Looks like they'll have to re-render Jurassic Park

What really helped sell it to me was when they'd cut to close ups of Stan Winston's handywork. It was a smart move to use a combination of CGI and practical FX.
 
HorseFilms said:
What really helped sell it to me was when they'd cut to close ups of Stan Winston's handywork. It was a smart move to use a combination of CGI and practical FX.
Click to expand...

That's the best way to do it. CGI is best used as a supplement to practical effects, as an enhancer, a side dish, but not as the main course.
 
I think partly the reason why the CGI looked so "real" was that the models where hand sculpted (Marquettes?) and then scanned in[1],

I'm not saying that was the only reason, It seems to me very logical, if you want "life like" models use real world data.

Also LOTR used 3d scanning alot, eventually 3d scanning will become cheap enough (I have some research interest in this area) for indies to use too.

[1] http://library.thinkquest.org/3496/zjurassic.html
 
I think only some of the CGI holds up today. The T-REX attack and the final scene with the raptors fighting the t-rex is visual perfection. But that gallimimus stampede has that blurry, visually elusive quality a lot of early cgi work had.
 
Yeah, some surfaces, like hair and the like are a challenge, but movement is always the hardest to pull off realistically. It's very rare that I find CGI movement on people or animals realistic. In JP1, it was done reasonably well, which is another reason why it rocks... whereas LOTR I find much less impressive from that point of view... considering the computer/software progress that is happening almost on a daily basis, it's even more shocking how JP1 gets it better than LOTR, IMHO since it's such a gap of time between the two... LOTR should have just swept the floor with the CGI in JP1, yet, when it comes to movement - not so.
 
I am a fan of JP III and welcome a 4th

By no means greatness, but completely acceptable popcorn. In fact, I was surprised by how much I liked the 3rd installment
 
OldCorpse said:
Yeah, some surfaces, like hair and the like are a challenge, but movement is always the hardest to pull off realistically. It's very rare that I find CGI movement on people or animals realistic. In JP1, it was done reasonably well, which is another reason why it rocks... whereas LOTR I find much less impressive from that point of view... considering the computer/software progress that is happening almost on a daily basis, it's even more shocking how JP1 gets it better than LOTR, IMHO since it's such a gap of time between the two... LOTR should have just swept the floor with the CGI in JP1, yet, when it comes to movement - not so.
Click to expand...

Totally agree.. especially when Orlando Blooms is clinging onto the elefant's leg and getting tossed around.. it looked extremely fake...


Oh and star wars suck..
 
OldCorpse said:
Yeah, some surfaces, like hair and the like are a challenge, but movement is always the hardest to pull off realistically. It's very rare that I find CGI movement on people or animals realistic. In JP1, it was done reasonably well, which is another reason why it rocks... whereas LOTR I find much less impressive from that point of view... considering the computer/software progress that is happening almost on a daily basis, it's even more shocking how JP1 gets it better than LOTR, IMHO since it's such a gap of time between the two... LOTR should have just swept the floor with the CGI in JP1, yet, when it comes to movement - not so.
Click to expand...

While I'll agree that JP1 looks more realistic than LOTR, I don't feel that LOTR has crappy effects. There are some really jaw dropping effects in the trilogy, and some less than stellar ones. Something to consider is that LOTR probably had thousands of digital effects shots and the narrative happened to take place in a much more epic scale world.

CGI has become way too dominant in the film industry. Just look at how much more effective the alien queen is in Aliens as opposed to the CGI one from Alien vs. Predator. Granted Aliens is a much better movie, but still, you would expect the queen to be more intimidating in Alien vs. Predator, but it is not scary there at all while in Aliens it is.

Speaking of Velociraptors and Jurassic Park, does anyone remember that dinosaur documentary that was released in the 1980's? It wasn't a theatrical doc, but a TV special or something along those lines. It pre-dates digital effects and CGI, so they used puppets and miniatures along with optical effects and animation. I remember being terrified and fascinated by it when I was a wee lad.
 
Heh heh... I just bought the 3-pack DVD at Wally World today for $19. Kinda funny to see this thread excavated tonight.
 
Those raptors still terrify me. I had this dream one time where one was coming after me, and my shotgun had jammed and he kept getting closer and closer until at the last minute I fixed it and blew him away! Take that!
 
I got goosebumps when the Brachiosaurus stood up and pulled the leaves from the tree tops. A friend of mine said he was looking into the trees along the road home after watching JP1 in the theatre. He just knew there was a dino in the woods.
It occured to me some time back though, after seeing those images on the screen, after being so awestruck, ( I mean come on, dinos!!!!! Every kids dream was to see dinos like those) nothing was going to blow me away again. There was never going to be such suspension of disbelief. Digital animation would impress me (Cars, Wall-E, etc.) But the novelty of seeing dinosaurs in action really just finished it for me. Not complaining, just musing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top