I spotted this short paean to computer generated visual effects on Twitter earlier today. It’s premise is that CGI visual effects are actually good for movies, and that it’s only considered to be a bad thing, because we only tend to notice bad CGI, whilst most CGI, the good stuff, is invisible – there are some overdue nods to superlative digital environments in there, including those for TV.
I’ve been generating CGI since 1995, which is a bit like the time in the middle ages, at the cusp of the renaissance in the context of computer graphics history. Back then I was constantly having to argue the toss and justify whether what I was doing was art/design/creative/valid, and we are still fighting similar battles now. I too get frustrated with the bad and unnecessary CGI, but equally, I still love to see the good stuff – particularly so when I don’t spot it until it’s pointed out to me later on by the likes of Cinefex, or via VFX breakdowns on the web.
This visual essay makes the point that CGI is great for some things e.g. environments, crowds, vehicles, etc, but not (yet) great for others – digital characters are still something of a work in progress. It also rightly asserts that many films and TV shows wouldn’t have happened without superb, affordable CGI. A good example being Game of Thrones. All tools have their place and value, whether they are practical or digital. So, I’d like to say a huge thank you to Rocket Jump Film School for articulating what I believe, so passionately, and far more eloquently than I am able in this short video.