There’s a difference between presenting an innovation and using an unfinished technology in a multimillion dollar project.
Also, if you have to add “for a 16 years old [CGI] model” than it really doesn’t look that good. And TPM looks way better than AOTC.
Are we now excusing any poor decison of Lucas as being brave or innovative?
It seems to me that your distaste for the movies are keeping you beholden to the idea that innovation is only valid if it breeds perfection. But at the end of the day, that is not how innovation works, nor has it ever.
It’s not about perfection, it’s about being at least as good as the existing technology. I’m talking about objective technical benchmarks here, like resolution and dynamic range.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think this is the first time you’ve mentioned any benchmarks at all.
Listen Frank, with all due respect, it’s not gonna help your argument. I’m a cinema camera and lens technician with experience working on Aaton and Panavisiom film cameras, I am currently certified in servicing Canon, Sony, Arri, Panasonic, and Red digital cinema cameras, and if you want to get into the technical aspects of sensor benchmarks and digital standards from the late 90s to early 2000s I am more than happy to.
At the end of the day, if you’d rather not get into it, I will gladly end the debate here. But out of my own interest in the subject, I am more than happy to get into more technical aspects of the issue if you’re so inclined. Cheers.