3 ms·

I don't understand this. Back in 1991 Robert Patrick was an outstanding T-1000. Did anyone experience an uncanny valley for that character? I didn't, and that

I don't understand this. Back in 1991 Robert Patrick was an outstanding T-1000. Did anyone experience an uncanny valley for that character? I didn't, and that was 25 year old CGI. For me the transitions were seamless and very convincing between "real" and "shapeshifted". So is there no uncanny valley if transitions occur quickly enough? Or is it that we know he's a shapeshifter that keeps us from being disturbed at any point during a transition?

grzm 10y ago
I think there are two things at play here. You point out the effectiveness of the CGI for the transitions in T2. I think you're right in that the transitions where quick and that we know he's a shape-shifter. The other is that Tarkin interacts substantially with the other characters, and close up. There are a lot of additional opportunities for us to see behavior that doesn't look quite right, especially facial expressions during conversation. When thinking about this, I compare the differences between how I reacted to K-2SO and Tarkin. I never thought once about the K-2SO effects until after the show: he blended right in. Perhaps it was just that I knew Peter Cushing was dead, I know I was always aware that something was just a bit off. I also thought that there was a little too much detail in Tarkin's face, but I think that be me focussing on it too much.
- kristianp 10y ago
  I think it's because in Terminator 2, the human face is not CGI, it's just Patrick's face filmed. (or when it is, it's not skin-toned, it's silver or checker-boarded). The Tarkin CGI is much more ambitious, because it simulates facial movements and expressions (and lighting).
  - grzm 10y ago
    Good point. Transforming or manipulating a filmed image is a different process from creating one from whole cloth.
- daxelrod 10y ago
  I didn't actually realize Peter Cushing was dead until after I saw the film. For me, it was the movement that felt unnatural. I think I would have been covinced by any single frame, they did a superb job on the modeling, texturing, and lighting. But the way his jaw and lips moved when he talked felt like a video game, not a person.
  - FroshKiller 10y ago
    I've pointed out that same detail to people. Real people's faces move in anticipation of the sounds they're about to make, not perfectly in step with the sound. Some sentences were animated better than others, though, and it was very good overall in my opinion.
Terretta 10y ago
That's not quite what's meant? The 'uncanny valley' term applies to a model that should be 100% human but isn't. It's off in a way that humans notice but the CGI designer couldn't correct for. The shapeshifter transition isn't human, you know it isn't human, you are meant to see and experience it isn't human, so cannot be in the uncanny valley.

grzm 10y ago

I think there are two things at play here. You point out the effectiveness of the CGI for the transitions in T2. I think you're right in that the transitions where quick and that we know he's a shape-shifter. The other is that Tarkin interacts substantially with the other characters, and close up. There are a lot of additional opportunities for us to see behavior that doesn't look quite right, especially facial expressions during conversation. When thinking about this, I compare the differences between how I reacted to K-2SO and Tarkin. I never thought once about the K-2SO effects until after the show: he blended right in. Perhaps it was just that I knew Peter Cushing was dead, I know I was always aware that something was just a bit off. I also thought that there was a little too much detail in Tarkin's face, but I think that be me focussing on it too much.

kristianp 10y ago
I think it's because in Terminator 2, the human face is not CGI, it's just Patrick's face filmed. (or when it is, it's not skin-toned, it's silver or checker-boarded). The Tarkin CGI is much more ambitious, because it simulates facial movements and expressions (and lighting).
- grzm 10y ago
  Good point. Transforming or manipulating a filmed image is a different process from creating one from whole cloth.
daxelrod 10y ago
I didn't actually realize Peter Cushing was dead until after I saw the film. For me, it was the movement that felt unnatural. I think I would have been covinced by any single frame, they did a superb job on the modeling, texturing, and lighting. But the way his jaw and lips moved when he talked felt like a video game, not a person.
- FroshKiller 10y ago
  I've pointed out that same detail to people. Real people's faces move in anticipation of the sounds they're about to make, not perfectly in step with the sound. Some sentences were animated better than others, though, and it was very good overall in my opinion.

Terretta 10y ago

That's not quite what's meant? The 'uncanny valley' term applies to a model that should be 100% human but isn't. It's off in a way that humans notice but the CGI designer couldn't correct for. The shapeshifter transition isn't human, you know it isn't human, you are meant to see and experience it isn't human, so cannot be in the uncanny valley.