|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Neeum Zawan
Subject: Re: Quick ... does the banner under #6 ring any bells?
Date: 8 Oct 2009 18:13:59
Message: <4ace6427@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/08/09 11:11, Warp wrote:
> Neeum Zawan<m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
>> At the same time, if they can make CGI that is very hard to tell from
>> real stunts, why should I value real stunts more?
>
> Because it's admirable when a film crew puts some effort and work into
> making the film.
In the end, it's the output that matters. They're selling a product:
Not the effort that goes into the product.
If we're talking about purely artistic endeavors that are _not_ made
mostly for commercial purposes, I can see your point. But if I'm buying
a chair and I have two choices: One made in a factory and the other hand
built, and I can't distinguish between the two, why should I care how it
was made? I want the chair to be comfortable.
> Sad will be the day when movies will be made 100% by people sitting in
> front of a computer and clicking with the mouse.
It doesn't sadden me at all. It'll only sadden me if the resulting
movie is of poorer quality (to save expenses), or if there are
techniques that can't be done on a computer and they're just not
bothering to do them live.
It's like people who are sad that film is on its way out and most
photography (including professional) is digital. I can understand them
_missing_ film, but it's not as if something good is being sacrificed
for something inferior.
--
(((((((HYPNOTIC)))))))(((((((TAGLINE)))))))
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Chambers
Subject: Re: Quick ... does the banner under #6 ring any bells?
Date: 8 Oct 2009 21:35:29
Message: <4ace9361$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Well, we're talking about a check handed to a mobile car mechanic. I
> don't know about you, but whenever *I* go into a bank and hand them a
> cheque, they always process it by hand. I doubt a guy who gets 12
> cheques per week is much different.
Maybe it's different on that side of the pond, but these days even if
you hand a teller a check it gets scanned right then & there, and
transmitted electronically within minutes (not immediately, of course;
they're sent in batches to reduce overhead).
Mostly it's the smaller banks & credit unions that process checks by
hand, and even then it's usually the ones that have fewer than 10 branches.
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> > That too. Or lovely models or especially sets that aren't computer rendered.
>
> It's actually surprising how much miniatures are still used in movies,
> rather than making everything with CGI. Yet, sadly, most people can't
> appreciate the huge amount of work put into those miniatures because they
> just dismiss it as a computer model.
And, conversely, the other effect - the people who dismiss even high-quality CGI
without an iota of understanding how much effort, research and talent goes into
it. Most people even seem to dismiss movie sequences as 'just cgi' even when
there isn't any. It seems trendy for people to bash movie effects as if it makes
them look clever for spotting the effects - even if it's logically impossible
for a scene to be done any other way.
Grinds my gears
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chambers <Ben### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
> > It is a shame. Nowadays it's hard to even go to a movie just to see the
> > special effects, too. :-)
>
> Back in 1988, when making Die Hard, John McTiernan actually blew out the
> windows on the first three floors of the Fox tower (despite having
> signed a release saying the building itself wouldn't be harmed :) ).
I thought that was a composited effect? I heard that the building's owners were
aghast at that scene, until it was explained to them that actually the building
wasn't touched.
That's what Die Hard's trivia on imdb claims anyway. Might not be true. It
certainly seems a cheaper way of doing it though!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Invisible
Subject: Re: Quick ... does the banner under #6 ring any bells?
Date: 9 Oct 2009 04:35:55
Message: <4acef5eb$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Well, we're talking about a check handed to a mobile car mechanic. I
>> don't know about you, but whenever *I* go into a bank and hand them a
>> cheque, they always process it by hand. I doubt a guy who gets 12
>> cheques per week is much different.
>
> Maybe it's different on that side of the pond, but these days even if
> you hand a teller a check it gets scanned right then & there, and
> transmitted electronically within minutes (not immediately, of course;
> they're sent in batches to reduce overhead).
Interesting. When I walk into the bank, you get to watch the person
stare at the cheque, type in the various code numbers, stamp the cheque
to say it's been processed, and hand you a recipt...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Invisible
Subject: Re: Quick ... does the banner under #6 ring any bells?
Date: 9 Oct 2009 04:36:54
Message: <4acef626@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> It's actually surprising how much miniatures are still used in movies,
> rather than making everything with CGI. Yet, sadly, most people can't
> appreciate the huge amount of work put into those miniatures because they
> just dismiss it as a computer model.
It's surprising how many people think making computer models is somehow
"easier" than making real ones...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Invisible
Subject: Re: Quick ... does the banner under #6 ring any bells?
Date: 9 Oct 2009 04:37:59
Message: <4acef667$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Sad will be the day when movies will be made 100% by people sitting in
> front of a computer and clicking with the mouse.
Ever seen, I don't know, any movie Pixar has ever made?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Well, we're talking about a check handed to a mobile car mechanic. I don't
> know about you, but whenever *I* go into a bank and hand them a cheque,
> they always process it by hand. I doubt a guy who gets 12 cheques per week
> is much different.
What's a cheque?
Seriously, who uses cheques anymore? I think I have only used 1 in my life.
Do many people actually have a chequebook anymore? I know I don't for any
of my accounts.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Invisible
Subject: Re: Quick ... does the banner under #6 ring any bells?
Date: 9 Oct 2009 05:12:34
Message: <4acefe82@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Well, we're talking about a check handed to a mobile car mechanic. I
>> don't know about you, but whenever *I* go into a bank and hand them a
>> cheque, they always process it by hand. I doubt a guy who gets 12
>> cheques per week is much different.
>
> What's a cheque?
>
> Seriously, who uses cheques anymore? I think I have only used 1 in my
> life. Do many people actually have a chequebook anymore? I know I don't
> for any of my accounts.
I used to get sent a new chequebook ever year. Until the bank figured
out that I write, like, 6 cheques per year. :-P
The only real reason I write cheques is to transfer large sums of money
to other people. If you buy something in a "shop", they'll take plastic.
But if you want to give Adam £400 for letting you borrow his skiis, a
cheque is the simplest way. (I can't withdraw that much money in cash
from an ATM. Not in a single 24-hour period anyway...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> At the same time, if they can make CGI that is very hard to tell
>> from
>> real stunts, why should I value real stunts more?
>
> Because it's admirable when a film crew puts some effort and work into
> making the film.
Sure, but would you pay extra for a film where the stunts had actually been
performed rather than just CG (if there was little or no difference to the
outcome)? I don't think many people would. Which is why it isn't done.
> Sad will be the day when movies will be made 100% by people sitting in
> front of a computer and clicking with the mouse.
There's a reason why most things in the world are done that way now, because
it's more efficient.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |