If you think you can spot CGI then you are, quite simply, wrong

[andrewducker]

via sarahs_muse

Comments

[eatsoylentgreen.livejournal.com]

it's come a long ways, but often it still looks wrong.

[marrog.livejournal.com]

I just assume that CG is being used for outdoor shots these days unless specifically shown/informed otherwise.

On crowds: I'll agree that you can't really tell when crowds are CG, but I'll tell you what, watching Agora you could really tell that they weren't. It made a huge difference to the film for me - more dynamic, more human, just more real - and it made me wonder how much soul we've lost from films by using CG for crowd sequences - I need to go back and watch some old epics with that in mind at some point.

I do like that these advances mean that you can make big costume dramas on a lower budget, these days, I guess, but I'm waiting for the 'backlash' where the really big budget directors click that we've lost something by doing so and start distinguishing themselves by using live extras and real sets again. Again, Agora is a good example of how I might like to see this go.

[andrewducker]

I've not seen Agora, but I just looked it up, and it sounds great. Is it good?

[marrog.livejournal.com]

It's pretty awesome. Vry srs. But awesome.

[andrewducker]

I can cope with srs. I shall add it to The List!

[marrog.livejournal.com]

I has on AVI

[andrewducker]

In that case, once I've recovered from my weekend, I shall come and visit with a USB stick :->

[octopoid-horror.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, you can very often spot CG because it's often not great, even in very high budget productions. Of course, when it's being used well or subtly, that's different.

It might just be the youtube compression but where the water meets the back (as in, the back from our perspective) of the harbour near the start looks odd.

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

Leaving aside the CGI which is indeed very impressive, that had the desired effect of making me want to watch John Adams!

[andrewducker]

Me too!

[broin.livejournal.com]

Also me. That was very cool, cheers. =)

[snarlish.livejournal.com]

Apart from the director's very annoying decision to shoot a lot of scenes framed at bizarre angles (you only see a couple of these in the effects real), i really found John Adams interesting and entertaining. The dynamic between Jefferson and Adams is good, Ben Franklin is a real weasel, Mrs Adams is amazing. There are apparently a few dramatic licenses taken, but all in all, i 'relearned' a lot of American History.

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

I wish that every historical dramatization had a page on the website detailing all the dramatic licences they took and important things they had to leave out!

[captainlucy.livejournal.com]

TBH, I hadn't really considered which shots in this were CGI or not, although I assumed that any large-scale vista shots of towns/ports etc, or anything with more than one triple-mast ship, had to be CGI'd. But the ones here were well done, unobtrusive, subtle and added to the story rather than being a "wow, look at the huge crowds we can generate" factor.

Personally, when I watched this a year or so ago, I spent much of the time trying to convince myself that John Adams himself wasn't being played by John Sessions. I came close a few times, but then Paul Giamatti's (usually fairly good) accent would slip a little from Massachusetts/West Country into classical Thesp, and my mind would ding "Luvvie!" :D