I've heard a lot of people say Thanos is, but I think his effects will appear somewhat dated in the near future. To me at least, Pikachu takes the cake. Before I knew about the movie and just saw the wrinkly face meme I thought it was a puppet for an advertisement or something. I think the cuteness helps a lot too, even shitty CG characters seem passable if they're cute, but Pikachu manages to cross over from being cute like a cartoon character and all the way into being cute the way an actual animal is.Who do you think it is?
>>701907Pikachu certainly ticks all the boxeshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHb1rGdWJbI
>this is what zoomers actually believe
https://youtu.be/GOlVRHsVzE4That fucking bear
>>701919Maybe it's just because I'm used to seeing bears in bright sunshine where I live, but to me that bear didn't seem right. Don't get me wrong, that scene is great, but somehow it just felt more like every other CGI monster than an actual animal.
>>701920Yeah, I think too the bear seems a little off but it's one of the greatest CGI shit I've ever seen.
Jungle Book CGI was pretty fucking epic.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0MD1g_5dV4
>>701925I may be wrong but I believe that the animals in that were done by the same studio as the pokemon in detective pikachu.
>>701929It's really amazingly done
>>701925The whole movie looks fake as fuck. Like an unrealisticly polished disney version of what real animals and nature look like.
>>701942better than the revenant bear, not even a contest
>>701920Yeah. The bear's movements look a bit too flowy.
>>701919Sure in the parts where you just see it's ass and it's mostly dark but when it moves into the light and you see it's head it's incredibly obviously cgHave to say Pikachu beats it
>>701907The planes on 9/11 videos. Shit looks too real
>>702285I wish I could do that, but nobody wants to even act in my shitty short movies. :[
>>702285it looks like modern Daz, Scorpion king was decades ahead!
>>70190793' Jurassic Parkundisputed champion
The bugs in Starship Troopers still look good. I'd say bugs, and especially hordes of them, are well-suited to 3d animation due to their sleek carapace and repeated movements.
>>70190720 years later and CG still can't compete with pic related.
>>701907It'll remind you a lot of the Garfield from the Garfield movie a few years down.Thanos is a solid choice because he could pass as a man in heavy make-up, really it just works because he's a purple man, so it looks human.
>>702724I know nothing of cg and I am only here because I just decided to look at boards I never looked at before, but I saw this thread and this is exactly what I was going to say.Why don't cg designers even try to make it convincing anymore?
>>702307That's because having sex in front of a camera doesn't qualify as acting, mate.
>>702861Gee anon, I wonder why that is
>>703414>implying that wasn't the point
>>703415Not a very fair comparison then, but yeah practical effects movies where so much more visually impressive and enjoyable.
>>701919CGI is goodThe CGI interaction is awful. I.e most of his clothes are intact after bites and claw swiping.
>>702724The cg in that is actually pretty weak. It's really only held up by how sparingly it's used. It's less that it actually looks real and more that the filmmakers knew how to trick you into not paying attention to how bad it looks. No doubt a lesson he learned on jaws.
>>703609Fuck you kid you don't know shit
>>703609Do it better homo lover.You can't.
>>703628>>703629They were obviously great for the time, and the animation and modelling are still top notch, but it's just a fact that lighting technology at the time was not nearly as good as it is now. The special effects look good because of how well integrated they are into the scene. They knew exactly when and how to switch between practical and cg effects as well as how to hide the limitations of the technology, but you're insane if you're insane if you think the T rex scene at the end of the movie is the most photorealistic cg character in existence. It certainly was at the time, but compared to modern cg the dinosaurs on their own are just not as realistic.>tl;dr the tech in Jurassic park was nowhere near modern equivalents but works because they were aware of the limitations.
>What is, in your opinion, the most convincing CG character in history?The Tyrannosaurus in the first J-Park movie.
>>703609>It's really only held up by how sparingly it's used.So, they used CG the way it should be used.
>>703637>is the most photorealistic cg character in existence.The question was "most convincing", not "most photorealistic",
>>703649Exactly.>>703650Holy fuck, you're right. If you want to know what level of absolutely retarded brainlet I am: I'm OP.
>>703391Because it's literally so convincing you can't even really notice it anymore, except when it's especially bad, or on the nose. Like 90% of movies these days use CGI, and I'm not even talking shit where it's obvious like superhero movies. There's tons of "regular" movies where entire environments are faked and it's just shot in front of a basic ass facade.You just don't notice it because there's not a fuck ton of CG going on, and it's not the focus of the scene. There's hardly any movies nowadays that are 1:1 shot on location without completely changing it into whatever they want later in post.This isn't the best example, but it is an example of the type of shit I'm talking about being used in a "regular" movie that's not focused on special effects.https://youtu.be/pocfRVAH9yU
>>703807>putting fake people in a scene with a real lion instead of a fake lion in a scene with real people
>>701907god I fucking hate Pikachu
>>704452Shiiit, I don't make the rules.Maybe it was easier that way. To be fair, they both look like they were shot on site, just at different times. So in reality, the order they showed them in doesn't matter. They're both composited into the same scene that was shot in the same place. Kinda like duplicating yourself on video.The ones shot in front of a greenscreen shows that in those scenes, so it's safe to assume the lion scene wasn't.
Davy Jones from Pirates of the Caribbean.It's been what, 13 years since that shit came out, and he is the BEST looking cg character I've ever seen to this day.
>>704653Yup, this. Still fucking impressive.
>>704653And it was even before PBR materials/renderers were used.Suck it, CGlets.
>>704529Oh I know, I just think it's funny that they chose to show it as the lion first with the people on top. Like it's obviously to make it clear that it's a real lion and not cg, but the presentation is funny.
>>704653You're probably the kind of tasteless cretin who cranks up SSS on all organic materials until you can see straight through it
>>705559Most materials that are not straight up metals have some amount SSS, often simply too little to detect except when held against really bright light sources. Of course it has to be always a sensible amount, we don't turn everything into wax candles.
>>704653> Not realising that this wasn't actually CGI but the actual Davy Jones
>>705716Still surprises me to this day that people do not know this.