Slashdot Mirror
A Photorealistic CGI TV Series Coming Real Soon Now
ziggy_zero writes "SoulPix has revealed their project named "SoulFire", a photorealistic computer-generated TV series created entirely with 3ds max. Here's a trailer (it's in German). Looks pretty cool, better than those CGI cartoons I've seen - although definitely not even Final Fantasy quality. Note - apparently the DivX version was encoded using a weird codec that doesn't work on all players, so you might be better off getting the Quicktime version."
I just watched the trailer (thank god for slashdot articles "from the future") and noticed that not a single one of the charcters blinked in the entire preview. Whether it's blinking, or speed of limb movement, or A/V sync, minute body motions are going to continue to seperate live action from CGI for a few more years to come. Photorealism exists only in still frames for the time being.
i hope its better than reboot
-- OMFG = Oh My Floatse Goatse
...not to troll or anything, but what makes cartoons and simular endevors neat is that they don't look real. There's a lot to be said for stylized animation. On the other hand when these techniques are used to make shots posible that otherwise wouldn't be (like about half of Episode II) then I appreciate it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
--M. Oshii
...are the reason CGI from Pixar, although less than photorealistic (and with a definite cartoony primary-colored look) can feel more photorealistic than projects where a company tries to fool the eye using computers.
...the actor's guild on strike against beings that do not exist.
That will be a triumph of surreal/dada-ism.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Soon we'll have to deal with a computer generated version of Friends.
although definitely not even Final Fantasy quality
Many fans' primary beef with the FF movie was the thin plot, not the lack of impressive CGI. For a movie, a lot of effort can be invested in minute details etc to render with realism.
For a TV series, I would expect less quality simply because there is less time to rollout, and continuous rollouts as opposed to one big event.
Don't get me wrong, the visuals are nice and all. But the motion seemed really forced and awkward. I don't mean to put the show down, but realism is more then a pretty picture; details that are left out seem blatently obvious. Lack of skin texture gives it a nonrealistic feel, the sense that the mouths and words didn't match up well, and the way that the characters moved seemed very strange, almost like they were staggering around (especially in the concluding shot of the trailor). I think that the animation definately is good, and could be really successful in creating a good show. It's unfonate that a few things could detract from well done CGI images, but that seems to separate the average CGI animation from the extremely realistic.
take off every sig for great justice
Why are we shooting for photorealistic CG TV shows? I can understand the use of CG technology for putting characters in dangerous situations where actors can't be used, or creating shots that would be difficult or impossible to attain through other means. But why have total shows created of it, are actors *that* much more expensive than the combined cost of the brilliant artists and voice actors? Sure its a cool use of technology, but why is this going onto TV rather than staying on a geek's drawing board somewhere? As someone else already pointed out, they haven't got it quite right yet, with lack of blinking and other minute movements. What's the motivation behind this type of project, aside from the "cool hack" factor?
Like Invader Zim, South Park, and Futurama, where they use 3D effects for effect, not as a central element of the show.
Also, they'd better start working on their lip-syncing, it's quite horrible.
Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
Africus aut Europaeus?
It's probably just me but I like the low tech cartoons.
They seem to have more character.
I like the hand drawn style of Betty Boop, the claymation style like Wallace and Gromit, paper cutouts (or Sgi computer simulations of) like South Park, and the puppet animations like the works of George Pal.
I managed to get the file, so here's a mirror using BitTorrent. If you don't know what BitTorrent is, first go to the BT site and download and install the client (Windows/OSX/Unix versions available).
i .torrent
Please keep your BT window open for as long as possible (at least an hour or two) after your transfer completes. Thanks!
BT link for DivX (35MB file): http://cobaltnine.net/bt/FINALTRAILER_720_divx.av
I am mirroring the video: www.btrig.com/share/FINALTRAILER_720_divx.avi [35MB; Divx5.0.3]
Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
I don't know what you refered to by "it," but:
I don't think the lack of realism really came from the redering technologies, but rather the modelling technologies.
Take the comparison between the real-actress and the CGI (Final Fantasy X-2 promotional video) for example, the lighting and such are all perfectly fine; but you can notice how "rigid" and un-natural the CG character's body moves.
I think, personally, that during movement, any fancy rendering effects are lost, but the actual movement themselves are the critical "realism" that needs to be addressed.
For one, human limbs move on a
1) feed-back system, which would be hard to simulate its complexities simply by dragging the block that says "arm" from here to there,
2) the feed-back is also has a lot to do with balance, another thing difficult to simulate properly, with such a complex system as the human body.
Interesting enough, Final Fantasy (the movie) is completely shot with the little humans too; I think it has to do with the fact that we cannot track the positions of the dots perfectly, though.
It should be possible eventually to do a GPS-esq system where the room has "location transponders" and each "dot" on the actor/actress's body would calculate it's location and send it out wirelessly to a computer somewhere nearby. I think after that, we can see some very good reproduction of human motions.
just my arm-chair thoughts after watching CG generated stuff for a long time.
My life in the land of the rising sun.
Just discussing this at work yesterday and we all agreed the stunning realism of Feathers McGraw just as he walked into the house for the first time and looked at Grommit was a pivotal moment. How they make a lump of plasticine (clay) act so lifelike is a true art. There's a lot to do with the timing, camera angle, script, etc etc that's missing from things like FF (movie, cutscenes etc).
pithy comment
... Duke Nukem Forever has been redesigned as a 'photorealistic CGI' TV Series and will be hitting local channels in the near future*
*time subject to change
The term 'photorealistic' refers more to the look they're trying to achieve, than the actual outcome.
Advanced users are users too!
Seeing as Babelfish is kinda impossible to use on this one, I thought I'd post a translation for those who are not fluent in German.
... prophecy
...
Every story has a beginning,
But this seems to be the last page.
It is a kind of
Here it says: be without fear,
be fearless and open.
For someone will come to change everything
Either for the good or for the bad I dare not say,
for it is up to you to decide
You will recognise the carrier of fire.
Hmm, sounds a bit like Wheel of Time to me. (and possibly a hundred other books)
You don't need to see my