Computer generated?


Am I the only one who got the impression that several sequences in the film were computer generated? Many of the shots were *too* perfect, or were taken from impossible angles (for example, stormy waters seen from above at close range, but without the vibrations and imperfections one would expect in footage taken from a helicopter or other aircraft flying in strong winds). As I was watching the film, I kept thinking "Gosh, I thought this was a documentary, but it has the look and feel of CGI."

reply

I specifically came on here to see if anyone else thought the same thing. Not so much the stormy waters, but the actual fish at times.

reply

[deleted]

I thought the sequence with all of the racing dolphins looked very CG to me, and it left me puzzled. It was mostly the underwater footage of this sequence where the "cameras" are following the dolphins. However, the out-of-water stuff looked like real footage... So I don't know.

reply

some scenes where CGI, like space, and the pirate ship, but the scenes with the fishes and dolphins where not CGI. They spent 4 years getting the film, so if they screwed up they would try to get it perfect the next time.

reply

Hi,the pirate boat was and is real,The Bounty,the original boat from Brando's feature...The only CGI sequences are the space ones and the museum animals...

reply

I also came to the board looking for this thread - some scenes were just too hard to believe. I found the schools of fish to look CG, and was puzzled as to how a camera could travel as fast as a school of dolphins, without shaking/moving/being in the way. I thought "Earth" was much, much better than this film. I was expecting some sort of storyline, or to learn something about the sea animals...maybe I was misguided and should have just enjoyed how the film looked...?

reply

ahornyak

I was expecting some sort of storyline, or to learn something about the sea animals...

i'm sorry, but you can't tell me you knew EVERY piece of information in this film already. that's a horrendous claim.

reply

well actually you could know a LOT of that information. Just from other documentaries and college classes, I didn't really learn that much new information from this. Don't get me wrong, still cool footage, but they didn't explain as much, or go into as much detail as others before it

reply

Some shots really looked "too good to be true" so I came here to check if others felt the same.
Really hard to tell.

reply

The herd of dolphins had clearly been photographed from some distance, it's not as if the camera were riding in the next lane. Still with high resolution and clarity though; that's possible these days. Many nature photos in bnooks have been cropped or zoomed and then upsized from long-distance to make some features come out more strikingly.

I don't think it was any kind of major trouble that the film never stated what species or what places (much of the time you could reckon what it was anyway). They clearly didn't want to make it look like a typical tv documentary, it's meant to evoke the majesty and variety of the sea.

Mr.Hitler has made life very difficult for Shakespearian companies.

reply

Often in the full series of these movie there are special features detailing how sequences were shot.
I would be a lot that nothing was CGI at all.
For example, in the "Planet Earth" DVD set there is a feature on how they shot migrating geese with
huge telephoto lenses mounted in hot air balloons. Those sequences seemed odd to me and I think
the reason was that the distance was so far away that it just looks odd when it is close-upped so much
because of the optics.
It is like the human face, or anything for that matter, looks different from close up, or magnified
from very far away. There are subtle things like air changing the colors or slightly distorting the
image.
I have not seen the movie yet but I would bet no CGI at all.

reply

There were a bunch of scenes I thought were CGI. There was one where they were zooming out of the earth and through the clouds to the satellite and it even changed angles... that HAD to be CGI. I agree about the dolphins. The whole time I was thinking how could they keep up with them unless a camera was mounted directly to the dolphin itself, but there was no bobbing... so it had to be cgi. The circle/blob of fish looked CGI too.

I felt like this whole movie was just 1 big screensaver. The narration was really poor and I don't feel like I learned anything. Planet Earth DVDs actually made me EXCITED for each and every episode. This movie did not inspire me at all.

reply

Also, I much rather watch this at Home next time. Being such a quiet movie made me realize how many people are coughing / unwrapping candy / moving around in their chairs... It was driving me NUTS!!!! I just wanted to tell everyone in the theater to shut up!! :D So next time, I will definitely be watching the Cats movie @ HOME! Sorry if you disagree guys, that's just how I feel.

reply


If this movie didn't inspire you at all, there is something seriously wrong with you...



<Generation "me" is an EPIC FAIL>

reply

Some scenes looked CGI to me aswell. One scene when the whale is floating on its back and the camera passes over it closely didn't look CGI, but looked impossible to shoot. Also when the school of fish were swimming directly at the camera it seemed a little fake.

When we get out of this, I may have to steal you

reply

The scene that was deffinetly cgi was the crabs at war and there were 1000s of the crab things running into eachother and it goes on as far as the eye can see. Cgi all the way.

reply

The crabs were not CGI. If you watched the closing credits you could see them filming it with a diver filming up close and you could see tons of crabby crabs fighting.

reply

The movie is not computer generated, and I know it because here in France we got tons of reports on the news about how they made the movie a few months ago.
They built everything to have the perfect shot.

For example, they put light and camera hidden under water, so the fish wouldn't be afraid. For the shot with the dolphins they shot it from diferent angle, they built a tiny helicopter with a camera on it, to have a steady shot who could follow the speed of the dolphins, it's quite amazing to see it.
They need years to make the movie just for the building part.

The point of the movie is to show the species and to make people realise how important it is for the planet so I think it would be stupid to show computer generated animals.

(sorry for the mistakes, explain all of this in english is not simple for a french person)

reply

You are doing fine. You have nothing to apologize for. Your English is probably much better than most people's French. And it is nice to hear from someone who seems to know how it was shot. Most of us are so use to the use of CGI, that we have forgotten how far advanced the use of actual cinematography has come. As for myself, having seen it just yesterday, I was amazed by the cinematography in the film. My congratulations to everyone who was involved in the shooting of this film.

reply

Yes, no CGi used.


http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-ca-working18-2010apr18,0, 6642322.story

LA TIMES: WORKING IN HOLLYWOOD

'Oceans:' Cold-water diver photographs marine wonderland
Eric Börjeson, who is used to working in a dry suit in his native Sweden, traveled the globe working on the Disneynature film.


FORMAL AUDIENCE: Emperor and Adelies penguins watch Borjeson filming in Antarctica. (Katell Pierre, xx)
By Cristy Lytal

April 18, 2010


For Eric Börjeson, one of the underwater cinematographers on "Oceans,"a Disneynature film on the subaquatic realm, swimming in ice water is as natural as breathing out of a scuba tank.

"It's very normal for us in Scandinavia because even in the summer we have to dive as cold-water divers," he said. "That means that we use a dry suit. Around the face and hands it has a neoprene seal, and then the boots are integrated, so there's no point where water can enter. Since I'm from a colder country, Sweden, 'Oceans' tended to send me out on colder shoots. I did the shoots in the Arctic and in Antarctica."

Diving is in Börjeson's blood. His father helped salvage and photograph the Vasa, a sunken 17th century warship, in Stockholm.

"I always knew that underwater there is a lot of history to tell," said Börjeson. "For me, it was a part of how I grew up."

After receiving his first camera at 16, it was only natural that Börjeson would later wind up donning a pair of flippers and shooting underwater scenes for Swedish feature films. Given the opportunity to film animals, he dove right in.

"Some 10, 15 years ago, orcas started to enter the narrow fjords of Norway," he recalled. "And since I knew about diving and photography, I just took a chance and went up there. Back then, we didn't really know how to dive with orcas, but we went in and tried to swim with them as if they were ordinary dolphins. And we found out that they're just friendly and beautiful."

On "Oceans," Börjeson took this several steps further as he traveled from the frozen poles to the milder climes of South Africa, Costa Rica and Cocos Island, encountering everything from walruses to whales. "Curiosity is actually what's driven me more than anything," he said."

Bubble head: On "Oceans," Börjeson mainly employed a technique called rebreather diving. "Rebreather is a closed-circuit system, so the air that you exhale gets filtered and then reoxygenated, and you breathe it in again. There are a lot of advantages with it, because you don't leave any bubbles in the water, so you can be in a stealth mode. For example, hammerheads can be really shy at this location at Cocos Island [about 300 miles off the coast of Costa Rica] because they are there to get cleaned by small fishes, so it's really a relaxing moment for them. We saw 100 at the same time but to get to that moment with hammerhead sharks, we really had to hide in the rocks and absolutely leave no bubbles going up to the surface."

Delicious fishes: Even outside of cans, sardines can find themselves packed. "We shot in what is called the 'sardine Run' in South Africa in a province called KwaZulu-Natal," said Börjeson. "And it's a major event where a lot of sardines congregate on the coast, and the dolphins start to feed on them. So what the dolphins do is go down at depth, and start 'bubble netting' [the sardines], which is surrounding them and scaring them up with bubbles that they let out from their blowholes. So a 'bait ball' of sardines is pushed to the surface and the dolphins start to feed from it. Gannet birds start to dive from the sky. And then after a few minutes, we start to get the sharks. So what we get is a fantastic mix of animals, and that's really action. There was one that ended up with a whale actually coming up from below and just opening his mouth and eating the whole bait ball."

Chilly disposition: Like actors, animals have their unique personalities. "The animals are extremely shy in the Arctic while in the Antarctic, they are all the opposite," Börjeson said. "In the Antarctic, they have no concept of humans being bad. They just looked at me. I was shooting a seal giving milk to its cub on the sea ice. And I was putting up my tripod and doing the shot, and I was two meters away from it. That would never happen in the Arctic. In the Arctic, the seals are afraid because of polar bears, and the local Inuits actually hunt them. So a seal would escape into the ice hole if I got closer than 100 meters away from him. I ended up doing the polar bears in the Arctic. The Arctic is an extremely interesting place to shoot but it's very difficult."

Blast off: It wasn't easy to keep up with the fishes. "We had high-speed camera rockets to have the camera move as fast as dolphins underwater," said Börjeson. "We had what we called a camera torpedo that was towed behind a boat to move with the schools of dolphins. Above surface, we had unmanned mini-helicopters with the camera remotely controlled. We had specifically invented and constructed a gyroscope to be able to shoot with a steady horizon while moving through waves on the open sea. So we're talking about a lot of inventions, constructions and special equipment. It was crazy and very visionary."

reply

[deleted]

Hi Mellouet3,

Your English is actually very good. I found your message very interesting and I hope more information on how the movie was shot is circulated in the U.S. as well.

I really want to hope that the film was not computer generated. I would feel defrauded if it was. This was hailed as an exceptional documentary, and if it had computer generated sequences, the producers would have cheated the audience.

So, like I said, I hope you are right. It's just that I cannot shake the impression that some of the images were somehow touched up. For example, towards the end of the film, there is a scene with a sea lion teaching her young to swim. At some point, the two animals hold each other in an embrace and exchange a glance so intense and loving as to seem human. It is a touching scene, but, as I was watching it, all my mental alarm bells were screaming "fake." The eyes of animals do not convey emotions the same way human eyes do. Mind you, I am not suggesting that animals are inferior--only that they are different. Looking in the eyes of an animal is a different experience than looking in the eyes of a human beings; and animals communicate through signals that are different from human signals. In the animal world, glances and eye contact do not have the same significance they have in the human world. So, seeing two sea lions exchanging a glance that seemed human suggested to me that the images had somehow been retouched or enhanced through a computer.

reply

It has CGI in it .

The museum scene is an obvious one (but I'm not sure it's in the american release )
picture here :
http://www.mikrosimage.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/oceans_web.jpg

http://www.cinemovies.fr/images/data/photos/10778/oceans-2010-10778-460037762.jpg

and the shot from outer space is the other obvious one.


The shark used in the fin cutting sequence is model made in Australia.


you can find teasers , trailers , scenes and making of here

http://www.allocine.fr/video/player_gen_cmedia=18930571&cfilm=28714.html

reply

as far as i know there was only one cgi scene, the one where it went from ocean to space.
some of the scenes mentioned in this thread are explained on the wiki page and other sites. they have top of the line everything.

reply

I just saw this movie, and I thought the same thing. I thought that the crab fight scene looked like CGI personally. It was just something about their movements. But I do agree that the above water scenes were definitely real, and most of the fish scenes.

"nothing happens unless first a dream.."

reply

Why does it look CGI? I don't think it looks like it, but I think that a lot of people don't seem to realize how the world really is working - they just can't seem to comprehend what is going on and that it is for real.

reply