Actually depending on your knowledge of how it was done there will be a point were no effect can work for you. You will see em all(almost always), but for most people it will "work" (in that sense of cg success)Originally posted by Nataliia
All I could see on screen was Maya being used - with some plugins of coarse[sic]...
But...if you could *see* it, doesn't that mean they failed? I would much rather watch a movie with tons of effects and never know where the real stuff ended and the CGI began, than to be able to see one bit and say "wow, that was a nice bit of CG in that spot there." Or...maybe I'm too particular It's been pointed out before that I am.
Well said.Originally posted by dragonfx
Actually depending on your knowledge of how it was done there will be a point were no effect can work for you. You will see em all(almost always), but for most people it will "work" (in that sense of cg success)
hey it was the bible who said that with knowledge came pain?
What youre saying is a common syndrome among those who study audiovisual arts... Cinema and storytelling in genaral is based on the "suspenssion?" of the disvelieving of the audience. Suspending the disbelief is harder the more you know of how its done. (or you are actully dissecting it instead of letting the history go inside your brains, right now i have to make a conscious effort to just sit there and enjoy)
If you ever study audiovisuals there are lots of classes wich consist on seeing some footage, then telling how was it done, then ripping it to its smallests chunks to study it, and then discussing it, then next day trying to use that info... (we spent 5 hours syudiying just a 8 min scene of hiitchcock... and i loved it, devil (in this case hitchcock) is on the details... (same can be applied to cg...)
ROTFLMAO!Originally posted by dragonfx
3 Penetration between males, have you tested it? I hadnt. So if the response is no as mines, you cant speack with knowledge of it...