Call of Duty WW2 has made a significant step forward in face rendering

Re:Call of Duty WW2 has made a significant step forward in f... by leohutson on Friday November 24, 2017 @12:28AM (#15769593)

I guess my thoughts are, why would you? The only time you would use VFX is if you can't do something in real life cheaper, and since it's extremely expensive that rules out filing the frame with mundane realistic objects. Aside from time and budget, art direction and production design often rules out a photorealistic look anyway, even if technology allows it.

I'd like to dig further into what you mean by photorealistic CG being fiction? There are still tricky areas that are actively being researched, but I've seen plenty of CG assets that are photorealistic.

What do you think is technically missing from CG video, that makes it lack realism?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Call of Duty WW2 has made a significant step forward in f... by sillysaurus3 on Friday November 24, 2017 @11:52AM (#15771744)

https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:sillysaurus3%20CG&sort=...

https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:sillysaurus3%20%22real%...

To answer your question precisely: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15294721

I'd love to debate this with you, but few people seem interested.

Here's the criteria for "CG video": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15698859

If you approach the subject with an open mind, you'll find that we really haven't achieved those goals. But the most I've managed to wring from people is a grudging admission that even though we haven't done it yet, we could do it if we tried. I disagree.

[ Parent | on HN ]