5 ms·

> Those Bullet Effects in Terminator 2 Weren’t CGI The film came out in 1991… they obviously didn’t have anything like the tracking to do effects like that as

> Those Bullet Effects in Terminator 2 Weren’t CGI The film came out in 1991… they obviously didn’t have anything like the tracking to do effects like that as CGI back then.

rasz 5y ago
Yes, they actually had to kill one of the twin actors, melt his corpse and then project it in reverse for this scene https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXsyn-9VLVA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXsyn-9VLVA practical effects ftw!
- knorker 5y ago
  I'm not an expert, but it's not obvious that the camera angle actually changes (as opposed to postprocess movement) in the one shot where the camera actually moves. This one was probably much more effort: https://youtu.be/6z9qws7M8q8?t=275 https://youtu.be/6z9qws7M8q8?t=275 You're not contradicting the parent comment though. It's not obvious that they had tracking back then. I wouldn't be surprised if they did it all manually, frame by frame. I'd say not a chance in hell they'd be able to do a good job in 1992 doing effects on a running Robert Patrick while the camera is on a vehicle. It was cutting edge back then, but not that cutting edge.
jandrese 5y ago
Digital morphing was introduced to the public in that film. It's not out of the realm of possibility that they could have done the splash effects using a similar technology.
- pierrec 5y ago
  > Digital morphing was introduced to the public in that film. As someone who grew up watching Willow (1988), I beg to differ... Note the box office was about 1/4 that of Terminator 2, so you could say it reached the public pretty well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKzbsDG58pc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKzbsDG58pc
  - mkl 5y ago
    That's 2D image morphing, not 3D CGI, but yes, jandrese didn't specify.
- agumonkey 5y ago
  Wasn't Abyss the introduction ? the pod morphing into Mastrantonio's face was the same software as in T2 IIRC
  - stephenhuey 5y ago
    The Abyss was another film James Cameron made shortly before T2, and I remember being mesmerized by how realistic it looked. Not sure what (if any) distinction there is between its CGI and T2’s, but this Wikipedia article claims The Abyss had the first 3D water effect: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_computer_animation_in_film_and_television# https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_computer_animati...
evan_ 5y ago
They did plenty of effects tracked to actors before computers, they just tracked them manually, frame-by-frame.
- CodeArtisan 5y ago
  They filmed Robert Patrick with a grid painted all over his body then did the animations by hand. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0xp74uIZO4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0xp74uIZO4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotoscoping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotoscoping
knorker 5y ago
You say that, but through brute force they managed to have camera movement + CGI in (only?) this scene: https://youtu.be/6z9qws7M8q8?t=275 https://youtu.be/6z9qws7M8q8?t=275 But yes, obviously they could not have done the bullet stuff with CGI.
flohofwoe 5y ago
Yet Jurassic Park was just two years later and combined CGI with moving cameras in some scenes. It could also have been achieved without camera tracking by painstakingly rotoscoping the effect into each frame by hand, which I guess would also count as "CGI".

> Those Bullet Effects in Terminator 2 Weren’t CGI The film came out in 1991… they obviously didn’t have anything like the tracking to do effects like that as CGI back then.

rasz 5y ago

Yes, they actually had to kill one of the twin actors, melt his corpse and then project it in reverse for this scene https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXsyn-9VLVA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXsyn-9VLVA practical effects ftw!

knorker 5y ago
I'm not an expert, but it's not obvious that the camera angle actually changes (as opposed to postprocess movement) in the one shot where the camera actually moves. This one was probably much more effort: https://youtu.be/6z9qws7M8q8?t=275 https://youtu.be/6z9qws7M8q8?t=275 You're not contradicting the parent comment though. It's not obvious that they had tracking back then. I wouldn't be surprised if they did it all manually, frame by frame. I'd say not a chance in hell they'd be able to do a good job in 1992 doing effects on a running Robert Patrick while the camera is on a vehicle. It was cutting edge back then, but not that cutting edge.

jandrese 5y ago

Digital morphing was introduced to the public in that film. It's not out of the realm of possibility that they could have done the splash effects using a similar technology.

pierrec 5y ago
> Digital morphing was introduced to the public in that film. As someone who grew up watching Willow (1988), I beg to differ... Note the box office was about 1/4 that of Terminator 2, so you could say it reached the public pretty well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKzbsDG58pc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKzbsDG58pc
- mkl 5y ago
  That's 2D image morphing, not 3D CGI, but yes, jandrese didn't specify.
agumonkey 5y ago
Wasn't Abyss the introduction ? the pod morphing into Mastrantonio's face was the same software as in T2 IIRC
- stephenhuey 5y ago
  The Abyss was another film James Cameron made shortly before T2, and I remember being mesmerized by how realistic it looked. Not sure what (if any) distinction there is between its CGI and T2’s, but this Wikipedia article claims The Abyss had the first 3D water effect: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_computer_animation_in_film_and_television# https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_computer_animati...

evan_ 5y ago

They did plenty of effects tracked to actors before computers, they just tracked them manually, frame-by-frame.

CodeArtisan 5y ago
They filmed Robert Patrick with a grid painted all over his body then did the animations by hand. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0xp74uIZO4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0xp74uIZO4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotoscoping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotoscoping

knorker 5y ago

You say that, but through brute force they managed to have camera movement + CGI in (only?) this scene: https://youtu.be/6z9qws7M8q8?t=275 https://youtu.be/6z9qws7M8q8?t=275 But yes, obviously they could not have done the bullet stuff with CGI.

flohofwoe 5y ago

Yet Jurassic Park was just two years later and combined CGI with moving cameras in some scenes. It could also have been achieved without camera tracking by painstakingly rotoscoping the effect into each frame by hand, which I guess would also count as "CGI".