Andrew Jackson reflects on creating the Manhattan Project’s Trinity Test, for which he says no CG was involved.

  • teft@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Practical effects age better. Compare The TRex in Jurassic Park vs any of the effects George Lucas added to Star Wars. Even with 5 more years of computer advancement the TRex looks great today and the special editions look like bantha dung.

    • GCostanzaStepOnMe@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The CGI that removed cars in the background will still have removed cars in the background and you wouldn’t have noticed.

        • Steve@communick.news
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Removal is additive.

          They have to add stuff to where the cars are. If they only removed the car there would be a blank spot where the car was.

          You won’t believe how much is invisibly added digitally in seemingly simple movies these days.

    • Detun3d@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Jurassic Park’s T-Rex also used CGI. This video explains a little. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4UuQxjFpfU Good CGI is wonderful as are good practical effects. A great team working together from the start so results look believable is key. Bad CGI often comes from not preparing scenes ahead of time to include it.

    • livus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ageing badly fascinates me because the effect itself doesn’t change, our perception of it does.

      My memories of Morrowwind are of an amazing landcape; but if I fire it up I’m looking at a bunch of dingy polygons.

      • Deftdrummer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        A perfect example of this is in Terminator 1, the brief shot of Arnold in the mirror of the hotel. It’s so obviously inconsistent with the animatronics that, had they just spent more time on Arnold’s makeup they would have nailed it.

        I know for a fact practical effects were up to par in 1984.

    • strongarm@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Indeed compare the original Star Wars 3 films compared to episodes 1, 2, 3.

      The practical effects are much more seamless