Stop the CGI


Posted 2s ago by tommyholtslander
CGI take a step back!

People are always looking for good CGI in movies. Why? If you want CGI go play a video game! Movies are an art form. The cinematography, lighting, acting, writing, etc. are tools for this art. CGI is a cheap way to paint attractiveness to your movie. I watched the Star Trek into darkness trailer and not only was I shocked at the destruction of Star Trek but all I saw was CGI explosions everywhere! Lens flares! It's disgusting and for a super famous director like JJ Abrams he should know how to make a movie with little to no CGI!
I just feel like CGI is a gimmick to get people to see your movies. Just look at Avatar. A CG fest! The computer characters look terrible against a real background and extremely bad long side
real people! The movie look good as a whole computer animation! But how the
hell did a CGI animated movie win an Oscar for cinematography?! Theirs is no camera! You just set the anchor points in a computer program and the computer does the rest!
I beg you Hollywood stop to CGI. Real film lovers miss the real movie and will appreciate a real film.

reply

As a CG animator, I have to say that this post is just wrong on so quite a few levels. And it's a bit insulting too. Though none of this is nothing I haven't heard before.

I often find that people are very uneducated when it comes to what exactly goes into CGI. I do a lot of animation and I pour my heart and soul into every single frame of my work.

CGI is a cheap way to paint attractiveness to your movie.

Okay, first things first... CGI is NOT cheap. Why do you think Avatar $240 million to make??

CGI is not cheap and it is certainly not easy to do. People who say that (and I'm not just picking on you... I hear this a lot) are just ignorant to the whole process.

Movies are an art form.

So is CGI. Animation is just as valid an artform as "traditional" film.

The cinematography, lighting, acting, writing, etc. are tools for this art.

ALL of these things apply to doing CG animation. Obviously you have to compose and lay out your shots in an appealing way (cinematography), and light them (lighting) digitally.

As for acting, that title would go to the animators for sure. The characters have to walk, talk, and emote.

Contrary to popular belief, we don't just sit around pushing buttons while the computer does all the animation for us.

We actually have to give a performance but give it one frame at a time. It takes a long time and it's A LOT of work. It's certainly not quick or automated as is the myth. Even when motion-capture is involved there is still a lot of animation work that is done after the initial data is captured.

But how the
hell did a CGI animated movie win an Oscar for cinematography?! Theirs is no camera! You just set the anchor points in a computer program and the computer does the rest!

Just because there isn't a physical camera doesn't mean that the principles of cinematography don't apply

You still have to set up and animate the cameras which is not an automated process at all... far from it. It takes a lot of time and it's an artform in and of itself.

reply

I agree cgi is so awesome. The ship on Poseidon was all CGI. The dinosaurs in Jurassic park where CGI. It's better than haveing puppet dinosaurs.

reply

I'm a huge fan of practical effects, although I have nothing against CGI. It's like oil painting vs. watercolors. They're both valid ways of making art. I do find it funny though, how much work people think is CGI, that is not. The comment that the dinosaurs in Jurassic Part are CGI, while true, is not exclusively true. CGI was only used when no other way would work. They built a full sized T-Rex and almost all the other dinosaurs were built as practical effects and used in camera, yet CGI got all the credit. My suggestion is to keep throwing support being practical effects movies like Evil Dead. Did you know that PFX company Amalgamated Dynamics Inc. is now using Kickstarter to fund their own practical effects monster movie, called Harbinger Down? I pledged to it, because I love the art.

reply

Black Crimson Effects Studio was started at the beginning of this year. Between the four crew members within the group, we have years of experience and many talents for the film industry. We deal 100% in practical effects. This year already, we have done many different aspects of the production process for both "Pro Wrestlers vs. Zombies" and "White Zombie."
Are talents cover every single aspect of creating a movie, and now we feel it is our time to do so. So, are you all ready to see a Black Crimson Effects Studio original feature. Learn more about "The Seven," and donate to our film to receive prizes, and a personal thanks in the credits of our new film at http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1727068777/the-seven?ref=live. We are the "MacGyvers" of film, and even if we don't get the funding now, we will make this happen, but with the funding, we can make it a masterpiece that everyone will remember. You can learn everything about us, and you can see us in action at www.blackcrimsoneffects.com.Please share this with your friend.
Likes are great, but we need to get this to everyone we can so that we can get this film made as spectacular in reality as it is in our imaginations. Black Crimson Effects Studio: Where we make the impossible possible.

reply

I somewhat agree with the OP. I wouldn't sh#t on the animators,programmers,artists etc who put a lot of work into their craft but the amount of CGI and more specifically, bad CGI, in almost every movie is ridiculous. I remember when CGI was something reserved primarily for the depictions of unwordly things or things that do not exist in real life. Even then, there were animatronics and models used to supplement the CGI. Think about Independence Day. A lot of a that movie is just visual effects with CGI reserved for depicting the aerial battles and space scenes. Same thing goes for 2001:A Space Odyssey. That entire film looked real to me whereas now when I watch Star Trek into Darkness, my mind does not accept the CGI ships as being real. Yes, they glisten and are extremely well textured animated and intergrated into the landscape of space but they look like they should be in a videogame cut-scene or a CGI film, not a live action blockbuster. But the new Star Trek films are good CGI nontheless whereasCGI in Olympus Has Fallen is just awful and out of place for a film taking place on earth in the modern times. I am sure there are reasons that filmakers go the CGI route to depict even the most ordinary things. I imagine money may have something to do with it but I really doubt it because I believe that for every frame of computer graphics there is several hours of intensive work from many people at play.

reply

As someone who has attempted to make simple animations in my spare time, I agree with JimTheAnimator completely. The problem I see with CGI is that it isn't subtle. A lot of CG shots, while amazing technical achievements, are the equivalent of "overacting," which makes it feel like a cheap trick.

I guess what I'm saying is, animation is a valid art form, but many animators aren't artists. (Just like many actors, directors, etc. aren't good).

--
My films: https://sites.google.com/site/westernroadmovies/

reply

Jurassic Park used puppets and practical effects more than you may think:

http://io9.com/5890628/an-absurdly-cool-behind-the-scenes-look-at-the-jurassic-park-dinosaur-puppets

reply

LOL

reply