| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
|
DuelGundam2099
Joined: 07 Dec 2014
Posts: 533
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 2:40 pm
|
 |
|
|
>CGI aging
Is it really fair to judge older CGI by today's standards? If it was top notch at the time it was top notch at the time, it isn't the fault of computers or artists back in those days that trends and technology evolve. At the very least a D in the animation department is a bit harsh.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Tanteikingdomkey
Joined: 03 Sep 2008
Posts: 2351
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:14 pm
|
|
|
| DuelGundam2099 wrote: | | >CGI aging
Is it really fair to judge older CGI by today's standards? If it was top notch at the time it was top notch at the time, it isn't the fault of computers or artists back in those days that trends and technology evolve. At the very least a D in the animation department is a bit harsh. |
There is a lot of people who judge older shows/tv/animation for dated work that does not hold up now a days. If it is not a style that is timeless, or atleast functions well for the viewer then I think that is fair.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
DuelGundam2099
Joined: 07 Dec 2014
Posts: 533
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:22 pm
|
|
|
| Tkingdomkey wrote: | | If it is not a style that is timeless |
Nothing is really timeless, everything ages. Besides, who determines if something does not age well? I could right now call old effects from Ray Harryhausen movies as "not dated well" or even the same with Stan Winston props. Nothing dates well, give anything a decade and it won't look well compared to today. The best way to judge effects is to compare it with its peers from its time, stacking them to today's tech is unfair and, well, sort of silly. Even if that were the case, the CGI here is very detailed in Gundam Evolve so giving a low score over "being dated" is very jarring.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FenixFiesta
Joined: 22 Apr 2013
Posts: 2581
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 7:49 pm
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Is it really fair to judge older CGI by today's standards? |
We can do the other route and judge the CGI quality of said pieces to say CGI media from Video games when compared to the segments release dates.
And frankly some of the pieces in Gundam Evolve still aren't the most impressive pieces of work when compared to say CGI media work within a year of there release.(think of CGI video game openers, my example would be Zeonic Front's opening CGI circa 2002)
Thought frankly the bigger issue is that hands down Gundam Evolve pretty much expects the viewer to be an avid fan that at least had a multiple viewings of most of the Gundam franchise before Gundam E's release.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Tanteikingdomkey
Joined: 03 Sep 2008
Posts: 2351
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:53 pm
|
|
|
|
You know full well what I meant when I said if something is timeless or not. the cgi is dated because it's a tech demo of Japanese CGI from roughly 10 years ago. When have tech demos really ever held up or stayed relevant after the next tech demo comes out. I am sorry but It is a flawed idea and it really shows that now.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
