Well, then your posts have clearly not responded to what I acknowledged a long ways back:Which is all well and good ... I suppose. But that was never my point.
Having a conversation is not just about asserting your own point, it's about listening to other people's points. It's not that I didn't understand your point, it's that I had one of my own to express that was about something different.
Yes, clearly. But I was talking about what might have happened if Jim Henson had lived. That's not contradicting or invalidating your point, it's simply broadening the range of the conversation.I've talking about what has actually happened with CGI ... so far.
That isn't to say Henson wouldn't have kept innovating. Nor does it suggest that he couldn't have accomplished the feat. Nor does it suggest that CGI is inherently inferior to traditional puppets. But, as yet, I've not seen any digital creation that looked like it could have replaced traditional puppetry (in the style of the Muppets, since that's the topic of conversation here).
So yeah ... I acknowledge that it's possible that, in some "hypothetical alternate reality" there exists a CGI that seamlessly meshes with the puppetry of the Muppets, and I further acknowledge that I am open to that becoming a reality ... but my entire point is that this kind of "hypothetical alternate reality" has not yet happened (although it could and, if it did, I'd welcome it).