Models or CGI?

Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by Shat Happens, Jun 26, 2014.

?

CGI or Models?

  1. Models!

    21 vote(s)
    27.6%
  2. CGI!

    8 vote(s)
    10.5%
  3. both are good!

    47 vote(s)
    61.8%
  1. publiusr

    publiusr Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    One effect I though about would be to have a model explode, but far above it and in shadow, a lot of large debris--larger than the FX model.

    Explode the model--drop the debris towards the camera.
     
  2. Drone

    Drone Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2012
    Location:
    Palookaville
    Season One of Space 1999 is certainly another example of the superlative use of models in the genre.

    From someone with really no knowledge of the line of endeavor, how much has the body of artisans who are truly accomplished in this craft attentuated over the past, say, twenty years? Is there sufficient impetus present today in various entertainment platforms to sustain the availability of capable practitioners well into the future?
     
  3. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    That would require one REALLY high ceiling. Plus the framerate of the camera for pyro wouldn't be ideal for the movement of debris. Explosions were frequently shot at 120 to 300 fps, and at 32 feet per second it would take 3840 to 9600 frames for the debris to travel 32 feet towards the camera. Sloooooow motion. Better to shoot the debris separately.
     
  4. publiusr

    publiusr Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Slow motion would give the impression of greater size--but shooting both separately is best for mid sized ships.
     
  5. martok2112

    martok2112 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2013
    When it comes to starships, I love both practical and CG models.
    Practical models are just gorgeous, and photograph well.

    But, you can't get the opening shot that you could get with Star Wars Episode III. For that, you needed CG, and ILM pulled it off beautifully. Two Jedi starfighters zooming along the surface of a Republic star destroyer, and then flying amidst the massive fleet battle. Sure, Return of the Jedi did a nice job with its practical models in their final, epic battle....but the opening shot of Revenge of the Sith was, to me, breathtaking.

    Besides, CG models only take up harddrive space, not shelf space. :)

    But, in the end, I still love both! :)
     
  6. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    To me the opening space battle in ROTS looked fake. The space battle in ROTJ looked more real to me.
     
  7. martok2112

    martok2112 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2013
    I hear ya', Mac. I can see why, sometimes.

    I guess, if I had any one gripe at all about the opening battle in RotS is that there just wasn't enough dogfighting. I mean, I know the battle was just a background for Obi-Wan and Anakin's mission, but still, we coulda stood a few more dogfights. :)
     
  8. Albertese

    Albertese Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 3, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    And yet, this is exactly how the explosion of the Genesis Device was handled in Star Trek II.

    From the book Industrial Light and Magic: The Art of Special Effects pages 113, 114:
    --Alex
     
  9. publiusr

    publiusr Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    My favorite movie explosion ever.

    Now the ending credits for Buck Rogers in the 25th Century were also good. The (misplaced) explosion in the 1970's-1980's Wonder Woman live action transformation scenes would have fit in with the Missile Command/Space 1999 blasts.