|
Topical
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 07:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
Skarsnik posted:I realise this has done the rounds already, but seeing the BBC news report it in its big serious font amused me a whole lot Turns out this was even funnier than we thought because Phuc Dat Bich was a hoax all along.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 07:33
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Turns out this was even funnier than we thought because Phuc Dat Bich was a hoax all along. You'll find that his 'real' name is Joe Carr or Joker.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 07:39
|
|
|
Choco1980 posted:Yes, but an army of cartoon goblins chasing a group of cartoon dwarves through a toy model of a cave city was not. Don't forget the scrotum beard. Bored has a new favorite as of 14:04 on Nov 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
Inzombiac posted:No they didn't. In fact, almost every shot had a full puppet that was then overlayed in CG to make it look "more videogamey". I want to say the other thing, which is almost reasonable, is that the producers would say "yeah, that's cool, but can we change the angle, and do more shots of this effect?" And the prosthetic people would have to say "uh...no. we built it specifically for this shot. It'll look terrible from other angles. We'd have to rebuild the effect for the other shots you want. That's why we plan it out months in advance." "Oh. That sounds hard and takes too long. We'll just do it CG, the audience can't tell the difference, right?" That 15 min video then only uses the making-of footage, showing these effects from the wrong angle again, making them look bad and undercutting them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL6hp8BKB24
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 15:25
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
This guy only gets things like, half right. First off, he's a LOT more forgiving on how "good" and audience-fooling a lot of his examples are (basically like upwards of 80% of his argument falls apart once he starts claiming that CG is good at mimicking skin, which it totally isn't). Also, as the other examples in the thread have stated, it's NOT cheaper. Often it's more expensive in fact than practical effects to do CG. However, it IS faster and easier, which looks like dollar signs to producers. Sometimes I wonder if some people's eyes just gloss over CG too easily. I remember years ago having a conversation with my brother, and blowing his mind bringing up how often it was used just like, in Futurama (which uses it a lot for pretty much all 3D and large scale motion shots) and he thought there wasn't any.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
Choco1980 posted:This guy only gets things like, half right. First off, he's a LOT more forgiving on how "good" and audience-fooling a lot of his examples are (basically like upwards of 80% of his argument falls apart once he starts claiming that CG is good at mimicking skin, which it totally isn't). Also, as the other examples in the thread have stated, it's NOT cheaper. Often it's more expensive in fact than practical effects to do CG. However, it IS faster and easier, which looks like dollar signs to producers. He only said that CGI was getting better at skin and there were even notable examples where some people were fooled by it. I'd say if you don't expect it, you can easily miss a dead actor brought back to life through dark arts of CGI in the latest Fast and Furious, and it gave much more freedom with expressions, angles, etc, and frankly, I don't think they could have pulled it off with practical effects.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
Choco1980 posted:Sometimes I wonder if some people's eyes just gloss over CG too easily. I remember years ago having a conversation with my brother, and blowing his mind bringing up how often it was used just like, in Futurama (which uses it a lot for pretty much all 3D and large scale motion shots) and he thought there wasn't any. how dare they sit there, enjoying things
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
Like any special effect technique when it's overused, poorly done or substitutes for actual content it's tedious. I can spot CG a mile away and it disappoints me when people slobber with praise over what looks like poo poo to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
Juan Cholo shown without his co-pilot, Chuy. Drink-Mix Man has a new favorite as of 19:27 on Nov 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:lol yes, there's a problem with people who aren't annoyed by effects shots this but unironically
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
I know bad CG when I see it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
I took his point, but he mostly lost me when he praised Michael Bay's effects. The first Transformers was like the exact movie that made me realize that I was starting to really hate CG. Crystal Skull definitely sealed the deal, forever, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
The steam forums for Crusader Kings 2 are kind of amazing if you look at them out of context.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Turns out this was even funnier than we thought because Phuc Dat Bich was a hoax all along. Aw phuc 
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
CaptBushido posted:I took his point, but he mostly lost me when he praised Michael Bay's effects. The first Transformers was like the exact movie that made me realize that I was starting to really hate CG. * gray alien stares you in the face from a close-up enhanced for 3D *
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
Stupid_Sexy_Flander posted:The steam forums for Crusader Kings 2 are kind of amazing if you look at them out of context.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
 Edit: Sorry, phoneposting. 
Megera has a new favorite as of 23:38 on Nov 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
gently caress you man
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Dominic Hailstone is awesome with practical effects FYI. I was blown away and talked to the dude in the ages of MySpace. He was pretty cool. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S9IA6SKHPFc
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
Skarsnik posted:Aw phuc Dat BICH!
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Doccers posted:Dat BICH! Dam Son
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 11:16
|
|
|
I bet they sweep before, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 12:59
|
|
|
Dean must be stopped.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 13:52
|
|
|
Stupid_Sexy_Flander posted:The steam forums for Crusader Kings 2 are kind of amazing if you look at them out of context. These are just some of the reasons CK2 is probably my favorite game of all time 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
Crow Jane posted:These are just some of the reasons CK2 is probably my favorite game of all time In previous iterations of CKII, everyone who died before the game began in 871 and died of natural causes died in childbirth, according to the game's code. Including Emperor Augustus. Including most popes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
Tasteful Dickpic posted:In previous iterations of CKII, everyone who died before the game began in 871 and died of natural causes died in childbirth, according to the game's code. I wish more characters died in childbirth. My wife just keeps pumping out babies like she doesn't know what a succession crisis is. Then I either have to get stabby or deny my lesser spawn a decent education so they don't think to rise up, and it wastes time I could have spent slaughtering infidels. The game totally makes you a terrible person, it's awesome.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Kids these days
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 02:53
|
|
|
People whining about CGI don't know what they're talking about : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL6hp8BKB24
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
I think a lot of CGI making GBS threads is because of the Star Wars 1-3. It was just so sterile and uninteresting, movie fans are nervous that we are going to see more of that crap. Avatar was not a very good movie but the CG was very well done without being plastic and homogeneous.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 04:35
|
|
Inzombiac posted:I think a lot of CGI making GBS threads is because of the Star Wars 1-3. It was just so sterile and uninteresting, movie fans are nervous that we are going to see more of that crap. I thought so too until I saw the high def blu-ray poo poo at a friend's place, it might have just been the settings on the TV but I thought it all looked like rubber or clay and just stood out painfully bad. But maybe I'm just crazy.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
Nuebot posted:I thought so too until I saw the high def blu-ray poo poo at a friend's place, it might have just been the settings on the TV but I thought it all looked like rubber or clay and just stood out painfully bad. But maybe I'm just crazy. That's usually the TV settings. I just bought a new TV and had to gently caress around in the menus for 10 minutes to turn off all the picture "enhancements" that destroy watching movies and single cam tv shows.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 05:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
Nuebot posted:I thought so too until I saw the high def blu-ray poo poo at a friend's place, it might have just been the settings on the TV but I thought it all looked like rubber or clay and just stood out painfully bad. But maybe I'm just crazy. People were getting depression because the cinema experience was so magical that nothing in reality could compare to it so I assume the tv was the problem here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 05:41
|
|
