posted
I got 7 out of 10, but I didn't check to see which ones. I figure it's a crap shoot, except I thought the nose and lips were anatomically weird.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
But I kind of expected that, since I'm the guy in the audience of any movie who, when a CGI effect shows up, groans loudly and says something like, "Ooo! Look at the pretty mipmaps!"
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Is it okay if you know it's supposed to be CGI?"
Yep. I don't mind unreality if it's INTENTIONAL unreality; it's when an effect struggles to look realistic but fails that I notice and care.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
They say,"pretty good" but have you noticed that 6 is the lowes, anyone has admitted to having? I think they are just flattering us.
Posts: 197 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Would you mind enlightening us as to what you look for, xnera?
Here is what tipped me off for each:
The grass - the uniformity of color, but it was mostly the water droplets...too silvery, not really clear or cristalline like they should be
The silverware - The angle of the spoon isn't right compared to the fork...it looks like the table is straight under the fork, but at a 3-7 degree incline under the spoon. Also, the reflections were a big give-away.
The glasses - I don't think you can acheive those perfect lighting effects in real life, especially the totally black background. The only way I could see a possibility is a black room with a blue spotlight, but then there would be no white vertical band on the glasses.
The face - Faces are usually the hardest to digitall create. This one simply doesn't look real. The best face I have ever seen is here.
The nails - all uniform, no nicks or scratches, and the weird starburst on the tops of the nails.
Posts: 515 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The biggest tipoff is too much glare/gloss on the surface of an item. CGI'd items tend to look too shiny compared to their real-life counterparts. This was the tipoff on the spoon/fork, and on the pills in the bonus round.
Next I look at the texture. Does the texture look real? On these samples, the texture of the face is way too smooth. Plus I thought the line between the foreground and background looked a bit odd. And as already noted, the water droplets on the grass doesn't look right. Actually, my original time through I didn't look at the big images for any, and I had guessed correctly on the grass due to its color.
Is there a natural variation in the objects? On the chairs in the bonus round, I noticed the scratches/dust on the one in the lower-right corner, and decided it had to be real. Compare that to the grass, which really doesn't have much variation. You'd expect that some blades would be broken, or a slightly different green, or have some holes in them.
Do the pieces fit together correctly? I was bothered by the liquid in the shot glass in the bonus round. It simply didn't look right near the top of the glass. I was nearly fooled by the dice, because to me some of the pips looked like stickers (you can definitely see how one of the pips is *above* the surface, rather than on it)rather than paint. I finally decided that it could be a layer of paint, so I checked it as real.
Usually, though, it's the shinyness that gives it away.
Posts: 1805 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Excellent! Nine out of ten answers were correct
I'm always looking at the lighting. Anything that has a slightly different lighting angle than anything else mixed with how I know we can't do radiosity without a HUGE hit and lots of time consumption. Couple that with settled dust, and serveral other real hard things to do and you can almost always tell, I missed the glasses, *I didn't look to closely at that one either.*
Posts: 1132 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
