Discussion
I'm lucky to work with some absolutely brilliant people here who are capable of producing results like this in CGI & retouching.
We still use plenty of conventional photography of course, but the CGI still makes me stop & think, 'How is that possible'?
Not wanting to start a real vs fake row, just proud of the staff here and wanted to share what they can do.
We still use plenty of conventional photography of course, but the CGI still makes me stop & think, 'How is that possible'?
Not wanting to start a real vs fake row, just proud of the staff here and wanted to share what they can do.
Renderings can be scarily realistic.
Some years ago shortly before I retired, a designer sent me renderings of the interior of a large corporate HQ
that they wanted me to photograph.
My first reaction was that they had already had it photographed but for some reason didn't like the images,
it wasn't immediately obvious that they were completely CGI.
They even showed the colour temperature 'errors' that you would expect under a mixed lighting situation.
The only real give away were the textures on things like seating fabrics; they were too corse.
Some years ago shortly before I retired, a designer sent me renderings of the interior of a large corporate HQ
that they wanted me to photograph.
My first reaction was that they had already had it photographed but for some reason didn't like the images,
it wasn't immediately obvious that they were completely CGI.
They even showed the colour temperature 'errors' that you would expect under a mixed lighting situation.
The only real give away were the textures on things like seating fabrics; they were too corse.
Simpo Two said:
How many hours to CGI as opposed to photograph I wonder?
The chances are that bottle never existed, it may have been just an idea that a designer was presenting to a marketing dept. before manufacture.In the case I mentioned in my post, the renderings were done to show the prospective client what their new HQ could look like if they used the services of that designer.
There was nothing to photograph.
Simpo Two said:
How many hours to CGI as opposed to photograph I wonder?
Valid point, but these images are not the epics (time wise) that some might think. They also only need basic colour corrections as all the imperfections are absent from source.Could you get photographic results that match that without any retouching?
Could you reshoot that 12 months later and have no visible difference in lighting, positioning or camera angle?
Can the photographic data be used for moving image as the CGI data can?
I've no doubt it could matched in photography but CGI offers a broader use with what we do sometimes.
durbster said:
Bacardi said:
Wow. I watch a lot of CGI stuff but that is outstanding.Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff