Jessie Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 King Kong lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Wasn't a fair amount of the impressive stuff in Independence Day actually not CGI? If you don't count motion-controlled camera rigs, then yes. Well into the 90s, even the biggest blockbusters had only a few minutes of CG. T2 has something like 4-5 minutes or so, JURASSIC PARK around 8-10 minutes (I'm pulling these out of my ass, but they're in the general ballpark). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndustriousAngel Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Actually, even the LotR films had very many hands-on effects: miniatures, costumes, make-up, forced perspective - you name it, they did it. I don't know if it counts though because every single frame was digitised and underwent at least some digital color-correction or tuning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Actually, even the LotR films had very many hands-on effects: miniatures, costumes, make-up, forced perspective - you name it, they did it. I don't know if it counts though because every single frame was digitised and underwent at least some digital color-correction or tuning. True, although all compositing is now done digitally, so even something shot using mostly traditional methods (bigatures, etc) ends up being a CG shot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovex Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 (edited) I wouldn't personally count that as CG, its just a traditional thing done digitally, REAL CG is something like the different in the Star Trek movies where originally they were models, but now they are totally CG rather than models composited digitally into a scene. I also wouldn't really count digital correction as CG. Edited March 12, 2013 by Rovex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Well, since we're parsing definitions to a fine degree, isn't CG modelling/lighting/rendering just "a traditional thing done digitally"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovex Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Not really, its the difference between a thing existing for real and not. In the New Star trek movie there is a scene with Spock in a volcano. Its not him in a volcano, or even him composited into a scene of a real volcano or even a model volcano with CG lighting effects, its a totally computer generated volcano. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 There's a boundary and I guess we all draw it somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
