nemesis wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 16:44:59 -0300, nemesis wrote:
>>> like I said, photorealism is not a matter of opinion.
>>
>> Sure it is.  It all depends on one's perception of the image.  You 
>> might look at an image and say "gee, that looks really 
>> photorealistic", and I might respond "are you on drugs?  Look at that 
>> shadow, that's clearly not right".  You might disagree about that 
>> particular shadow (whatever it is).
> 
> if I saw at a sharp shadow and said it was photorealistic, I'd sure be 
> on drugs. ;)

Any shadow viewed from sufficient distance will appear razor sharp. 
Using sharp shadows for large-scale objects and scenes can be completely 
photorealistic.

>> Have you ever been to a movie with someone who thinks the CG effects 
>> are outstanding and "the most realistic effects they'd ever seen", 
>> only to tell them that they were crap effects?

I've certainly heard people say they thought the effects were rubbish 
when I thought they were exemplary... the Hulk, for one.

Post a reply to this message