NEW AVATAR Trailer
- Thread starter Blue_Trek
- Start date
someone mentioned Disney-I think Jake's av's face kinda looks like Simba. 
People keep saying this, but I don't get it. They're blue elf-people, not anthros of any kind. I can categorically say – as a furry – that I don't see much appeal in the Na'vi.
For people who aren't thrilled by the trailer.
Most epic movies in the past are better than their trailers
http://www.starwars.com/video/view/000576.html
Original first 1976 Trailer for Star Wars.
Most epic movies in the past are better than their trailers
http://www.starwars.com/video/view/000576.html
Original first 1976 Trailer for Star Wars.
Who really cares... And of course I find it highly amusing that people would be upset by 'furries' on a TREK forum. 
Why? I don't think there has been any series that has featured more interspieces romance than Star Trek!
Why? I don't think there has been any series that has featured more interspieces romance than Star Trek!
Last edited:
Who really cares... And of course I find it highly amusing that people would be upset by 'furries' on a TREK forum.
Been there, done that.
On topic, the textures, shaders and lighting for the Na'vi are all top-notch in those outdoor shots. It's everything else that lets the illusion down – the almost-there-but-not-quite animation of the Na'vi limbs and faces, the fully synthetic environments, the integration between the live-action and digital elements, and, most unforgivably (IMHO), all the mechanical objects, from the ships to the landing pad to the powered armor. Those all look astoundingly phony, to the point where they really do like effects from 1999. Which is difficult to believe considering that hard-surfaced objects with smooth mechanical joints are some of the easiest things to get right in the computer. It's baffling.
Mechanical objects look "astoundingly phony"? I'm not quite sure how to respond to that one... 
Sure, the mechanical designs may not be following the over detailed or super-grittified "transformers" aesthetic... But I really have a hard time describing these shots as "astoundingly phony":
http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Avatar81.png
http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Avatar83.png
http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Avatar11.png
http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Avatar32.png
Tastes differ, of course. And it is hard to judge how it will all come together in its final form, since the effects certainly are no "locked" yet. I share some of your concerns about live-action and effects integration in 3D - but I'll be happy to give a report about that once I see the film. Fortunately my local theater shows 3D screenings in one auditorium, so I hope to see it that way first.
Sure, the mechanical designs may not be following the over detailed or super-grittified "transformers" aesthetic... But I really have a hard time describing these shots as "astoundingly phony":http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Avatar81.png
http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Avatar83.png
http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Avatar11.png
http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Avatar32.png
Tastes differ, of course. And it is hard to judge how it will all come together in its final form, since the effects certainly are no "locked" yet. I share some of your concerns about live-action and effects integration in 3D - but I'll be happy to give a report about that once I see the film. Fortunately my local theater shows 3D screenings in one auditorium, so I hope to see it that way first.
That's not what I'm talking about; the design has nothing to do with it: it's the surfacing, lighting and compositing of the objects that concerns me.
Of the four shots you posted, I'd say only this one reads as realistic to me. The bluescreen work here is obvious, and the shading and highlights on the arms and hands of the power armor are problematic. Ditto this, which just looks fake as hell in every way for something that supposed to be "game-changing" (blue screen, the fake reflection on his faceplate, the armor, background and cargo plane look like paintings). Again, the suit especially looks like it came from a film where it wasn't trying to be realistic.
To be fair, shots show up in other films looking like this, but it's especially egregious here given how much Cameron et al. hyped the effects technology ahead of time.
Ok, this may be a meaningless excercise... But in your one example, where the "bluescreening is obvious". Tell me, what elements are bluescreened? And are you sure there is even a single element in that scene which is not CG? 
And please elaborate on why the shading and highlights on the power armor arms and hands are problematic. Is the object too dark/bright to fit its surrounding? How would you expect the highlight to look like?
I'm not trying to be difficult, I am really trying to understand you viewpoint.
Feel free to us CG terminology if you need - I am an amateur CG artist, so I am familiar with most of it.
And please elaborate on why the shading and highlights on the power armor arms and hands are problematic. Is the object too dark/bright to fit its surrounding? How would you expect the highlight to look like?I'm not trying to be difficult, I am really trying to understand you viewpoint.
Feel free to us CG terminology if you need - I am an amateur CG artist, so I am familiar with most of it.
Well, the live-action actors in the shot aren't lit quite the same as the other elements--the backlight specifically doesn't match the other objects. Something about the shadows looks off too,like the actors were originally lit differently and the dark areas were curved up for brightness. Also, if you look at the soldier to the right of center standing on his own behind the fern frond, there's a big black fringe along the back of his arm due to motion blur. To a lesser extent, the same issue is visible along the limbs of several other soldiers.
The power armor doesn't look right in part because the smooth, flat components of the arms, hands and guns have that too-even shading problem that tends to crop up on very flat or smooth CG surfaces. I don't know if there's a technical name for it, but I've always thought of that as a "glowy" look, where the lighting illuminates a surface too evenly and almost makes it look incandescent rather than being lit by an external source. The metal's highlights look like they're being accomplished with conventional specular shading rather than accurate raytraced blurry reflections that have become all but standard these days – that's TV-level or 1999-era movie caliber work.
I also take issue with the power armor's texturing; it too is very even and doesn't seem to interact with the mesh at all--it reads to my eye as though the metal was all textured with a generic "damaged metal" material that isn't taking edge wear, grease, leaks and damage form the associated moving parts into account. I'm more willing to cut the CG team some slack on that as they seem to be trying to match the physical props, which look pretty phony plastic too. But I still don't like it.
And since I've been employed doing 3D in the past and will be moving to LA this January to intern at Zoic Studios, I like to think my opinion carries some weight.
The power armor doesn't look right in part because the smooth, flat components of the arms, hands and guns have that too-even shading problem that tends to crop up on very flat or smooth CG surfaces. I don't know if there's a technical name for it, but I've always thought of that as a "glowy" look, where the lighting illuminates a surface too evenly and almost makes it look incandescent rather than being lit by an external source. The metal's highlights look like they're being accomplished with conventional specular shading rather than accurate raytraced blurry reflections that have become all but standard these days – that's TV-level or 1999-era movie caliber work.
I also take issue with the power armor's texturing; it too is very even and doesn't seem to interact with the mesh at all--it reads to my eye as though the metal was all textured with a generic "damaged metal" material that isn't taking edge wear, grease, leaks and damage form the associated moving parts into account. I'm more willing to cut the CG team some slack on that as they seem to be trying to match the physical props, which look pretty phony plastic too. But I still don't like it.
And since I've been employed doing 3D in the past and will be moving to LA this January to intern at Zoic Studios, I like to think my opinion carries some weight.
Last edited:
I want to know what the deal is with the Na'vi using mounted troops in a Goddamn jungle.
Thanks for the detailed response, Gep Malakai. I appreciate it, even if I don't agree with all of your comments. But you certainly do have more experience in the area than I do.
One comment though, about "raytraced blurry reflections that have become all but standard these days" - That is far from the standard, from what I have read. Most shops still use a series of cheats and hacks to approximate GI. (And even if they use GI, they render it in passes so they can blend to look like what *they* think it *should* look like)
But it will be interesting to read the Cinefex article about avatar for sure.
One comment though, about "raytraced blurry reflections that have become all but standard these days" - That is far from the standard, from what I have read. Most shops still use a series of cheats and hacks to approximate GI. (And even if they use GI, they render it in passes so they can blend to look like what *they* think it *should* look like)
But it will be interesting to read the Cinefex article about avatar for sure.
Most shops still use a series of cheats and hacks to approximate GI. (And even if they use GI, they render it in passes so they can blend to look like what *they* think it *should* look like)
I'll concede the point on a lot of CG being cheap tricks, but it's not usually this obvious.
It's worth noting that, as of Terminator: Salvation (and maybe even earlier), ILM at least has eliminated the specular and diffuse channels entirely as part of their energy-conserving materials, consolidating them into the reflection and color channels respectively. Perhaps it's naive of me to expect that to be widespread, but given that Weta is supposedly providing top-notch work for this film, I'd hope that they'd match the advances used for films already released, or at the very least hide their cheap tricks better.
one thing I'd really like to see in Avatar is....
...okay they established pretty well that there are two "scales": humans are about 5-6 feet tall, Na'vi tend to be 10 feet tall, right?
But once Jake enters the jungles of Pandora, he's in "Na'vi-scale world", while the human characters are in "human-scale world"....sort of like how in LOTR, hobbits build smaller-scale homes which are the right size for them but small for other people.
I'd like to see more interaction of either normal humans against Na'vi, or ***Na'vi in human environments.
And they do this to a degree with the "Avatars" in the human's medical facilities or being dropped off in helicopters, but it's not the same as "the native Na'vi interacting with these people from beyond the stars who are basically aliens with more advanced technology"
I realize this is very difficult because having a real person standing next to a Na'vi highlights how they're CGI and not "real" but...
....I'd like to actually see like "Neytiri running around inside the human's base camp" or something; I mean like in a future movie if not this one; like, Jake in Avatar form can figure out how to switch an oxygen tank so it carries ammonia-gas they breath, and we'd see a Na'vi character running around in a human base just like humans can be on Pandora's surface but need oxygen tanks with them.
***something as simple as "Neytiri gets on Michelle Rodriguez' helicopter, and we're reminded that they're not the same size"
...okay they established pretty well that there are two "scales": humans are about 5-6 feet tall, Na'vi tend to be 10 feet tall, right?
But once Jake enters the jungles of Pandora, he's in "Na'vi-scale world", while the human characters are in "human-scale world"....sort of like how in LOTR, hobbits build smaller-scale homes which are the right size for them but small for other people.
I'd like to see more interaction of either normal humans against Na'vi, or ***Na'vi in human environments.
And they do this to a degree with the "Avatars" in the human's medical facilities or being dropped off in helicopters, but it's not the same as "the native Na'vi interacting with these people from beyond the stars who are basically aliens with more advanced technology"
I realize this is very difficult because having a real person standing next to a Na'vi highlights how they're CGI and not "real" but...
....I'd like to actually see like "Neytiri running around inside the human's base camp" or something; I mean like in a future movie if not this one; like, Jake in Avatar form can figure out how to switch an oxygen tank so it carries ammonia-gas they breath, and we'd see a Na'vi character running around in a human base just like humans can be on Pandora's surface but need oxygen tanks with them.
***something as simple as "Neytiri gets on Michelle Rodriguez' helicopter, and we're reminded that they're not the same size"
Similar threads
