> When does it make more sense to simply photograph a car than to try and make a digital image of a car look as real as possible? If you're making a movie? Not

> When does it make more sense to simply photograph a car than to try and make a digital image of a car look as real as possible? If you're making a movie? Not as often as you might think. With real cars you have to acquire them, transport them, close off streets to film them, in many shots rent out a helicopter to get a shot in, you're limited to certain times of day to get the right lighting... Animation became part of film and (especially) TV quite early, and it wasn't about some stylized unrealistic aesthetic; it's just plain cheaper. And then of course you're going to want to get around the limitations of the form, and put your anthropomorphizing eyes onto objects that are as realistic as possible.