Can CGI get more realistic?

[HAMOND]

exostrike i agree with you, the background characters human and na'vi had almost NO INDIVIDUAL PERSONALITY, all they did was make emotional noise, at least some back ground humans talked a bit, only one back ground navi talked that was the young navi with tsu'tey when jake learn to fly the banshee, the rest of the navi just make cries yelps, screams and other noises with no talking at all.

[exostrike]

I suspect the problem is that it takes MONTHS to render just one character in a frame and so not as much time/money can be spent on the background characters (and alot was spent on them anyway) to try and differentiate them.

[HAMOND]

good point exostrike, it would have been costly to add more character to background characters and weta digital was on a budget, it took a lot of energy and time with the room full of server computers running day and night 24/7 everyday for more than a month!

[exostrike]

I think I've worked out how Cameron was able to avoid (partially) the uncanny valley. The Na'vi are not really photo-realistic dipictions of human, thier slightly stylised nature, long body structure and large eyes allows us to ignore the imperfections of motion capture since subconsciously we don't expect them to move exacully like us.

Unfortunately the lack of polish on the background characters and problems with the lighting (they just don't look real when in direct sunlight) means that the uncanny valley is totally avoid.

[Eternal Enigma]

problems with the lighting (they just don't look real when in direct sunlight).

I agree that the Na'vi lose some realism in certain lighting conditions.

I've always noticed that most CG/GCI looks better in low light conditions anyways.

[exostrike]

I agree that the Na'vi lose some realism in certain lighting conditions.

I've always noticed that most CG/GCI looks better in low light conditions anyways.

allows for easier blending of tones and forms.

[Ikaríyu]

Its hard to believe probably in 20-30 years avatr wont look real :(

[Ricardo]

Why not? Movies from 1980 look real, too.

[exostrike]

Why not? Movies from 1980 look real, too.

But they were still mainly dependent on tradtional special effects. For example the film Bladerunner all the city scapes were model or matte shots blended together by hand. Beings like the terminator and the Alien were animatronic or stop motion animated.

Overall they will probadly made works that are even more real than Avatar, but we are reaching a point where animation is so complex and expensive that it isn't affordable or practical to go any further.

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

Why not? Movies from 1980 look real, too.

you should see the original 1982 The Thing with Kurt Russell,on Blu-ray. except for the clothes/hairstyles,it looks like it got made last year. wow. Blu-ray is amazing.


Avatar will still look great when i give my energy back...

neyney_warpaint5.gif