[hd]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZsEwUuBjio[/hd]
[hd]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnQLjZSX7xM[/hd]
[hd]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB_3r4b-CAU[/hd]
I suppose this is a series of videos. Hope they release more because I love behind the scenes stuff
So about 3 seconds of on screen film took hours and hours of work
Shit sounds difficult
I love these kinds of videos, gives you so much insight into how much work goes in to make these movies.
I don't know why but I read the title as The Aspergers instead of Avengers.
While I liked the movie, there was something off about the CGI. Hulk looked great, but those generic aliens not so much.
I had no idea that Captain America was CGI in that scene.
Must be great to be paid to have scarlett riding on your back.
Absolutely bonkers. Amazing that they can even do this.
Great film too.
That was easily one of my favorite scenes both in the movie and in any movie I'd seen this year. Was so hyped up during it.
OP
[QUOTE=blacksam;38991319]I had no idea that Captain America was CGI in that scene.[/QUOTE]
i bet you also didn't know that the mask on the police officer in star trek was CGI
[IMG]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_toUUYnt00SA/S9001sgNCMI/AAAAAAAAAnY/1CaG_g0hPrI/s1600/trek_mask1.jpg[/IMG]
This thread is an example of [I]good[/I] CGI.
CGI is not terrible when effort is put into it. I just wish more of an effort was put in to begin with.
now make this on games
[QUOTE=markinluck;39145043]now make this on games[/QUOTE]
yeah I'd rather not have a 15 second scene take a full week to render properly
it's like
0.00000000001 FPS
and they tell me playing shooters at 30 FPS is terrible
[QUOTE=Mastahamma;39146059]yeah I'd rather not have a 15 second scene take a full week to render properly
it's like
0.00000000001 FPS
and they tell me playing shooters at 30 FPS is terrible[/QUOTE]
That would mean it would take the average computer over a million years to render at 24 fps.
[editline]8th January 2013[/editline]
It would also take about 35-40 years to achieve at 30 fps with zero optimizations
To be honest, games aren't THAT far off these days. Real-time lighting is getting better every year, and we can have millions of polygons in a given scene without too much loss of speed.
A talented team could probably produce a real-time game environment in CryEngine 3 or Unreal 4 that looks as good (if not better) than Toy Story or some other mid-to-late 90's CGI movies. Another 20-25 years from now, we'll probably be able to render Avatar-esque visuals close to real time.
It took 23 hours to render one frame of transformers CGI in transformers 1 in 2007
[QUOTE=Pandamobile;39147658]Another 20-25 years from now, we'll probably be able to render Avatar-esque visuals close to real time.[/QUOTE]
I'm going to have a bit more faith in evolution in graphics and I'll say it'll take 7-10 years.
Even from 2007 until now is a world of difference in graphics in many ways. I believe in less than 10 years we'll get to Avatar.
also was i the only one that noticed the horrendous greenscreening when renner was standing on the building
my uncle worked here!
[QUOTE=Nemisis116;38990918]So about 3 seconds of on screen film took hours and hours of work
Shit sounds difficult[/QUOTE]
Much longer than that given that they would have had to develop a bunch of new technologies, shaders and rendering systems for the stuff that they wanted to achieve
[editline]9th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=meppers;39147746]It took 23 hours to render one frame of transformers CGI in transformers 1 in 2007[/QUOTE]
Roughly the same for the original Toy Story
As hardware capabilities increase so does the quality of what we're rendering, so generally speaking render times remain constant while quality increases
ok so now we can have a new Terminator movie with a young Arnold as the title character because they can just CGI the shit out of the thing
hell they already did in Salvation
[QUOTE=nessman;39146527]That would mean it would take the average computer over a million years to render at 24 fps.
[editline]8th January 2013[/editline]
It would also take about 35-40 years to achieve at 30 fps with zero optimizations[/QUOTE]
To render a frame in a pixar movie, on massive render farms, it takes between 6 - 80 hours depending on how complext the scene is. So yeah, it might take a while before we have this kind of stuff in realtime.
I never realised how much work went into the Avengers. That's incredible.
[QUOTE=meppers;39144663]i bet you also didn't know that the mask on the police officer in star trek was CGI
[IMG]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_toUUYnt00SA/S9001sgNCMI/AAAAAAAAAnY/1CaG_g0hPrI/s1600/trek_mask1.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
I'm seriously wondering why. The mask doesn't seem that complex to actually build.
That said, I didn't even notice that it could be CGI, so that's some quite amazing work.
That Captain America CGI is completely flawless. I wonder how long until video evidence isn't enough because of how easy it is to do in the future.
OP
Holy fuck CGI
God damn
that mark model looks amazing
I doubt I would have been able to tell the difference between the cg model, and Mark without the text.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.