why?

File: tt1070.layoutfacecap.1067CROP.jpg (73KB, 1381x846px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 1381x846px

good thing it didn't ruin the movie - can't ruin of garbage

Looks kind of impressive, although I haven't seen it in action.

>>80608671
Technically impressive yes but it seems off in a film with real actors. Theres no reason they couldn't hire a look alike.

its the eyes right? almost perfect though. I applaud the effort

>>80609296
I actually think the eyes look extremely lifelike. It's mostly the mouth movements and the overuse of closeups.

Fuck off the movie came out like 3 months ago

>>80609296
yes. looks pretty good but you can see its cgi.
they shouldve hired charles dance and used make up. maybe a bit of cgi to make him skinnier.

>>80608671

in action it looks like a video game character. why the fuck did they mix it in with live actors?

File: peter-cushing-star-wars-grand-moff-tarkin.jpg (639KB, 1600x705px) Image search: [Google]

639KB, 1600x705px

>>80609749

what a dummy

you can see in the thumbnail the face has that stupid HDR like lighting, that "painting like" effect (not really) some dumb photos have.

looks flat and dry. dull. dead.

the CGI looked so fucking bad
like when he smiled it looked like a pixar movie

>>80609749
Rogue.One.2016.720p.BluRay.x264-SPARKS
1 day ago
>:^)

>>80607875
Why is it that no matter how realistic CGI gets, it's so painfully obvious that it's fake?

>>80611093

it's true for human faces, because they are so complex. mechanical things (like cars) can be pretty photorealistic whre it's hard to tell cgi from live action.

>>80611093
It's in the eyes. CGI eyes look dead as fuck.

>>80609296
>its the eyes right? almost perfect though. I applaud the effort

it was the animation. his face moves around in weird ways, almost like it's convulsing at times. it's just unnatural.

This was done badly on purpose. The CIA and other alphabet agencies don't want the general public to know technology exists that can digitally replicate human faces and expressions.

>>80611093
The tiny muscles around your mouth and eyes probably don't activate the same time every way, I think the CGI ones tend to make the same movements.

There's incredibly tiny imperfections of movement that are probably hard to nail when you are time constrained.

We'll get there one day, I think we a are close.

Speaking of close, there were too many close-ups of Tarkin, but I guess that was the best way to really show off the new CGI that ILM have going.

File: rise-of-the-tomb-raider.jpg (78KB, 1550x999px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1550x999px

>>80611460

> We'll get there one day

i agree, and it'll be creepy and awesome at the same time. why go to see someone, when you can meet them in VR and can't tell the difference between their digital version and the real person!

>>80607875
Im suprised how good it looked. I mean, yes, when he talks all immersion is lost, but in screenshots, and in some cases in movie, he does look pretty lifelike.
And I did not expect for him to have so much screentime. If was a rumor before the movie that he will be CGI, but I thout he will have a brief cameo, pretty much like Leia did.