The Great Gatsby without CGI.

I wouldn't say technically it's a lot of CGI depending on your definition. I think alot of miniature practicals with green screen and other compositing tricks were at work here. Maybe augmented with CGI and some actuall shots with pure CGI ( matte paintings and such and maybe a few CG models, smoke debris, ect.).
A combination of both I suspect is what really happened.
Just my first impression. If I'm wrong, that was pretty good.
 
Gord.T said:
I wouldn't say technically it's a lot of CGI depending on your definition. I think alot of miniature practicals with green screen and other compositing tricks were at work here. Maybe augmented with CGI and some actuall shots with pure CGI ( matte paintings and such and maybe a few CG models, smoke debris, ect.).
A combination of both I suspect is what really happened.
Just my first impression. If I'm wrong, that was pretty good.
Click to expand...

I believe nowadays people mainly refer to post production enhancements as cgi (kind of throwing everything into the same bucket..)...but I totally agree with you Gord, I can see, or at least think I see many separately filmed backplates, miniature, matte paintings etc... But only the ones that worked there can tell us so.
 
I think this highlights how much the Hollywood film industry has come to rely on this sort of VFX work, for high end films anyway. I hope these guys were paid properly for this film, unlike some other recent ones. They need and deserve more respect and recognition.
D.
 
It's beautiful and inspiring. This kind of work implies such meticulous planning and execution. Thanks so much for pointing it out.
 
Amazing what can be done to day. Also seems more ethical than what the last Bond production did in Istanbul, just to get a fancy background for their story. Of course let´s all hope VFX artist will get paid in the end and not just with an Oscar...
 
The Great CGatsbI

Seriously though, there are some really beautiful shots and vistas in that reel.

While watching this I also had a strange feeling wash over me. Basically I've been feeling guilty about wanting to make big budget movies with lots of effects. Mainly sci-fi or other such fantastical stuff. Now I kind of feel like I'm being silly about it since this kind of digital moviemaking is perfectly suited for fantastical subjects. I love miniatures and practical effects, as they usually look better onscreen to me. I think that era is almost gone though. It really is kind of silly for me to rage against digital effects being the primary methodology nowadays.
 
It's a wonderful testament to the VFX artists, but personally I hate the general trend towards this style of shooting. Even work that good still feels fake so much of the time, you may not be able to pick out the individual elements of the image that aren't real, but the sense of fakeness they create just pulls me out of the movies each and every time. It just removes so much of the sense of engagement from these films, and I feel like my attachment to characters (and therefore my attachment to the storylines themselves) really suffer.
 
When I see something like this I'm encouraged by the capabilities at this level but don't really consider the scope of something like this for my work. I think about how well you can use this ability to tell a "smaller" story. I think that the plate can be real video, just allowing an imaginative composite. My favorite was that shot where the car turns the corner around the ash mound. Two small green screens and the plate were old timey signs and the river vista beyond. Nice.

I always think about Monsters by Gareth Edwards, of course not blue or green screen, but mattes to replace signs or place scene elements. It's a boon, as far as I see.

I also think that movies need to be other than real, dream-like. We do it all the time with light. I think that it's a shame if the artifice takes you out but things shot without light or effect or grading take me out more often. The whole glossy thing can be too much but it's right for this one, which is all about gloss. Also, we practice this legerdemain ourselves and are much more sensitive to it than the regular viewer... an occupational hazard ;)
 
Last edited:
what I see is, it is extremely hard for audience to distinguish if its CGI or real

For god sake all of my friends cant event tell which shot is more red or blue when comparing two cameras shooting same subject and cut together in post.

they interested more in content.

and nowadays a shot is only like 3 secs long, you cant tell, even I couldnt tell if this is CGI. I guess big studio wins for future film making, no more street/revenue reservations, just a big studio space and remake eveything.
 
Seemed like the cut was heavy on showing the effects themselves rather than actually showing how they'd been assembled, or shot even.
 
Shawnvfx said:
what I see is, it is extremely hard for audience to distinguish if its CGI or real

For god sake all of my friends cant event tell which shot is more red or blue when comparing two cameras shooting same subject and cut together in post.

they interested more in content.

and nowadays a shot is only like 3 secs long, you cant tell, even I couldnt tell if this is CGI. I guess big studio wins for future film making, no more street/revenue reservations, just a big studio space and remake eveything.
Click to expand...

I don't know, I could tell from day one that the whole film was CG. The first teaser showed it, and the final film did as well. It was so obvious -- it wasn't bad, per se, but it was obvious. Kinda feel like it might have added asthetically to the film, though: knowing that the glitz and the glamour were not real. Still, kinda would've liked to see a Cleopatra-style Gatsby, you know... massive, elaborate sets, and extras out the wazoo...

-EMB
 
Grug said:
It's a wonderful testament to the VFX artists, but personally I hate the general trend towards this style of shooting. Even work that good still feels fake so much of the time, you may not be able to pick out the individual elements of the image that aren't real, but the sense of fakeness they create just pulls me out of the movies each and every time. It just removes so much of the sense of engagement from these films, and I feel like my attachment to characters (and therefore my attachment to the storylines themselves) really suffer.
Click to expand...

True. I agree. Well said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top