Topic: The use of CGI in films...
Hello fellow LEGO muuvie-ers.
Those of you who know me know that I love computer generated animation and effects. I think they can add a lot to a film and give a director the freedom to tell a story without boundaries. That being said, they also need to be used wisely, and some of my films have essentially become extended effects tests because I was focused on cool effects, not a great story.
The brickfilming community puzzles me in that quite a few of you seem to have a sort of conviction against the use of computer generated effects in brickfilms. Below are a couple of quotes to prove my point. I'm sure that if I looked a little harder, I could find many more statements like these.
...by principle I refuse to use 3D cgi...
You add too much CGI and we prefer real stuff...
To me these statements seem completely illogical. "Principle"? Zwan refuses to use 3d CG (Not just any kind of CGI - he uses greenscreening and 2d effects - only 3d) based on "principle"? I'm not just picking on him, he only gives a good example.
I'd love to understand your viewpoint better, so here are a few questions on the subject.
1) Given that the work we do is an illusion (animation, even video itself and storytelling), what exactly is it that you dislike about another illusion technique (CGI)? That it is not "real?" Neither is the movement on the screen, the story, the characters, the action, the sound, or the violence in any brickfilm. Do you have a more convincing reason?
2) If I could create CGI that was completely indistinguishable from real footage, would you condemn that as well? What if I did not tell you that it was CG, and you never noticed? What is the difference to you, the person experiencing the illusion?