• triptrapper@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    19 hours ago

    CGI. When people say “there was too much CGI” they just mean “there was bad CGI” because the good stuff is imperceptible.

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      17 hours ago

      And often that’s not because the CGI itself is bad quality, but because the effects team was asked to do the impossible with half the tools necessary. The “fix it in post” mentality.

      Even small things like having reference lighting examples from the set can be the difference between an okay outcome and something almost imperceptible.

      • MoonMelon@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        One time I worked on something where a character threw a spear. For some reason they didn’t have a spear on set and asked the actor to just pretend. Then our instructions from the director were to make the actor twirl the spear before he threw it. Just because it looks super cool to twirl stuff, I guess.

        Not only did the actor not pretend to twirl it, the shot was about 30 frames long (one second is 24 frames). So we had like 15 frames to make him twirl this giant spear, which the actor didn’t do. It was either make it look like dog shit or make a full, hero digital double and completely re-do the shot as 100% CGI, which there wasn’t time or budget for.

        Yeah, it looked like dog shit. The whole project did.

      • triptrapper@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Absolutely. On the Team Deakins podcast they (Roger and his wife James) said they try to be involved in post as much as possible, because when animators and DPs don’t communicate, the digital elements are lit differently and end up looking cartoonish.

      • IWW4@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        The reasons why CGI is bad doesn’t matter. If the CGI is bad it is bad.

        • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          13 hours ago

          I’d argue it matters quite a bit. It shows producers, and by extension a studio, that can’t manage production effectively, and that almost always extends to the rest of the movie. “Bad” CG is rarely the only issue with those movies, it’s just what you remember most since movies in general require the suspension of disbelief and that pulls you right out of it.

          • IWW4@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            13 hours ago

            That the CGI is bad is what matters the most. Why it is bad changes nothing for the viewer.

            • 4am@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Not sure why you are being downvoted for this. It’s true. The takeaway should be “producers shouldn’t rush their VFX and listen to time and budget projections” instead of thinking they can get something for nothing.