Yeah, that did look pretty damn good in the commercial and IMO even more impressive on a TV budget. I had a feeling the car was entirely CG but I wasn't completely sure, it was that good even at this stage. Just a bit easier to notice in the version you've shared.
I said it looked ridiculous however I mean it in a "but it looks cool" way and not as in "and looks stupid" way.
I'm very interested in seeing how the car model looks in motion since I think we all know how physics/animation/motion of a CG effect can make or break it an CG effect, no matter how good it looks standing still if it doesn't move/react or look right it can be a quite jarring experience, most recent instance of that for me would be the scene in The Dark Knight
where Batman, riding the Batpod does a 180/turn around off the side of a side of a building with the front tire going up and it twisting around to point him back in the opposite direction, took me out of the movie for a second.
I have faith in that you guys already have a good handle on it.
Not like there's a whole lot of realism in having a 3,000 plus pound car manage to jump off the ground in the first place but it's still gotta at least look like it's a real car and not a totally computer generated and badly animated effects shot. On the bright side at least you have total control so there's no need for a cut away to avoid showing the car being wrecked upon landing nose first.
There are a lot of big movies over the years that have had bad CGI, especially in the earlier days but there's still plenty now, from big budget films to Sci-Fi channel's "monster" movie of the week. Hey! One of which David Hasselhoff recently starred in.
What kind of budget do you guys have? Is that something you're allowed to mention? Either way so far it looks like you guys are doing some really good work and probably not being paid enough.
I'm probably not going to word this in the way I want, I'll blame that on it being late and my being tired. I wonder, how much of a pain has it been to implement the lighting and reflections correctly? Or is it done automatically in the final rendering of the model with it's reflective surface with it being calculated by the hardware/software you're using? I'd kind of feel bad for you guys if you're going to have to work on every shot and making sure reflections, lighting and everything else is done properly because I can imagine it being a pain to have to constantly do manually. But I'm sure if for some reason that was the case it's something that would get a least a bit easier with experience. I'm trying not to think of it in the way it's done with graphics engines in games and how reflections can be done in "real time" by the game engine, after a lot of work by the programmers that built the engine so all the calculations are done correctly of course. Is it similar even though you're basically putting a 3D model into a 2D space where there was nothing for reference? On one hand I can imagine it being so but then on the other I my mind is coming up with problems with that due to the natural lighting or lack thereof and environment on something that isn't really there.
What kind of hardware and software are being used? I could make guesses or look some stuff up but then I'd probably end up making myself look more stupid.
I really need to do some reading and maybe have stuck to working/playing around with image software and got deeper into it.
Wow, I've spent way too much time writing this and wrote waaaay to much.
. forum
