Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Again, I'm not a future seer,

Then why do you keep pretending you can predict the future?

I said that people do notice, maybe not most, but yes, some people do notice. If you would like to make a different claim, then do so. It's not about some YouTuber, it's the fact that at least some people do notice bad CGI, while you said "people can't notice" it.

You still don't even understand what I'm saying. There is a huge amount of explicit detail demanded by the people making movies and it all needs to be exact.

People write scripts for fun, yes. I'm not sure what there is to show you

There is nothing to show, because kids aren't writing "hollywood blockbuster scripts" in their bedrooms even though they could just type it out on their computer.

It only seems that easy to something who knows absolutely nothing about writing.

Based on this sentence, I can tell you haven't used the state of the art recently, even if you say you used something like ComfyUI with inpainting.

Or maybe these results aren't as great as you think.

Things like Ultimatte with Unreal Engine's virtual sets do just that actually

They absolutely do not. Ultimatte is not a natural image matting plugin. The virtual set stuff isn't even in the same ballpark as natural image matting, it is a live screen behind people.

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/ultimatte

https://www.google.com/search?q=natural+image+matting

My point, again, is that people will be making current blockbuster level content in their houses

You don't even understand what that means. Lots of people read article headlines and watch 30 second youtube clips, but it is a mistake to buy into so much hype without understanding that new tools are still just a piece of the puzzle.



Alright, seems like you can't or are not articulating what you profess to claim, instead expecting me to read your mind and when I can't, saying "yoU StilL doN't EvEN uNdeRStaNd," and it is clear you don't even use the tools you're dismissing, so I think this is an unproductive conversation for me. Goodbye.


I explained it many times and I will again.

Automation produces something plausible, high end movies need something exact.

Plausible is fine for animatics and previs, not for hundreds of millions of dollars.

The amount of work required is so vast you could automate away 90% of it and it is still out of reach for one person to make a "hollywood blockbuster in their bedroom" just as it is for one person to launch themselves to the moon and make it back.

If you don't believe me, try to make a single shot of CG pool balls on a live action pool table. Nothing but spheres, it should be easy right? Automate some of it with 'AI' if you can.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: