[ SECRET POST #7074 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #7074 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.




__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.
[The Boys]



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 20 secrets from Secret Submission Post #1010.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I completely disagree, also I think you tried too hard to 1up because in my experience, it isn't the surrounding/lighting that bother me. Even though, much like physical painted backgrounds, and screen/light filters, all the way back to silent era - those are meant to invoke area and tone. It's fully impractical to wait for weather and season and setting, even when dealing with settings in your own backyard. It's the reason why hollywood is located where it is, because of the temperatures and microclimates that allow filming all year round. Those things have been around since forever.
It's not that horrible CGI used in these areas are any less noticeable, but in the same way studio footage is accepted and passed off, the fact these things are meant to invoke rather than fixate they are often given a pass. (also it takes a fuckton more work to physically build and/or paint a backdrop/set than it does when using CGI, even at it's oldest, it's used because it's both cheaper and easier, and don't even get me into AI, so you're just plain wrong when claiming it insults the work they do)

Personally, I've never forgotten Ian McKellen's admission of breaking down in tears while filming the Hobbit movie because he was completely isolated from the rest of the cast, because his character needed to be separately CGI'd to be bigger, and was distraught about it, lamented that 'this is not what acting is'.
It's that which is most obvious to me as well. That actors can't adlib or form a rapport with literally nothing, and very few can actually make it believable they're interacting with something that isn't actually there.
The absence is the biggest reason I wasn't the biggest fan of CGI, really.

[(Anonymous)]

That is an example of bad CGI, though. There are plenty of examples of good CGI. And plenty of examples of bad practical effects. Isolating particularly bad examples to claim that all CGI is like that is disingenous.