Accurate human rendering in game [2014-2016]
- Thread starter babcat
- Start date
- Status
It was horrible in attack of the clone too or the uncanny cg Arnold Schwarzenegger in Terminator Genesys.
I prefer the choice of Naughty Dog to go with stylised human... Maybe one day someone will realise an accurate human rendering but for the moment it is not a success...
It wont work going with stylized when your whole movie is using life actors. It wont match. Either you should go with a fully CG stylized movie or with a life action movie where CG characters would be used when needed and made as realistic as possible.
It was the best but not accurate enough for me. It needs to be perfect...
Very funny I was more impressed by Navi's in Avatar than any human CG...
I think the best is to find a way to use real actor when possible...
I believe thats what they did with Genesys sand Rogue. CG was used only when actors where either too old or not any longer with us
Genisys Arnold had a body double but it was replaced with CG in post.
The choice in Rogue One was controversial from the start, but based on what I've read, most of the audience wasn't familiar enough with the real actor and his history to be wary enough to spot the digital double. Hardcore fans of SW and CG enthusiasts weren't as easy to fool, but eventually, they were the minority - so the gamble worked in the end.
The movie is going to be known as a pioneering effort in the future, but the enterprise was way too costly for it to become common place in the next decade or so. Beyond that, all bets are off.
The choice in Rogue One was controversial from the start, but based on what I've read, most of the audience wasn't familiar enough with the real actor and his history to be wary enough to spot the digital double. Hardcore fans of SW and CG enthusiasts weren't as easy to fool, but eventually, they were the minority - so the gamble worked in the end.
The movie is going to be known as a pioneering effort in the future, but the enterprise was way too costly for it to become common place in the next decade or so. Beyond that, all bets are off.
How much do you think it cost for the two CG characters in RO ? I thought the main one looked incredible with only slight movements giving him away as CG.
Those two characters were terrible. Looked like computer games cutscenes from some years ago. Very 'Gollum' in terms of unrealism.
Billy Idol
Legend
Yeah, it was brutal. Especially the eyes...the fck happened to the eyes?
Elli from TLoU1+2 has better eyes.
Am I wrong in stating that artistic talent >>> money
?
Elli from TLoU1+2 has better eyes.
Am I wrong in stating that artistic talent >>> money
?
They were simply awful for such a humongous budget Hollywood movie. The main guy was so disconnected from the rest of the scene, he kept looking at the wrong places and generally broke any sort of suspension of belief. Leia was plastic.
I find it very interesting that some people are impressed. It shows there's a certain sensitivity. I can also see this in myself - I recall Jurassic Park and thinking, "we can create reality now." Years later, it's often obvious when effects resort to CGI.
First time I saw Jurassic Park. I find it perfect but now it looks old.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I think Jurassic Park works because nobody knows exactly what dinosaurs looked like or how they moved so your brain has no frame of reference to identify inconsistencies or experience 'dinosaur uncanny valley'.
How old is that now? I now feel ancient, thank you very much! But come on, considering how old it is, it still holds up pretty well!
Extremely well to be honest. It is not very far from the level we get in many movies today. And at that time they didnt have the technologies we have today. The accomplishment for that time is probably ages above what we do today considering the limitations of the 90s.
- Status
