JCreasy
Member
Awesome! Thank you!
Star Wars: Force for Change - A Message from J.J. Abrams
- Thread starter Rootbeer
- Start date
- Status
Awesome! Thank you!
Warm Machine
Member
OK. Then how about 2k and up. It totally depends on the feature and the format. Shots that have appeared in IMAX productions have been rendered at or near that resolution.
It really isn't.
What people seem to notice and dislike is the ridiculous amount of compositing, fake lighting choices and "cardboard sprite" reframing of live-action footage in post-pro. You can't really call that "hate of CG". Compositing is the fusion of live-action with CG/models/whatever.
"we shot it neutral and all the actors separate so we have all the time in the world to move them around and add fake god rays from all kinds of angles" kind of stuff.
It doesn't matter if certain parts of the image were practical models, puppets or paintings. If they are just the basic building parts of a comp with e.g. 50 comp layers it is really tricky to make it look real. Especially if your average compositing artist has probably spent more time looking at computer screens than real-life.
There were lots of instances of relighting, reframing of the image too in Episode 2. Too many art/lighting/framing choices were left to be decided in post, just the way George liked it probably.
I'd almost say I'm the other way around. I really prefer physical sets and physical vehicles and props and stuff, but I'm not too jazzed by CG characters, either. Puppets can have a ton of charm.
I like the bolded line. I'm pretty sure that the unease over CG is sometimes unconscious reflection of the actors' failure to interact with the scene and each other when everything in the sets is just illusion and they have nothing to base their acting on. You'd need a good director to get over that and Lucas, for example, can't direct humans.
Yep, and i'm hyped. It has warmth to it as opposed to the sterile CG. And as others have said, this is raw footage. It will look better in film.
It really isn't.
What people seem to notice and dislike is the ridiculous amount of compositing, fake lighting choices and "cardboard sprite" reframing of live-action footage in post-pro. You can't really call that "hate of CG". Compositing is the fusion of live-action with CG/models/whatever.
"we shot it neutral and all the actors separate so we have all the time in the world to move them around and add fake god rays from all kinds of angles" kind of stuff.
It doesn't matter if certain parts of the image were practical models, puppets or paintings. If they are just the basic building parts of a comp with e.g. 50 comp layers it is really tricky to make it look real. Especially if your average compositing artist has probably spent more time looking at computer screens than real-life.
There were lots of instances of relighting, reframing of the image too in Episode 2. Too many art/lighting/framing choices were left to be decided in post, just the way George liked it probably.
Someone post that Yoda/Obi-wan/Mace screenshot where there are like 5 contradictory light sources.
CGI relies on it even more. At least you have 100% realistic lighting for puppets with natural refraction, subsurface scattering, etc.
Awesome alien.
I mean it.
nice visual balance between cartoonish / anthropoidal accuracy / cultural clues (immediately conveys the idea of the affable persian seller).
Just compare it with the alien slave owner from Episode 1 and see how much better it's conceptually/visually superior in EVERY WAY.
is that Macklemore?
digoutyoursoul
Member
It's from last year but interesting...
"Star Wars Episode 7 to see less CGI and more models and real droids"
http://metro.co.uk/2013/07/29/star-...-cgi-and-more-models-and-real-droids-3902277/
"Star Wars Episode 7 to see less CGI and more models and real droids"
http://metro.co.uk/2013/07/29/star-...-cgi-and-more-models-and-real-droids-3902277/
Warm Machine
Member
Someone post a god awful shot from Return of the Jedi like Luke and the Rancor.
Compositing is done everywhere. The OT has tons of compositing work in it. Lots of set extensions and forced perspective mattes and sets. Not everything in those films is perfect.
For years, watching my VHS copy of Empire I thought the Star Destroyer bridge was a full set. No, it is a piece of one and a painting.
GentlemanCrow
Member
Someone post a god awful shot from Return of the Jedi like Luke and the Rancor.
Compositing is done everywhere. The OT has tons of compositing work in it. Lots of set extensions and forced perspective mattes and sets. Not everything in those films is perfect.
For years, watching my VHS copy of Empire I thought the Star Destroyer bridge was a full set. No, it is a piece of one and a painting.
The Star Destroyer bridge extension works way better than it has any right to. I couldn't tell and I suppose that was the point.
I was watching some stuff on the the Robocop Blurays and if your not looking you can't tell when something is extended in a matte. The 1980s had it down pat when it came to 2D set extensions. The trick is obvious but clearly it's been lost in the move to more advanced techniques. Put a matte in where people aren't looking for one and they won't find it.
CadetMahoney
Member
Warm Machine
Member
Thing is with the painting on glass technique or otherwise you cannot move the camera. You are pretty much restricted to false zooms. James Cameron used rear projection a lot like in the Dropship crash but it ends up looking just like what it is with modern playback like Blu Ray.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
If the whole movie was made to look like it came from 1980, that would be awesome. I wouldn't mind at all. It's fine really.
valkillmore
Member
I even want CG effects that have the same aesthetic as the original films. Kinda like how the devs of Alien: Isolation are approaching things. That would fucking rock. Have state of the art CG effects but the aesthetic is Episode 4-6.
I hope they bring back the old lightsaber look. I hated the fluorescent tube look.
XANDER CAGE
Member
Say what you will about how "good" it looks compared to top-end CGI, that puppet looks like it walked right off the set of A New Hope. Pretty uncanny, and cool.
Sapiens
Member
I can guarantee you that if the people who produced the special effects in this clip from RotJ had access to CG workstations, they would have used to to fix a lot of rough edges present.
And they probably would have used pure cg for a lot of the shots.
I don't understand the anti-CG sentiment at all. It makes special effects work in movies so much better, year after year.
I think what a lot of you are complaining about is aesthetic, which I get, because the prequels looked like shit, but it wasn't because of computers. It was because of shitty art direction and tacky production design.
Also, the horrible, horrible hair everyone had - but I guess that is de rigueur for Star Wars film.
And they probably would have used pure cg for a lot of the shots.
I don't understand the anti-CG sentiment at all. It makes special effects work in movies so much better, year after year.
I think what a lot of you are complaining about is aesthetic, which I get, because the prequels looked like shit, but it wasn't because of computers. It was because of shitty art direction and tacky production design.
Also, the horrible, horrible hair everyone had - but I guess that is de rigueur for Star Wars film.
Extra Sauce
Member
You mean the design or the animation? If you're criticizing the latter, keep in mind that puppet movement usually looks goofy in behind-the-scenes footage. If you're criticizing the former, I think you're just plain wrong.
PeskyToaster
Member
yeah but people are using it as an excuse to bash the prequels solely because of their use of CG and then they bash all of CG when they can't even tell what is cg.
But with JJ lens flare to the maximummmm!
Jack Scofield
Member
It doesn't look like something from Star Wars.
FO-totality
Poet Centuriate
So much better than CGI. There is hope.
Dat neckbeard.
Fine by me.
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
It looks like it fits right in with the weird fucking Mos Eisley aliens in A New Hope. Love it.
a secret-boss
Banned
Same physical vehicles game the old Star Wars good details even though its a miniture.
which also disappeared in Hobbit
Man who cares about the CG shit in the prequels? Why is that always the focus on why the movies suck?
The movies suck because they're simply badly directed all around. Bad acting and bad script being two of the major flaws with it. Plus it's full of pointless shit that doesn't matter to the actual story whatsoever (like the majority of Episode 1 for example).
The movies suck because they're simply badly directed all around. Bad acting and bad script being two of the major flaws with it. Plus it's full of pointless shit that doesn't matter to the actual story whatsoever (like the majority of Episode 1 for example).
Movies are the sum of their parts. So far the only real morsels dropped on 7 have been some visual stuff like this. Everything else is speculation and theorycrafting.
I'd say the visual of the OT are very important and have been a benchmark for high science fiction for years.
Mango Positive
Member
Pretty easy to justify spending a tenner for the chance of winning the prize. If you don't win, you gave to charity. Not a total waste, like the lottery. I love the puppet and am hopeful that JJ will deliver.
I'm not talking about the current discussion, but it seems like all people have to argue against the prequels about them sucking is stuff like 'Having too much CGI." I always thought the CGI was perfectly fine in the prequels, just the movies as a complete package are just garbage in general. The focus should be more on the bad dialogue if anything is to complain about. You should be hoping Episode VII doesn't have a bad script over hoping it doesn't have CG imo.
Mango Positive
Member
The 2nd biggest problem with the prequels (right behind George) is that no one really cared how Annikan became Darth Vader. It was a story that everyone already knew the ending to. There could be no real drama there. If instead he took the Knights of the Old Republic story and filmed that (with a script and director who took no input from George), we'd have a drastically different narrative right now.
Bucket Mouse
Member
I think this is the most Star Wars-looking creature they've created in years, albeit one I could imagine in RotJ (or a hypothetical Episode VII made in 1986) rather than ANH or ESB.
But how do you define that? In truth even the prequel trilogy had aliens and creatures that looked like they belonged in Star Wars. This guy looks like he would fit right in with the other aliens of Tatooine, in Ep. 1, 2, or 4.
Aside points on the fidelity of CGI, I quite hated the artistic direction of the prequels. CGI has a big influence on that. Certainly in here, me and a bunch of others are excited to see those prospects. It gives confidence that the qualities of the originals are being given not only consideration but form.
Pretty much every other thread for VII has had focused discussion involving the script, casting, direction. Let us not forget that this thread is first and foremost about a charity. Everyone's just excited about the practical effects and that is taking center stage in discussion in here.
Doctoglethorpe
Member
It can take up the entire shot and still work for me if it's well done. Whenever I see this scene I still get that sense of "oh fuck, don't fall off the edge!" like I did when I was a little kid. I now know its just an immediate flat floor, but a part of my brain calls BS on that fact, a part of me still feels like I did when I was a little kid and didn't know any better, which means its working.
GentlemanCrow
Member
It can take up the entire shot and still work for me if it's well done. Whenever I see this scene I still get that sense of "oh fuck, don't fall off the edge!" like I did when I was a little kid. I now know its just an immediate flat floor, but a part of my brain calls BS on that fact, a part of me still feels like I did when I was a little kid and didn't know any better, which means its working.
They were crazy old wizards back then - look at the depth, the sense of the scale. Combined with a industrial fan and you sell that they are in the underbelly of a floating sky city. THEY SELL A FLOATING SKY CITY'S UNDERBELLY.
Fucking cinema.
Bucket Mouse
Member
I respectfully disagree. We knew how the story ended for Vito Corleone, but The Godfather Part II gave us with a compelling insight into his younger life and the character is stronger for it.
It was the execution of Anakin's downfall that was poorly handled.
Warm Machine
Member
You will no doubt be happy to know that the art department for Episode 7 includes Doug Chiang and Ian McCaig from the prequels.
I mean... some neat ideas existed in the prequels. Too much of it was "this would be cool" or "we need to be the first to depict this"
I don't know what imprints they specifically left on the prequels, but I hope to god there is some stringent quality control coming down from JJ's direction.
KittenMaster
Member
Welp, I'm out. I really disliked the architectural and mechanical design of everything in the prequels, especially when it influenced spin offs too.
Count Dookkake
Member
Yippee!
- Status