Why did they put in CGI?

My guess was that... they couldn't film the ordanance hitting without risking their cameras to getting damaged.... it's been a couple years since I saw this movie, but i remember exactly what you all are talking about.... all the real plane footage and then the explosions stick out like a sore thumb! Oh well.... I still liked it. I saw it at the USAF Museum in Dayton, Ohio... so that was kinda a fitting place to watch this :)

Those were gasoline pyrotechnics, not CGI. It was SFX, but "real" SFX.

Well, I've only seen the 7 minute blurb on Youtube, but my video card shows higher resolutions than the current 1080 limitation, and the only CGI I saw were the computer-radar images on the AWACs.

Could you reference a scene?

As for the CGI,

One always has to weigh costs and benefits, and then there are laws of physics. For the most part CG was added because the POV cockpit shots were not possible any other way. An IMAX film camera is HUGE, and weighs a ton. No way to cram one into a cockpit. So when they (Steven Low) wanted to look out from the hero plane, through a HUD toward the target plane, the cockpit, HUD, and target plane were added to passes from the chase plane. I wasn't at the shoot but I understand there was a bombardier jet with a stabilized rig for the camera. This give you much more creative control over trying to do anything practically. It can be many takes to get a shot right, and flying around the desert burning money, fuel, time, and safety to get one just so wasn't a good solution. Some shots were added later to better tell the story, same deal with re-shoots not being possible.

The other main category of CG shots was the NACIS (I think that's what it was/is called) screens. That is (was?) the tracking software they use at Nellis AFB to see, in very cool detail, where every aircraft has been, where it is, and who is out of bounds, etc. The real system is classified, so we came up with a 3d version that was close enough to not give away the goods but tell the story. Indeed, I think it was enhanced to be stereo.

The actual HUD displays are also classified, more so when in combat mode, so yet another reason to do those in post. Those were my doing, actually (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0194141/). I never had to apply for any kind of clearance, plus there wasn't time, but you'd be amazed at how much one can learn when you are designated friendly to the cause. Sill, I knew a lot about HUD displays by the time we finished. They were done on an Inferno, running on a SGI Onyx (man that seems like aeons ago...), comp and finish was 5616x4002 @ 10 bit log (12 lin), ~90 megs/frame. It got pretty sporty in there. And one more thing, an real HUD display looks more like an '80s video game than a modern display of any kind, so what went in the film was just better all around to look at.

To be fair, and with apologies to the 3d guys, some of the planes could have used better lighting and some more subtle details in the textures. However in their, and my, favor this was some time ago, and rendering and compositing in 5k 10 bit pipeline was for sure a test of mental and physical stamina. We all did what we could.

As for the bad pyros when the Warthog is shooting the tank, I can't help you with that one. I wasn't there, and there was no budget to enhance what was shot. I too cringe every time I see that shot.

Hope this clarifies the reality on the ground. Remember men, maintain situational awareness!

--------Beak