space shot CGI ship expectations

[Number One]

The NX-01 turning and swooping like a X-wing fighter was embarrassing, hopefully in the new series this will be absent.It almost like this is some kind of discussion site.Not what I want. A (very) few establishing shots, fly past the camera, going into orbit, but not much beyond that. Get to the meat of the story, meaning the characters.

Nothing like Sacrifice of Angels, with it's long boring special effects sequences.

If All goes well, similar to your view, but also depends, some episodes requires more fx than others. Well, unless the stories are so good, which could also be done, but they couldn't manage it in the past for long periods of time. Depends on how good is the writing team, utterly.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

Aside from story and general level of VFX quality, I'm hoping they make the ships detailed enough for interesting close-up and out the window shots. Also they shouldn't do dog fighting starships just because they can. Even Star Wars follows some of the rules of physics in space and the larger ships are slow and cumbersome comparatively. Things don't have to move fast to be interesting.

I'd love a more realistic portrayal of space itself too, but I doubt we'll get a change that fundamental. Like no sound (the score would "play" explosions, thrusters, and weapons fire). Far less Nebulae and arbitrary lighting, and more self-illumination of ships and deep space stations, etc.

 

[Amasov]

Could we potentially see character CGI work in the same manner as Rogue One? If a young Kirk, Spock, or even Pike were to appear, however briefly, from a TV budget, I wonder if this would be possible.

Granted, I'm still not convinced big-budget films have it down perfectly just yet.

 

[KennyB]

Could we potentially see character CGI work in the same manner as Rogue One? If a young Kirk, Spock, or even Pike were to appear, however briefly, from a TV budget, I wonder if this would be possible.

Granted, I'm still not convinced big-budget films have it down perfectly just yet.

Westworld came pretty close.....I see no need for it in DSC. They really need to find their own path.

 

[KirkusOveractus]

Could we potentially see character CGI work in the same manner as Rogue One? If a young Kirk, Spock, or even Pike were to appear, however briefly, from a TV budget, I wonder if this would be possible.

Granted, I'm still not convinced big-budget films have it down perfectly just yet.

Rogue One had it pretty close to perfect for someone in the movie. I really had to look closely in some scenes.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I'm very glad Discovery is recasting roles instead of using creepy CGI puppets. They're using modern sets, props, uniforms etc so CG Shatner and the rest would likely look out of place in Discovery's universe, anyway.

 

[Mudd]

Rogue One had it pretty close to perfect for someone in the movie. I really had to look closely in some scenes.

The two awful zombies, you mean? God, those took me right out of the movie. Fuck CG "actors."

 

[Draculasaurus]

Rogue One had it pretty close to perfect for someone in the movie. I really had to look closely in some scenes.

The two awful zombies, you mean? God, those took me right out of the movie. Fuck CG "actors."

I think in the next few years we're going have a better idea why different people react to these CG creations so differently (or at least a name for it). It doesn't seem to be a matter of vision. I think our brains are set up slightly differently in how they devote resources to different things like analyzing how light should bounce around, what correct physics should look like, or the subtleties of how the human face moves.

 

[Mudd]

It probably has something to do with the way we're wired to relate to other people.

 

[Trajet]

I'm expecting the production values and visual effects to be at least as high as other Canadian produced sci-fi shows like The Expanse and Dark Matter. In reality, they should be substantially better, as Discovery's budget is in an entirely different league to what SyFy can afford, and should easily allow for mastering in 4K to futureproof the show.

 

[mdtauk]

I'm expecting the production values and visual effects to be at least as high as other Canadian produced sci-fi shows like The Expanse and Dark Matter. In reality, they should be substantially better, as Discovery's budget is in an entirely different league to what SyFy can afford, and should easily allow for mastering in 4K to futureproof the show.

The post production will be taking place in LA AFAIK. With the filming and physical production taking place in Canada

 

[Ridcully]

Video games these days have almost feature film budgets.

Most games makes a great deal more money than any movie does these days....
Well I hope it will look nice...

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

I just rewatched "Shattered Mirror, in which the Defiant bobs and weaves about DS9's docking arms with more agility and speed than Carrie-Anne Moss in the first Matrix movie, the only time that ship moved as such. I do hope that the ship CG maintains the grace of the best Trek ships while still implying speed. Voyager actually did a good job of that in both its model and CG shots; Enterprise less so, but IMO that was a result of a inconsistent portrayal of the ship between given episodes, as the Defiant was in the example above.

Mark

 

[Blamo]

I hope it's like the teaser.

No, I'm not trying to be edgy.

While the teaser was obviously rushed and I didn't like the ship design, everything else felt spot on. The lighting, the colours, the directing and the ships movement felt spot on.

The ship felt like a cruiser, rather that a spitfire.

 

[Woulfe]

Main Ship - not a jet fighter, an aircraft carrier, leave the jet fighter moves to the shuttles as they are smaller in size.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

It's not cool to have an opinion on any specific part of the show whatsoever. All that matters is that the plot and the characters are good and if you don't remind people how much you don't care about anything in every thread else you're not doing your job.

It doesn't need to be jaw-dropping or genre-changing CGI. It just needs to be the type of CGI where I say "It's fine".

In my case, THAT'S where the whole "I don't care" attitude comes into play. As long as the CGI is at least average, I really don't care as long as the story is interesting and entertaining.

In fact, I would MORE disappointed if the CGI was spectacular, but they spend too much air time showing us spectacular gratuitous CGI. I personally find that boring...Think of a Michael Bay film, for example, that puts the flow of story on hold for for 5 minutes or more at a time to show us really great (but really boring) special effects action scene.

So please, no CGI Porn. As long as the CGI is at least "not bad", and as long as they don't over do it to show off the really great CGI, I'll be satisfied.

 

[sojourner]

I like to contrast the CGI work in Transformers and Pacific Rim. On the surface they're both giant robot movies with lots of action, but with Transformers there is just something "not right". The robots move too fast and seem weightless in the scenes, appearing to defy our expectations of "the real world". The Pac Rim robots on the other hand move ponderously. You can almost feel the inertia when they get moving or are throwing punches. It's a good example of how attention to physics can help sell (or not sell) the reality of what we are seeing.

How many times have we seen spaceships in movies (not just Trek) doing some maneuver that just didn't look right? Ruining all the hard work the FX team did on making a beautiful mesh.

 

[DS9forever]

The fleet battles in Sacrifice of Angels are a Star Trek highlight.

 

[midnightz]

Although CGI is not the be-all and end-all, shows like The Expanse and BSG before it have shown how world-building can aid in immersiveness. Although superb CGI can't recover a poor script, shoddy CGI can take you out of a great script...

 

[F. King Daniel]

Just let the alien planets look better than that wide shot of the junkyard in The Walking Dead and I'm happy.