View Full Version : Why CG sucks (except it doesn't)

11-19-2015, 02:58 AM
I don't know if any of you have heard of Freddie Wong, he does some pretty funny short videos on youtube. A bit of a youtube celebrity, who uses CG effects to make his shorts very cinematic.

Anyway, I just stumbled upon this video he put out with the same title as this thread. I hear this argument a lot out in fan land, so it's maybe a useful little vid to show anyone who argues such a thing and I agree with it completely.


Andy Webb
11-19-2015, 04:56 AM
Very good :thumbsup:

11-19-2015, 09:48 AM
I saw this a while ago, but still fun to watch.
One thing he says when talking about what CG has down is water effects. I don't agree. It's getting really good, but it still doesn't look real and is pretty obvious when it's CG or the real deal. And he said it's looked real since the movie Titanic. Wasn't most of that practical effects? I thought they actually made part of the ship...not to scale of course...
Then he also compares matte paintings to CG too...not the same.

Still a great little video though.

11-19-2015, 10:39 AM
I think that more can be got away with regarding water, as most people aren't that familiar with how water looks on a large scale... well, when big things are jumping in and out of it at least!
I know what you mean though. As with most visuals in CG, people are far far less critical of recreated real world objects/aspects, finding them easier to accept.

It's convincing people of the unreal/unlikely that gets difficult. Orcs, Groots, Scorpian Kings, Langoliers :) (hehe if you've seen that movie, an unfair example to be sure).

11-19-2015, 11:52 AM
I didn't know what Langoliers were until now! haha!

11-19-2015, 10:39 PM
I think that video might be in response to this one, from "Story Brain":


11-19-2015, 10:50 PM
You don't notice good CG because you don't "see" it.