I saw this story on Today this morning, reported as fact. A fascinating Gizmodo article explains how CGI artists can tell it's fake when most people can't.
Eleven ILM employees weigh in ...
"Bad physics, shaky cam with bad focus (always a giveaway) and the most steady head I've ever seen on a guy flapping his arms in order to not break every bone in his body. FAKE."
"The wing-loading is crazy. ,,Also, a major purpose of a tail on a bird or airplane is to counter-act the forward pitching moment of the wing. If you could get your weight down to about 50 pounds for those wings, you would still find yourself rolling forward. Straight-wing flying wings need a specific twist, or large dihedral, to maintain stable flight (both of which kill lift). The configuration in the video is prone to gerbilling.,,I think the animation cycle on the figure is borrowed from the monkeys in Wizard of Oz."And a "heavyweight CGI alum" ...
I've been in CG for 15 years, and worked at some of the largest studios like ILM and Weta Digital. This is 100% without a doubt a digital composite, which is great! When I saw this video I was happy to see that somebody really took the time to integrate good CG into a viral video. So many hackneyed attempts are passed around, and this one really stands out. A lot of people have been fooled, so I thought I'd show how trained Hollywood visual effects artists can spot CG when ley people can't. The ILM guys that pointed out the crappy footage were right - that's what covers 90% of the problems. You actually WANT bad footage to put CG into, because the shaking covers many mistakes.
2 comments:
Great story.
And the other shoe drops.
Post a Comment