I don’t believe that.
Given how extremely lackluster that nuclear explosion looked, it can’t be that far off from the truth.
Comment on Christopher Nolan Forgot To Credit Over 80% Of VFX Crew On ‘Oppenheimer’
WarmSoda@lemm.ee 1 year ago
He also claims there isn’t even one CGI shot in the entire film. I don’t believe that. There aren’t any backgrounds filled in at all? No touch ups? If he used matte paintings you would be able to tell with IMAX, there’s too much definition to pass off a painting.
lloram239@feddit.de 1 year ago
KingJalopy@lemm.ee 1 year ago
That was so disappointing…
kingmongoose7877@lemmy.film 1 year ago
While I will agree that maybe Sir Christopher is possibly stretching the truth regarding CGI (it’s entirely possible there isn’t one entire, totally computer-generated shot), but computer-aided, computer-enhanced, no. Especially in this day and age, everything is touched by Inferno/Flame/Smoke/Nuke/AE/Blender/Maya/blah blah blah.
When you say “matte painting” you mean traditional, non-digital, paint-on-glass? Forgive my ignorance, but why would that be any more or less noticible in IMAX?
WarmSoda@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Imax has a huge resolution. It’s like watching a 4k copy of an old movie and being able to see how fake the materials used were.
TheBat@lemmy.world 1 year ago
He meant there’s no full CGI/green screen shots. He’s not completely averse to CGI.
The Dark Knight has Batman flying over Hong Kong and that was a CGI shot. Inception had folding city. Interstellar had mathematically created CGI of black hole.
Otherwise CGI is used by him to enhance existing shots or to hide wirework. Such as zero gravity scenes in Inception.