I was just thinking how I wish that was the case on reddit, but for submissions.
Some magic where if you submit some article that is BS, deceptive rage bait, or just not up to whatever the subs standards are ... you as the submitter take the hit somehow.
It wouldn't be foolproof, but forums sometimes are inundated by users who love to post / submit stories and it chances the atmosphere of the forum from thoughtful to ... whatever low effort tweet is out there getting attention.
If feel like it is completely normal for any kind of sharing to have these kind of rules.
It keeps people from using "don't blame me, family member did it" as an excuse / cover for cheating. I used to moderate a busy gaming forum, that excuse is baked into that community sadly.
To me the Psudeo-CGI or straight up non CGI effects have more character. Is it intentional or just "found" I don't know, but I always feel like there's more of a unique look to them.
Straight CG still looks more often than not, too clean (even if trying to look dirty), too polished, too uniform, no character, and just feels like CGI for CGIs sake. Something feels lost and while I expected it to get better over time, I don't feel like it has gotten better.
CGI effects are inevitably samey because any generation of them all get built on the same few tools from the same few vendors, largely by artists and animators trained to approach those tools in the same way, often chasing the mark established in the last big breakthrough hit and whatever new technological innovations it was built on.
Meanwhile, practical and hybrid effects have a much wider palette of material and techniques leverage hundreds of years of diversity and maturity in craft technique, and leave plenty of room for lead artists to apply their own personal creative signature.
We can assume CGI will eventually merge into that latter pool, but that won't happen until technological innovation plateaus and artists turn focus to clever innovations in technique and style instead.
It all comes down to lots of greebles and people who see a CD-rack and think 'that would actually make a really cool skyscraper for this dystopian cityscape I'm making'¹.
I don't think "all CGI looks the same" has been any more true for games/movies/tv than "all [things] look the same" style-wise was before (consider sci-fi aesthetics by decade, say - how many Star Trek copycats, how many Alien copycats, etc). And obviously the limitations of practical effects are HUGE - Star Wars broke a lot of ground here, and yet looking at a movie from 5 years later, Wrath of Khan, we see very limited model movement and "action". Or compare TNG space action with even the primitive CGI of Babylon 5.
Wind Waker was one of the first obvious examples in the 3d-rendered-game world; the Spiderverse movies are probably the most widely-seen cultural example of breaking with existing styles. The "feathering" effect of some of the surfaces/fur and such in the commercials for The Wild Robot is another that I remember seen recently.
There's a lot of copy-catting, but not really in a "limits of the process of making CGI" way anymore.
Back in the 90s in the post-Jurassic Park TV/film landscape, it wasn’t common for similar CGI models to appear in waves, e.g., multiple shows with the same variations of janky CGI dinosaurs. My guess was that a VFX shop, having created a model did the hard sell to multiple sci-fi producers to try to get as much profit out of the initial work as possible.
My guess was that a VFX shop, having created a model did the hard sell to multiple sci-fi producers to try to get as much profit out of the initial work as possible.
This or anything like it never happened and never came close to being considered for multiple reasons, including that the vfx studio wouldn't technically own that asset and that the model itself wouldn't be the most difficult part of the process.
What actually happened was that after a huge success like jurassic park, dinosaurs were hot and more dinosaur projects were made.
Reuse of starship models certainly happened in SF shows and movies. There’s a big fleet battle in Serenity with IIRC some Battlestar Galactica and Star Trek models in the background, and I think the Serenity and one or two Star Trek ships found their way into fleet shots in Battlestar Galactica.
What you're talking about is the same studio reusing assets that they made and have saved to fill in the background.
This is common, but that isn't the same as selling your hero assets to someone else and having them use them as a hero asset, which is what the other person was guessing happened.
This could not be further from the truth. Reality is almost the exact opposite from what you are saying. Practical effects are severely limited and if you look at movies in the 80s and 90s you can see the exact same model + foam + air brush + balsa wood breaking + cocoa for dirt + mist canon in one shot after the next.
Meanwhile in modern times you are watching movies where virtually every shot is somewhere between subtly modified to mostly CG and you don't notice. Then people see one awkward shot out of 400 and declare that "practical effects are better".
Watch batman returns to see a high budget comic book movie before modern film making and compare that to the summer block busters from today.
I mean you see a combination of cgi and practical (puppet/rubber applicae and masks) in some of the newer disney+ star wars stuff (and some stuff that is both, grogu is primarily a puppet but they do some cgi work on top to 'sweeten' him). I think generally a toss-up as to what looks worse from a reality comparison perspective, however I think the practical work in starwars taps into a lot of the nostalgia and legacy from the first three movies and ends up being more 'accepted' by that audience.
Other blockbusters have followed suit on this re-adoption of practical effects as well, the new Dungeons and Dragons movie used quite a bit of practical effects in their creature work as well.
One of the first commenters addressed this [1] with a pretty fair point of view:
> "There's an apples-to-oranges comparison going on because while the majority of hand-drawn/made/oldschool animation and effects which were very ordinary and uncreative have slipped from memory (and are unavailable to view) and we only see the cream/best of a hundred years of those artforms, CG is unfairly and naively compared to it."
That is, most old effects before CGI were crap. We remember fondly those that stood the test of time (like Max Headroom or Blade Runner) precisely because they were good. We forget about the majority that weren't very good.
---
[1] 11 year ago! Wow that article is old, especially given how rapidly tech progresses
I find it interesting that cheap animation went from cell-based hand-drawn animation to CGI over the last 20ish years. It used to be that if you saw something that was computer-animated, it was expensive and care was spent on the whole production. Now, you can assume that if you see traditional 2D cell-based animation that it’s more likely to be a prestige project.
CG still looks more often than not, too clean (even if trying to look dirty), too polished, too uniform, no character, and just feels like CGI for CGIs sake.
The truth is that this is what you notice. Most of the effects fly by and you have no idea. When you see slivers that don't work as well you think of that as 'all cg' and the 'cg look'.
Depending on what you get, it can actually be quite solid in macros and not super unhealthy. Particularly if you’re trying to hit protein goals, the $/cal or $/g protein is better than most other fast food places, and they had healthy alternatives to the typical grease-filled beef.
Taco Bell will never be the healthiest thing you can eat, but in terms of fast food, it’s not half bad. In my anecdotal experience, their quality has gone up across the board compared to years ago, and they’ve also added many healthier customization options (you have to ask for it, though).
Those places can be reasonably healthy depending what you pick; a burger is low in fiber but otherwise it's actually pretty balanced. Soda and fries are what's bad.
They've gotten better. I only order it rarely and was surprised last time by how much they were pushing chicken and black bean options that appeared... healthier. No doubt to save them money, but hey, two birds, one stone.
Yeah, I went there for the first time in a decade last week and was impressed that they had a global “Veggie mode” button on their digital menu kiosk that limits the menu to only meatless items.
Made it really easy to buy a bean crunchwrap with sour cream and cheese swapped for guacamole and potato.
I went there so my Mexican girlfriend could try it. She was disappointed that the Dorito shell tacos are just unflavored orange tostadas, not actually a big Dorito like their ads / marketing suggests.
I haven't been in a bank very often in years, but when I have I've noticed how few tellers there were and they were running around trying to help as fast as they could but there weren't enough bodies to cover all the cars / people.
How often this is the case I don't know.
It makes me wonder if it is purely pay for each individual worker, as much as it might be conditions surrounding it.
I've worked jobs where the pay was not great, but the culture and atmosphere were great, and it was fun. I've worked jobs where the pay was better, but the culture and atmosphere were horrible and i wanted out so bad ... I would have told you I wasn't paid enough, but that wasn't the whole story.
Wait, cover all the cars? I barely understand drive through ATMs, but are you saying they have drive through tellers too? Every time I think Canada is basically America lite I hear something like this and it boggles my mind.
Yes, it's typical in the US to have a drive-thru lane at a bank branch. You can send items back and forth using those pneumatic tube things. Are they not common in Canada? Here is a short video showing how they work. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5pVJ8ID0DQ
That seems slower than getting out. Only advantage I can see is for people with mobility issues (thought even then leaning out would be a challenge) and making it less likely to have bank robberies.
With FedNow instant payments now available, I would expect check volume to continue to decline, negating the need for physical transfers of instruments at banks (both checks and cash). Branches will end up as advisory and sales touch points; Capital One is marketing them as cafes, for example.
Yeah, I'm going along assuming a share cultural context and then I have to stop and do a double take that reminds me some things are very much not the same.
I get the feeling that might not even be needed. There's a pattern of those in power thinking they'll be kept in power even in trying times, patterns where they're wrong, but also where they are right.
I've seen a bunch of these articles now and a lot seem to have these sort of "context explainer" paragraphs that seem like they're there as filler to explain the context of the events.
However, they're almost always so general, or even elementary that anyone who would bother to read the article would already know that stuff would wonder why a sports writer would write it. There's zero need for them for the audience they will attract.
A few even have these hilarious "this report was is not intended to indicate X, but .." type paragraphs at the end.
You can almost imagine the prompts that brought them about.
That is factored into their approach. See https://theoceancleanup.com/rivers for multiple approaches on how to prevent plastic from making its way into the ocean.
Also from the about section of the blog post:
> They aim to achieve this goal through a dual strategy: intercepting in rivers to stop the flow and cleaning up what has already accumulated in the ocean. [...] To curb the tide via rivers, The Ocean Cleanup has developed Interceptor™ Solutions to halt and extract riverine plastic before it reaches the ocean.
Nothing. Philippines is the largest contributor [1], Western countries will clean, Indonesia will continue, it’s a money transfer from the West to Philippines through a garbage medium.
Because those are two separate problems, and not having a solution for one shouldn't stop you from dealing with the second. If you can remove it faster than it grows, other folks can deal with tackling the vastly more complex issue of getting the entire planet to reduce their dependency plastics.
Some magic where if you submit some article that is BS, deceptive rage bait, or just not up to whatever the subs standards are ... you as the submitter take the hit somehow.
It wouldn't be foolproof, but forums sometimes are inundated by users who love to post / submit stories and it chances the atmosphere of the forum from thoughtful to ... whatever low effort tweet is out there getting attention.
reply