FX and Sci-Fi

[nccdee]

Is just me or does anyone else believe that CGI is over rated? Hey, I like the new BSG mini but I hope we are not going see CGI Cylons all the time. As for the space scenes, they used the documentary style film (shifting, shaking of the camera) so the CGI imaging look less glossy and super clean. And they were smart to use distant shots of the Galactica.

I've seen more pictures of The Second Coming. There is a scene were Apollo is on a Cylon basestar (CGI background), surrounded by 30 Cylons (all CGI, four different models, flying clyons, drones, mech warriors, old ones and new version). Not bad, if you plan to air it as a live action Saturday morning show.

Yes, I know that George Lucas is using virtually CGI everything but at least he is spending a fortune on the latest technology and even then its not alway believeable (Flying car scene in Ep II).

I was watching an A&E program about LOTR: Return of the King and I was very impressed with the artist that created models of cities and the detail they put into it. The director even went through the trouble of building partial sets in the middle nowhere New Zealand only using CGI to enchange the scene. And yes, I know he made extentive uses of CGI but it was the plending of live sets/models/CGI that I like.

My main arguement is that some shows are doing way with live sets and models and have actors stand in front of green screens and we are all suppose to believe it real. It's one thing being practical and saving money but its another to be just plain cheap.

I feel much better now.

nccdee

[Titon]

I was watching an A&E program about LOTR: Return of the King and I was very impressed with the artist that created models of cities and the detail they put into it. The director even went through the trouble of building partial sets in the middle nowhere New Zealand only using CGI to enchange the scene. And yes, I know he made extentive uses of CGI but it was the plending of live sets/models/CGI that I like.


Let me just say that LOTR is an exception to the rule. It had a huge budget to work with and that's something that Galactica and alot of others show just dont' have the luxery of. Stop gap motion and building models is fantastic but unrealistic in television today. It's both to time consuming and extremely expensive. CGI can be good or bad depending on what type of money you have to work with.

But i'm biased you see cause i think cgi can be ever bit as good as real models.

:)

[Boomer65]

You’re definitely not alone nccdee. I liked Spiderman and Matrix2 but a couple of scenes with CGI characters were noticeably CGI and if you notice it then it doesn’t look real, right? But, as Titon suggests, money might make all the difference in the world.

If you can, rent the Underworld DVD with Kate Beckinsale. Not only is it a nice take off on the vampire/werewolf horror themes but the story is actually quite good. Anyway, in one of the “making of…” extras the director says exactly what you’re saying – Something is lost when you use CGI. So he used real people in real suits wherever possible and I think the positive effect showed. Maybe the difference is only noticeable to a few – like listening to a CD or a vinyl album – but I was impressed.

[Sci-Fi]

My personal opinion is that it all depends on how well everything blends into the final scene. The actors and CGI team, especially if they are flying a ship, need the information from the script, story board, director, and writers on what is supposed to be happening on the green/blue screen. If it just appears like the actors are looking lost and just turning their head side-to-side with a blank expression, then it doesn't matter how good (or bad, inexpensive?) the CGI is. The audience needs to be convinced what the actor sees and is experiencing from the interaction with CGI on screen is real. Otherwise the movie may end up on MST3K or the actors performance or CGI is soundly panned by viewers.

I doubt any TV series has the budget of a big movie to allow custom programming for CGI as mentioned by others above. But the small screen does allow for less detail (more affordable CGI), yet still have the desired impact on viewers. Although dated now, the 40's-50's Republic serials, like King of the Rocketmen, had some special effects that haven't been duplicated yet, imho, by CGI.

[WARDAGGIT73]

Never been that keen on CGI effects... :tongue:

[nccdee]

Eric Chu is the Production illustrator (everything Cylon) for the BSG mini he made this comment at Media Blvd " However, the Cylon Centurions did not look 100% convincing. Something about them still looked CG..."

nccdee

[Muffit]

Hi nccdee! I'm with you on CGI, it is often over used which spoils the intended effect. I am incredibly impressed with those individuals so talented they can create CG art, it really blows me away sometimes. But somehow I can't get over liking model based effects better. CG looks a little too pristine to be believable. And when it's used too much in a film it kinda jades me. But I certainly like to see a little in every film, especially when its used sparingly and well. A few good CGI shots placed just right can really make a film.

But my heart and eyes are still much attached to models. There's something about them - perhaps that they are tangible rather than surreal.

:muffit:

[nccdee]

Muffit, have you gone to Thomas7g website? He has a 3D CG of the Old Enterprise in drydock. I was just thinking, would it be interesting to have Universal do a CGI cartoon of the TOS Galatica? They could redo the pilot, tweek other scripts and continue were they left off (not 20 years later). They could hire an actor could do a Loren Greene impersonation.

All the cast would be back and it would be family friendly.

nccdee

[Muffit]

Hi nccdee! Yes, I have been to Thomas' site. He is amazing! Yes, I think a cartoon would be great. I always loved the Star Trek cartoons and also the Beatles cartoons. As Ringo once said, there are no limits when you do a cartoon.

:muffit:

[braxiss]

Let me just say that LOTR is an exception to the rule. It had a huge budget to work with and that's something that Galactica and alot of others show just dont' have the luxery of. Stop gap motion and building models is fantastic but unrealistic in television today. It's both to time consuming and extremely expensive. CGI can be good or bad depending on what type of money you have to work with.
:)


i have to go with titon on this cgi is great with the right amount of time and money
and unfortunatly t.v. usaully dosen't have alot of both

[Titon]

I was just thinking, would it be interesting to have Universal do a CGI cartoon of the TOS Galatica?

If you have a PS2 game system or even Xbox buy the Battlestar game that Warthog produced. You'll see just how good a cgi based cartoon could be. If you seen the Starship Troopers animated series it's as good as that.

:)

[Rowan]

If you have a PS2 game system or even Xbox buy the Battlestar game that Warthog produced. You'll see just how good a cgi based cartoon could be. If you seen the Starship Troopers animated series it's as good as that.

:)I Love Starship Troopers, the first time I saw it I was blown away!:)