seem to assume technological progress works linearly

At what point will it ever be able to done "on the fly" though? you either need an "animator" to meticulously program every action the character performs or a very advanced mocap that can finely translate the specific actions the actor's face is already making. it's a dumb silly concept outside of special effects roles and cartoons

dedication effort caring

They had someone there and through CGI on it. AND they never let it talk. They all ways changed Camera angles when it talked.

To be fair that one was still heavily based on 2 real actresses.
More like CGI makeup right now.

Such a beautiful moment. Reminded me of Twin Peaks season 3 Laura Palmer (young) in the forest with old Dale Cooper.

David Lynch created Laura Palmer from the 1990 in Twin Peaks season 3 and she was allowed to show her face when she spoke and that moment was just as amazing as this.

Literally first film I liked this year.

The original uncut version is about 4 hours long, they have to shorten it.

They have to release it*

Retarded youngfag shut the fuck up

>young
i'm 30+, just not being blind.
it's future, progress. every now and then there is some revolution in cinema, don't deny it.
>1900s - silent era "there will never be sound"
>1920s - black&white era"ok, but they will never make color"
>1950s - color era "ok, but there wont be anything more"
>2000s - 3D comes
What You suggest next? For me:
>2020s - full movies in 360 degree, videoclips are already on test stage
>2040s - full CGI/VR

>full movies in 360 degree
where do you put the production crew and all of their baggage?

>2020s - full movies in 360 degree, videoclips are already on test stage
You're a moron, movie magic works because you can only view a slice of the world they represent. 360 cameras would be a headache to watch and it'd break so many things that are normally just outside the view of the camera. All of that shit for literally zero improvement to the movie. The only way they'd be a thing is in niche one off art house projects.
>2040s - full CGI/VR
They already exist, they're called animated movies you retard. Photorealism or not, they fully exist and still need actual actors to voice them.

>1900s - silent era "there will never be sound"
>1920s - black&white era"ok, but they will never make color"
what makes you think these were pervasive opinions at the time?
you do realize there were records that could record sound during the silent era, right? they just hadn't figured out how to combine it with moving pictures yet
same for color in film, that was also just a matter of time

>mfw this almost makes it out of the uncanny valley, but knowing the wizardry behind it makes it meta plus harder to get out of the valley and this actually has thematic impact relevant to the scene and situation, on top of the referenced continuity error

scratch that, that's not even the biggest problem
this would completely ruin any semblance of proper storytelling the hacks in unholywood still retain
storyboards would lose their meaning
how do you show something at a specific moment to a person who can literally look the other way?

They already have a hold of this technology.
It's probably sculpted in zbrush with displacements from texturing xyz and then hair is probably xgen and rendered in arnold or some shit. All of this just takes a ton of skill and time and hentai animators are lazy

youtube.com/watch?v=fV34mT5m0bM

They're going to have actor fonts in the future. You'll be able to make home movies and substitute any actor with any other, along with lighting conditions and music to mimic any genre.

Humphrey Bogart as Han Solo and Mickey Rooney as Luke Skywalker? Lawrence Olivier as Ben Kenobi? Done. Wanna make your film noir Star Wars black and white with hissing and popping and artifacts? Done.

can be done with some movie magic
these are just my "predictions", what are yours? it's been dedaces since there was something new, sooner or later there gonna be next step. question is, when and what.
many actors were unaware of sound coming to cinema, some of them lost jobs, as they had terrible voices

what continuity error?

What you want is irrelevant if you're dead. You're of no concern to anyone and vice versa.

When Deckard gives the Voight-Kampff test to Rachael in the original, her eye shows up as green on the monitor. A minor continuity error that largely went unnoticed.

And with that scene BR2049 literally makes even the original film better by turning a continuity error in the first one into a plot point in the sequel to make a commentary about the inconsistency of our memories and the failed basis of our human condition.

Forgot the pic

But how is it a continuity error when Deckard says "her eyes were green" to show that the clone of Rachel is flawed?

Because her eyes were actually brown in the original, while the test and that picture say they are green, a continuity error.

oh that's prett clever

>lighting
This and entirely this.

Tarkin and Leia looked awful not because of the quality of their CGI, but because the lighting was terrible on the CGI actors compared to the rest of the real scene.

The lighting for that entire setting is something else, the madman Deakins had people construct rotary 360 dynamic light just for that room specifically