Jump to content
July Town Hall Thread Read more... ×

Does Hyper realistic CGI need to STOP?

14 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Just this year, we've had:

 

Sonic Fiasco 

TLK disaster 

Cats Mess

 

:psyduck: Does Hollywood need to get its act together? 

 

PaO7k9J_d.jpg?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&f

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:chick3: At this flopping

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to character design, yes.  The cartoon element of these characters is very important to their personalities and how they emote.  I’m all for hyper realistic world design, though.  You can get away with a more low-res character if the world is stunning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop exploring advancements in technology to appease who exactly??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, these are different cases.

 

The Lionking is too based in realism of the animals facial animations. 

 

Sonic is bad design overall, it's not even hyperrealstic. It's a failed and unnecessary attempt.

 

Cats is actually great. It's surreal but I love it, nothing is lost. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Phantom said:

Just this year, we've had:

 

Sonic Fiasco 

TLK disaster 

Cats Mess

 

:psyduck: Does Hollywood need to get its act together? 

 

PaO7k9J_d.jpg?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&f

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

27 minutes ago, Archetype said:

When it comes to character design, yes.  The cartoon element of these characters is very important to their personalities and how they emote.  I’m all for hyper realistic world design, though.  You can get away with a more low-res character if the world is stunning.

Image result for vin gif atrl

 

No. Hyper-realistic CGI is the future. And hyper-realistic CGI has already been used to Oscar-winning effect. Don't forget: 97% of the Oscar-winning film "Gravity" is hyper-realistic CGI—the only real-life addition to "Gravity" is George Clooney and Sandra Bullock, and even that's not entirely true because in some scenes, Sandra Bullock's bare human legs are completely CGI to achieve a more realistic feeling of Zero G in space. "Gravity" really set the bar high for hyper-realism. Another thing not to forget is David Fincher's use of hyper-realistic CGI. The Oscar-winning film "The Social Network" (a movie about Facebook) contains more CGI and digital shots than 2014's "Godzilla" (a movie about giant monsters fighting). Hyper-realistic CGI will continue to improve and what separates bad hyper-realistic CGI from good hyper-realistic CGI solely lies in the usage. No one wants to see "The Lion King" in hyper-realistic CGI. That being said, I think animals can be "realistic" while talking. Shere Khan was great in "The Jungle Book."

 

...Vin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most sets are CGI

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cats looks incredible.

 

As for the others.... not so much but TLK is literally based off real animals, they are never going to have incredible expressions as the cartoon. What needs to stop is the live-action remakes from cartoons, they are exhausting at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. It's not about the (technical) quality of the animation for me, I just want things to be a little more stylised again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Vin said:

 

Image result for vin gif atrl

 

No. Hyper-realistic CGI is the future. And hyper-realistic CGI has already been used to Oscar-winning effect. Don't forget: 97% of the Oscar-winning film "Gravity" is hyper-realistic CGI—the only real-life addition to "Gravity" is George Clooney and Sandra Bullock, and even that's not entirely true because in some scenes, Sandra Bullock's bare human legs are completely CGI to achieve a more realistic feeling of Zero G in space. "Gravity" really set the bar high for hyper-realism. Another thing not to forget is David Fincher's use of hyper-realistic CGI. The Oscar-winning film "The Social Network" (a movie about Facebook) contains more CGI and digital shots than 2014's "Godzilla" (a movie about giant monsters fighting). Hyper-realistic CGI will continue to improve and what separates bad hyper-realistic CGI from good hyper-realistic CGI solely lies in the usage. No one wants to see "The Lion King" in hyper-realistic CGI. That being said, I think animals can be "realistic" while talking. Shere Khan was great in "The Jungle Book."

 

...Vin

I am specifically referring to hyper-realistic CGI for CARTOON characters, especially animals, if they are to emote and talk like humans.  I agree with you about Shere Khan, but that’s because the character emotes were purposely not hyper-realistic even if they appearance was.  Sonic is the perfect example of a character that should never be rendered in hyper-realism, because there is absolutely nothing realistic about Sonic, ranging from appearance to physical abilities to emotes.  I agree with you about everything else tho, part of my job is accurate 3D modeling and photorealistic rendering.  It is the future, but only if tastefully done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. New movies are a disaster. They have way too much CGI. They had more creativity back in the day. That's why old movies are still better than current ones even with less tech.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Vin said:

 

Image result for vin gif atrl

 

No. Hyper-realistic CGI is the future. And hyper-realistic CGI has already been used to Oscar-winning effect. Don't forget: 97% of the Oscar-winning film "Gravity" is hyper-realistic CGI—the only real-life addition to "Gravity" is George Clooney and Sandra Bullock, and even that's not entirely true because in some scenes, Sandra Bullock's bare human legs are completely CGI to achieve a more realistic feeling of Zero G in space. "Gravity" really set the bar high for hyper-realism. Another thing not to forget is David Fincher's use of hyper-realistic CGI. The Oscar-winning film "The Social Network" (a movie about Facebook) contains more CGI and digital shots than 2014's "Godzilla" (a movie about giant monsters fighting). Hyper-realistic CGI will continue to improve and what separates bad hyper-realistic CGI from good hyper-realistic CGI solely lies in the usage. No one wants to see "The Lion King" in hyper-realistic CGI. That being said, I think animals can be "realistic" while talking. Shere Khan was great in "The Jungle Book."

 

...Vin

Mess @ you being purposely obtuse and refraining my argument as one that is against all uses of CGI instead

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly Detective Pikachu was amazing so no. It’s all up to the art direction, giving the lions in TLK a extremely realistic look was a mistake, compare it to Aslan in the Narnia movies he looked real but still could emote well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites