Amazon.com Widgets
  • Practical effect look better than CGI

    Practical effects have always been used in movies and bring the movie production great amounts of respect. CGI is an innovative strategy to apply to use on stunts and effects, and there are a lot more possibilities than practical effects, but they look fake and often cartoonish. So in movie production practical effects trump CGI when there is a choice open.

  • It just feels more real.

    CGI may be a wonderful thing but in most cases it does not beat the use of practical effects. If we rely too heavily on CGI effects then we take away from the realism of films. In the eighties we saw some of the best practical makeup effects ever committed to film and there was little to no computer involvement and it looked way better than most of the stuff going today. It can be done and it can be done great with practical effects.

  • Yes, practical effects surpass CGI effects.

    It is my belief that practical effects can produce a more positive outcome compared to CGI effects. Not only are practical effects more believable, but they are immersive. CGI effects can often be found lacking a certain realistic quality, forcing the viewer to question what they are seeing. When viewing a film shrouded in practical effects, the experience is passable and easy for the viewer to understand what it happening.

  • Yes, practical effects feel more real.

    With CGI, it is often very obvious that what you are watching is not real. Practical effects mean that the actors are interacting with something that is real and in the room with them. It looks better under the lights. Movement is more organic and authentic. Whenever possible, practical effects should be embraced.

  • No responses have been submitted.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.