• MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      69
      ·
      3 days ago

      I mean, this is what your 2024 videogames look like, rendering in real time. I’d say we’ve come some distance.

      And this is what offline CG looks like now. I’m all for repurposing this thread as an appreciation of how far scientists, engineers and artists have pushed CG in the past 30 years.

      EDIT: Ugh, this stupid site’s terrible image support. Changing links.

        • MudMan@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 days ago

          I’ll be honest with you, I can see these most of the time now that I updated the links but I’ve also seen them broken in other tabs and refreshes, so don’t blame me (or CG tech), blame federation and bad design for image support.

          But let me know if they’re still broken on your end, because I have no reliable way to know.

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      Indeed. There still are films with good CGI, but don’t expect Disney to spend real money on a movie aimed at kids to get at their pocket money (or their parents sparetime activities budget). The kids won’t know the difference.

  • cobysev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    3 days ago

    I mean, Disney put out a casting call several years ago for little people to fill the dwarf roles for a live action Snow White. But Peter Dinklage balked at it, claiming that it was oppressive to cast little people just because they’re little and not giving them serious acting roles based on skill or merit.

    However, a lot of little people in Hollywood got mad at Peter Dinklage for ruining job opportunities for them, because they’re rarely cast for anything else and they had no problem taking the roles based solely on their height.

    But it was too late; Disney pulled the casting to avoid controversy and now we’re stuck with this CGI abomination to replace little people in this film.

    • HeyJoe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      3 days ago

      That’s awful. A lot of people do a lot of degrading work in life… you do what you gotta do. Besides, I would imagine getting your foot in the door in a big budget movie would do tons for the rest of their careers and could have helped with getting other roles easier. Pretty sure that’s how it works for everyone in the industry. Did Peter not do anything like this?

    • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s such a stupid take on his part

      It’d be like a studio needing to fill a role for a black character with a black actor, putting out a casting call for black actors, then a famous black actor coming out against it.

      It’s stupid and only harms those that he’s trying to help.

      It’s not like the studio was just going to hire the first 7 little people to show up, they were still gonna have to try to get the role.

      • doctordevice@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’m also confused, hasn’t he had plenty of roles that were typecast for little people? The two I know him most for are Game of Thrones (a character with dwarfism in the source material) and Elf (a character who’s entire written purpose seems to be “little person that Buddy mistakes for an elf”).

    • lath@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 days ago

      Guess in reality, you first have to afford the bills before being able to afford virtue.

    • macniel@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 days ago

      Peter Dinklage probably feared that other with his medical condition was able to find acting jobs and he would have to fight to find a gig then.

    • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 days ago

      yeah its sorta redic of him. Its like saying they should not cast backup dancers because it oppressive to the lithe. They are decent jobs and not everyone can be a starring role.

    • smokebuddy [he/him]@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      For awhile it was being remade as Snow White and the Seven Magical Creatures then images from the set came out and backlash led to this CGI trash

      • samus12345@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 days ago

        Time to retire that term. Being “politically correct” in the US clearly means being a bigoted Christian white nationalist, judging by the most recent election.

  • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    3 days ago

    We can thank Steve for the leaps and bounds that happened in the early 90’s with CGI - tl;dr he was a brilliant animator who snuck in under the radar at ILM and was given run of the animation department because he/his working partner literally invented many of the cutting edge animation techniques, from scratch.

    Dude has a tragic story (personality disorder & alcoholism) that led to him being uncredited and blacklisted, pretty well captured in a biopic, worth the hour-ish watch imo.

    • The Abyss, 1991 - Academy Award for Visual Effects
    • Terminator 2, 1991 - Liquid Metal for T-1000
    • Jurassic Park, 1993 - work featured throughout, with the highlight of the T-Rex’s movement and skeletal modeling
    • The Mask, 1994 - Nominated for Academy Award for Visual Effect
      • MudMan@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 days ago

        20, maybe. It may have been the paranoia about blending everything together driving so much of the focus for on-set lighting, but a bunch of that is cut and lit the right way to hold up.

        Terminator 2, on the other hand, absolutely looks of its age.

      • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        I think the original got re-touched up more recently, too. So you’ll probably have a hard time finding the theatrical release cgi version to even watch.

  • sploosh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 days ago

    Photorealism and stylized animation are not the same thing and are used in different contexts.

  • Sibbo@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 days ago

    That screenshot is so blurry, there is nothing visible that would be wrong with the CGI

  • Zexks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Looks a thousand times better. No hair on the dino. The trees were real and the dino was just pasted in behind. It also barely moved and has no lines. It’s almost like you weren’t around to see what else was being put out in cgi at the time. This was during the live run of the show Reboot go watch that to get an idea of computing power at the time.

    • andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      They knew what they are capable of and acted accordingly, like Spielberg and this wrecked cursed doll in Jaws. They cut every scene keeping in mind that they should avoid giving away how fake it really looks. With these dynos it’s the same, they constructed the picture in a way these rubber water hoses fit in.

      There they kept that seemingly unfair close shot and oked it. More than that, direct shots right-in-yer-face are usually avoided because they are always uncomfortable even with real actors, but there they doubled down and got the best of uncanny valley effect. I feel like it’s more plausible to be a sabotage rather then incompetence.

      On other points I agree, gfx jumped seven miles just between these to pictures, but technology can’t replace good taste and basic sense.

  • DavidGarcia@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 days ago

    I think the issue is more that a realistic human shaped like that, no matter how realistic the CGI is, will trigger the uncanny valley effect

  • Mothra@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Yeah it’s not impressive but I think it’s stylized and it’s decent enough CG to get a pass. Pinocchio otoh, released not that long ago, that was difficult to look at.