CGI Quicksand: A Possibility?

[General Woundwort]

If it should ever come to be, hopefully it will not be nearly as pathetic as the underwater CGI that is infecting too many films and shows of the past few years. That is enough (though it's not the only or even primary reason) to place me firmly in the "reality" camp. "Good enough" is not nearly so.

[water_bug_62208]

Hadn't really thought about this much before now.

I guess the kicker to our "reality" is that there is at least some danger of some kind out there when it's "real". There's been at least half-dozen times when our "reality" was real enough to cause some alarm or actual trouble while creating it. That will never be there with CGI.

But again, for the viewers anyway, if the producers don't tell you then how will you know? What difference would that version of
"reality" make? Would you want the creators to tell you it wasn't "real" fake or would you want to know it was CGI fake?

Guess that's where the dangers of the "holodeck" would come along... a life where there's no danger, no way you'd ever get hurt, where things are SO real, yet it's only real as long as you stay in the holodeck. Step outside the holodeck and it's gone, and probably forcing you to seek refuge away from reality because you can't handle it. I prefer the not-so-perfect ways of reality versus fake perfection.

I understand what you're saying, Duncan, but it truly shall be a sad day if those creators can get to the point where fake can be made as reality. Then you're having to trust that those creators are honest with you in letting you know when it's fake and when it's real, but the scarier part happens when the creators themself lose track of what's real and what's fake.

Modern photography is an example. Back in the days (and, so far, still in the present), you have a negative or a slide from the film you shot. That negative or slide is the ORIGINAL image. You can make copies from those, but the negative or slide remains the original. Now, with digital photography, is that image composed of pixels an original, or is it a facsimile of pixels coming together to produce an image, which can be reproduced and manipulated repeatedly. If that first digital shot could be considered an original, you can quickly loose track of what was the "original" and what was the copy, or "fake."

I plan on staying with reality.

[Nessie]

But again, for the viewers anyway, if the producers don't tell you then how will you know? What difference would that version of
"reality" make? Would you want the creators to tell you it wasn't "real" fake or would you want to know it was CGI fake?

I got a feeling that even if it looked 100% seamlessly real with perfect lighting and detail so fine I can see individual hairs on the sinker's head...I'd still know that it wasn't real. They'll make it too perfect (like, I bet the girl won't have one single flaw on her face!) and you all know that if a thing looks much too good to be true...it certainly is.

That doesn't mean it won't be any good to look at. Just, I've gotten mighty hard to fool.

Nessie

[Qsvgitguy]

As a lot of people know, I do poser work with QS.

The reason why I do this is that it's the only way to get a scene the way I want it. I've been doing it for 11 years now and I've gotten better, but I have to agree, CGI will never replace the real thing.

I'm sure that with motion capture and fluid dynamics, you can create some pretty impressive effects, not to mention those pesky laws of buoyancy will never get in the way. I just got the new Poser Pro 2010 which will enable me to import poser scenes directly into Lightwave, which is a very powerful program used by movies and TV shows since the early 90s. I hope it will enable me to do even better QS effects than I've done in the past.

But no matter how good it gets, nothing can replace a real flesh and blood beautiful girl who is willing to jump into this stuff for our amusement. I do poser because unlike Dave and the others, I don't have access to a location, the equipment, the money, and most importantly the girls to do something like this.

Thanks Dave and all the others for over 10 years of making our dreams come true!

[Duncan Edwards]

As a lot of people know, I do poser work with QS.

Yeah, and I hope you don't ever stop. One day you will create something that we will all have to look twice at just to make sure.