This 100%. CGI should be used to enhance traditional special effects, not replace them entirely.
Also, planning properly for CGI can dramatically reduce both the cost and quality of CG. For instance, recording reference lighting to provide the CG team so they can more accurately make any fully-rendered elements. Don’t just say “they’ll fix it in post”. That’s where CG cost skyrockets.
Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 6 days ago
And if your practical effects are good enough, you don’t need CGI at all. Look how the CGI in The Thing remake absolutely fucked up their beatiful puppet monsters, so that everything looks so off that it destroyed willing suspension of disbelief.
halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 6 days ago
That’s exactly most likely an example of my last point. CG can look perfectly real. If you have the tools and references needed, or the time to do everything manually frame by frame, which adds up extremely fast.
Based on the result in The Thing, CGI team almost certainly had no references from actual shooting apart from the bare footage, and even composited shots were inconsistent from each other.