Info & Ideas: ESB and ROTJ Wishlist — Page 204

Ghost said:

Looking at how far CG has come in the past years, I have no dought it will one day look real.  Look at the jump in CG from TPM to ROTS.  I have a feeling that Lucas is waiting until he can perfect his movies all at one time with perfect CG.  There has got to be another addition coming out.  Blu-ray?

 Depends by what standard you judge real. That's clearly different for you and me. And photo-realistic textures and lighting are only a small part of the process to successful CG characters.

Do you guys think that GL will release another edition of his films? 

 It's a fact that he is.

Darth Venal said:

Ghost said:

Looking at how far CG has come in the past years, I have no dought it will one day look real.  Look at the jump in CG from TPM to ROTS.  I have a feeling that Lucas is waiting until he can perfect his movies all at one time with perfect CG.  There has got to be another addition coming out.  Blu-ray?

 Depends by what standard you judge real. That's clearly different for you and me. And photo-realistic textures and lighting are only a small part of the process to successful CG characters.

Do you guys think that GL will release another edition of his films? 

 It's a fact that he is.

I don't even know what "perfect CG" means. What does that mean? Seriously.

shanerjedi said:

I don't even know what "perfect CG" means. What does that mean? Seriously.

 Only Ric has the answer.

It's a fact that he is.

 I'm talking an "Ultimate edition" with more changes. Are you being serious that he is going to release another version?

I don't even know what "perfect CG" means. What does that mean? Seriously.

When you can't tell the difference between CG and real life.  It sounds like a stretch now, but I think CG will get there someday.

Ghost said:

It's a fact that he is.

 I'm talking with more changes. 

So was I. It's a fact that it's happening. The time frame isn't clear yet.

I don't even know what "perfect CG" means. What does that mean? Seriously.

 

When you can't tell the difference between CG and real life.  It sounds like a stretch now, but I think CG will get there someday.

With human CG characters, it will never happen. And I mean that sincerely, not being reactionary. It will never happen that we have CG humans who are totally distinguishable from real humans, for the reasons I already stated.

Darth Venal said:

shanerjedi said:

I don't even know what "perfect CG" means. What does that mean? Seriously.

 Only Ric has the answer.

Sorry DV, but if no one else has the answer, I can't have it either.  I only have answers to questions that don't need asking.

CG battle droids and space ships look pretty good.  CG humans won't ever work.  And it isn't because they won't look good, it is just computers can't replicate their movements.  Even the scenes of JarJar just standing around in the prequels still looked 'acted'.

Ric Olie said:

Darth Venal said:

shanerjedi said:

I don't even know what "perfect CG" means. What does that mean? Seriously.

 Only Ric has the answer.

Sorry DV, but if no one else has the answer, I can't have it either.  I only have answers to questions that don't need asking.

Sorry Ric, I think I was leaping a bit laterally there... that was my point. There's no answer to the question because perfect CG, or perfect anything, is subjective.

So was I. It's a fact that it's happening. The time frame isn't clear yet.

Do you have a source?  I haven't heard anything about it. 

Ghost said:

So was I. It's a fact that it's happening. The time frame isn't clear yet.

 Do you have a source?  I haven't heard anything about it. 

 Well I'm not revealing my source, not a chance. But Rick McCallum has hinted pretty strongly on a couple of occasions.

Darth Venal said:

Ghost said:

It's a fact that he is.

 I'm talking with more changes. 

So was I. It's a fact that it's happening. The time frame isn't clear yet.

I don't even know what "perfect CG" means. What does that mean? Seriously.

 

When you can't tell the difference between CG and real life.  It sounds like a stretch now, but I think CG will get there someday.

With human CG characters, it will never happen. And I mean that sincerely, not being reactionary. It will never happen that we have CG humans who are totally distinguishable from real humans, for the reasons I already stated.

I was more optimistic a few years ago post Davey Jones that it might happen, but less so now. Partly because of the solid reasons and hurdles Venal outlined but also because of something else(actually he might've mentioned this also):

What is "real" to you may not be "real enough" to me. So when you say "perfect", that's in the eye of the beholder. And to make a person or CG human so real you wouldn't notice it is also, IMHO, nearly impossible now for one other big reason:

The loss of the "magic" factor.

When I was growing up there was one magazine that covered fx, a few shows here and there on PBS that would cover it, and a bit of TV coverage. Today, the behind the scenes stuff is everywhere. It's all over the place. It's very difficult to surprise or get the jump on people. People were already bitching about Jim Cameron's Thundersmurfs months ago.

The magic is gone and that genie is out of the bottle. It might happen to a latter generation that all this info and tech stuff goes away for awhile to re-emerge and knock our socks off but I doubt it.

So as technology has improved, so have people's eyes and knowledge. Even my DAD was complaining about bad bluescreen composites the other day. No, I'm not joking. "That looks like it was shot separately. It was wasn't it?"

"Yes dad. It was."

"I knew it. You could see the blue outlines around the people."

Sigh.

When my dad is picking out bad comps in modern movies, it's over.

ibid.

Perfect was probably not the right word to use.  I'm saying that a CG shot or picture that isn't possible to tell apart from a real life picture would be IMO, perfected CG.

Ghost said:

Perfect was probably not the right word to use.  I'm saying that a CG shot or picture that isn't possible to tell apart from a real life picture would be IMO, perfected CG.

 

But here's what I'm talking about: Cinema has never been about real life. It's always been a heightened sense of fiction. Even documentaries still posses cinematic, manipulative qualities with viewpoints. They're not reality either.

And really, if you're not talking about CG animation, then the older techniques are just as good at enhancing scenes and making things epic and making you think what you're seeing is really there. Matte paintings and forced perspective miniatures have been doing that for decades.

Think about it:

If you can capture something in-camera or on-set then how is it better to take that and create something months later, with different conditions, in different locations, and trying to match the lighting of what was on set going to get you a better result. it's not. If it's there on set, you should shoot it. if it can be captured in camera you should capture it.

The only things that should be reserved for post are absolutely those things that cannot be captured in camera.

Ghost, have you ever watched Close Encounters of the Third Kind?

vaderios said:

Can this conv be on the offtopic forum?

low and behold, prodical son returns

vaderios said:

Can this conv be on the offtopic forum?

Sure. Sorry but were were just discussing some things. Not much was happening here today anyway.

Anyway, back to the wishlists:

1: Fix the crawl. Make it more urgent and dire for the rebels. This needs to be conveyed in the briefing scene too. Just a bit here and there. That's all.

2: Why is this DS2 a bigger and more powerful threat? Because of it's size? So what? It only blows up ships. The other one blew up planets. Why bother?

2: Why is this DS2 a bigger and more powerful threat? Because of it's size? So what? It only blows up ships. The other one blew up planets. Why bother?

 

There is nothing to do about it.  It is just a part of the story.  I think it makes sense.

that was the one thing GL wanted to avoid. and i don't get why its bigger and stronger either. Still, it has a very menacing look about it.

Maybe this Death Star would be a bit different if it had two superlasers top and bottom front and back (it's in space so technically speaking that doesn't make sense but I think you know what I mean).

The superlaser doesn't seem to be easy to aim having a second dish would half the time it would take to rotate and get a target in range.

It would also make the ROTJ station look a bit diferent from the ANH one.

I'd prefer a second hidden station to a single station with an extra dish but just because we saw the first Death Star look one way doesn't mean that we have to have the exact same design the second time around.

The Star Destroyer designs altered quite a bit between ANH and ESB.

It could even have a bigger dish on the equator like the original designs for ANH.

Is anyone going to add slash-burn-things to Jabba's guards in ROTJ, when Luke fights them on the barge?  After seeing what a saber does against flesh very well when Vader destroys the Separatists on Mustafar in ROTS, I think those effects should be added to ROTJ.  To see a burning sword hit the guards, and they just fall, is not very convincing.