Should 3D-animation replace alive actors?
Debate Rounds (3)
Let`s talk about the benefits of using 3-D made charachters and alive ones. If the director of the film will make his work in 3-D format, there will not be any quarrels and misunderstandings between him and the actors, also he will not pay a part of the income from that moovie to the actors, there will be much less people whom that person will have to pay. All the process will be in control and the director will able to keep an eye for all the steps of creating this movie too. It will much cheaper and easier for him.
So I think that developing technologies can replace real actors and the emotions they express could be very realistic, and also they will be expressed much better some years later.
http://www.imdb.com... it's possible to notice that for infected elements actors stared as well. For making clear our discussion, answer these questions:
1) Who will be a prototype for 3D models? Will it be actors or designers would create their own charachters?
2) Who will work on the whole animation?
3) Would it be cheaper to replace alive actors?
4) Wouldn't it be unnatural?
I'll try to answer these questions from my side, ok.
1) Let's look to the way how ani-movies directors create their charachters nowadays. In the most cases they draw a computer model of a real actor. Look here, from my point of view these are the best comparings:
So, how they can replace actors if they use actors as a fund of their animated charachters? Even if they would show the expressions, it would be the expressions of real persons.
2) Of course on the models would work good designers. But the proccess would be very difficult and long-timed because of the amount of work. To create and work-out a simple expression you have to count every point and milimetr of your construction. The one of the fundamental programm for 3D modulating is 3D Max and as fundmental programm it has this requrements for building a model. Just have a look on this video and you'll understand how it may be difficult.
3) From the previous point it became understandable that using the 3D technology as the main for creating every charachter in every new movie wouldn't be cheaper, because of the deep technical requerements. At the worst it may be the same priced.
4) Sometimes 3D modulated persons look very natural, but with time it may bore. All of us wants to see real people and the real actions on the screen. This is the secret of reality-shows success. Andy Dehnart in his 2009-2010 television season review wrote, that the most popular shows were the reality TV-shows. (http://www.realityblurred.com...)
You said that it will be possible if the characters will be drew from the alive actors, yes I agree with it and we can observe that the results will be very great too. For instance, if the real actor will not be alive, 3-D technology can replace him and I will be very successful deal. Of course there must be a special agreement between both sides, when they are alive or some kind of this.
You say that it will not be possible to replace humans at all and I think you are very pessimistic....Nothing will stay at the one condition and will not be at the same step. The world develops each day and the things we think arenot impossible now, compulsorily will be realized in the future.
For example, all the people just didn`t know about the computer-animated cartoons as long as Steve Job`s Pixar company created the first cartoon, which was totally made by computer graphics, ``The Toy Story``. And it was very successful, and the company continued such works and now there are lots of computer-animated projects and Pixar is the best among such companies.
It was the real example developing technologies, but in cartoon sphere. And as I said before, nothing ll stay at one condition and the obvious answer is that 3-D technologies will very developed and could totally be the substitute of real actors., thanks.
"You said that it will be possible if the characters will be drew from the alive actors, yes I agree with it and we can observe that the results will be very great too."
Excuse me, but I said that director's already use this kind of creating cartoons.
Everything is changing and I agree with you that animation area isn't an exception. Comparing with earlier works it became very natural and look-like real. But "look-like" doesn't mean that it has a possibility to change alive persons. Can you imagine that 3D-model would impromptu during the play? It's very serious area of actor's quality, how they can improvise. Since they are people of the art, their mood can change very fast and sometimes they can suddenly change what is written in director's manuscript and start to act how they can think they character should act or think. The majority of good actors can change their actions from what is written to their own, while playing to the way which would be liked and accepted by the director. In the one of the series of "Sepernatural" Jensen Ackles (Din Winchester, the main character) started to improvise and this impromptu was great and entered to the video. If I didn't watch about this moment here (http://raincoaster.com...), I've never thought that it was an improvising. As you see, it that video Jensen tells about it by his own. From the side of 3D models, they can't do it, they don't have feelings, and as a result they can't feel the character. From that reason they look unnatural. You can argue that in the animated movies we may feel the mood of the situation, even it's animated. But don't miss the fact that models have their voice actors as well, which adds a lot of realism into them.
Another reason why it would be difficult to create every new movie in animated format is the difficulty of process. On the one hand you need expensive computers for it and from the other side you need a lot of specialists which would create everything in your movies. Again, you can argue that nowadays there are a lot of 3D animations, but compare the amount of them and the amount of movies with real actors, distributed per year. You can look it here http://www.imdb.com....
As you see, the amount of movies much more than 3D animations.
Thank you for attention.
So ``Terminator: The Salvation`` is the real example of using computer-made actors and we can observe that the idea of replacing the real actors by their 3-D made copies is actually real nowadays.
Also you said that computer-made actors could not express real emotions and make impromptu acting. Here is another good example of expressing emotions by the computer-made actors - ``Rise of the Planet of the Apes: Monkey shines``. Here http://www.toronto.com... you can read some information about the movie and the episodes how they made all the apes. They were totally made by computer graphics and if you saw the film by yourself, you should remember how realistic apes were ``acting``, because the technologies developed so much. Of course there was one exception – the emotions of the main character – Caesar. Today there is very good motion capture computer technology, when computer captures the emotions and acting of real actor and paste to the computer- made copy. So this movie is. Caesar was a combination of human emotions and very good drawn computer graphics.
I have named the real examples of using computer technologies today and I want to repeat again that such problem as emotions will be totally solved some time later too, because it develops.
Thank you too.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by debate250 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||6||0|
Reasons for voting decision: I feel like con's argument was more convincing. I feel like Pro was arguing more for the future rather than the present, and I also feel like Pro in their examples it was actors and animation which was a little contradictory. However, it was a good debate, and both sides argued well.