8 ms·
CGI Renders Are Real Photos (2017)
- photoGrant 4y agoI love this! I've always said a retoucher always tries to stray away from what a cgi artist looks to achieve. i.e. they want what each other have. perfection, and a lack of it.
- sublinear 4y agoThese are beautiful. Yet... I know this sounds arrogant, but I feel like I would eventually realize they're real photos if I stared at these long enough without being told. i.e. If I saw them framed on a wall and walked past them every day. The image noise, surface imperfections, chromatic aberrations, etc. are clues, and yes a raytracer can reproduce that, but not usually this well. That's precisely why I think these are beautiful.
- viraptor 4y agoI think the main thing that gives away the shapes image is that the glass surface has thickness. You can see that there are 2 layers of reflection visible on horizontal edges because of it. You could do that in CGI, but nobody does - they make the base surface slightly reflective. I don't think I would notice it out of context though...
- startupsfail 4y agoRTX does it in real time, in some settings. And then DLSS can infer on top.
- berkut 4y agoIn VFX at the high-end (the smaller studios do often take shortcuts) we do model full layered materials with thickness, at least for mid to hero-level assets, so we would do the glass with proper volumetric thickness, with fully-correct inter-reflecting/refracting dielectric BSDFs modelling the glass, with correct IOR and total internal reflection. It is slower to render than using "thin glass", and lighting the checkerboard surface underneath the glass isn't as efficient (you can't do naive Next Event Estimation through the refraction of the glass volume, but you can do manifold walks to solve that), but we do it at that level of fidelity often enough when required and have been for years. There are times when it's not required though, so approximations can be acceptable in more forgiving situations.
- viraptor 4y agoYes, you totally can do it if you want to. What I meant is that that kind of CGI scene composition does not include a glass sheet on the surface. They used it to add the reflection to a checkered pattern instead of trying to find something like polished marble. But if we found a thousand different versions of that scene in CGI, I would bet that every single one of them would use a checkered pattern plane that's slightly reflective. Maybe even uses marble subsurface scattering. But none would add a sheet of glass on the plane as a not-forced modelling choice. That's what makes the photo identifiable as a photo.
- berkut 4y agoSorry, I mis-understood: I agree.
- darthoctopus 4y ago[2017]
- 1-6 4y agoI think people are trying to do this as well with face filters; make the real more artificial to attain the appearance of perfection.
- saithound 4y agoThis can happen accidentally as well. For example, the default Windows 10 wallpaper was created using a physical model, an array of projectors, and a smoke machine. Alas, the end result turned out to be indistinguishable from CG. [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewmXizBqjl0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewmXizBqjl0
- pfranz 4y agoI think for building anything (art, code, furniture) the tools help you find the result. Building it a second time is much easier and requires a lot less sophistication.
- actionfromafar 4y agoYes, I don't know what to say. I just want to emphasize what you say, because it's apparently an alien concept to many people. Tools and process inform the art. How could it not be that way, really? "Cool C64 demo you have there buddy, I could do that in Unity in an afternoon". Yes, but would you? (Edit: and even if you did, it would be a copy of a unique style born out of specific circumstances.)
- wkat4242 4y agoWow I never knew this, thanks
- reeeeee 4y agoThat's nice and all, but isn't that a huge waste of time/money/resources? What is the advantage of doing it this way over just creating a wallpaper digitally?
- BulgarianIdiot 4y agoBig old corporations suck at efficiency. Much like the government does.
- astrange 4y ago
- Mathnerd314 4y agoDoes CGI actually get the subtle shadow details right? Last I checked they were close but a trained person could spot the difference.
- Robotbeat 4y agoDepends on the CGI. With a combination of ray tracing and radiosity, it can be insanely good.
- sjrd 4y agoThat reminds me of a real world experience I had a few years ago, where a real engine in front of my eyes looked like CGI. I was on a small cruise on Switzerland's PS Gallia [1], the fastest lake steamboat in Europe. When you're on it, you can look down the center of the main deck to watch the engine at work. The engine is perfect. Perfect casing with diffuse white (IIRC) reflection, perfect golden metallic joints with glossy reflection, perfect little vials of oil on top of each moving part, to constantly oil them. It felt too perfect to be real, and really looked like it was animated CGI, yet it was there, 3 meters away from me, moving and powering the boat. [1] https://www.lakelucerne.ch/en/your-cruise-experience/explore/our-fleet/steamboat-gallia/ https://www.lakelucerne.ch/en/your-cruise-experience/explore...
- Doxin 4y agoIt doesn't help that steam engines are surprisingly not all that noisy either. For the sheer amount of force a steam engine creates basically the only real noise is the exhaust steam, which if piped elsewhere you won't hear much.
- luguenth 4y agoIf somebody is as curious as me now: https://youtu.be/ohk40f7v8Lw?t=110 https://youtu.be/ohk40f7v8Lw?t=110
- netsharc 4y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVRZ_jxYPPY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVRZ_jxYPPY Shots of the engine
- BulgarianIdiot 4y agoI'm actually quite curious how come not a single person, especially a child, fell into this open meatgrinder. The reason it looked like CGI, in part, is because the engine is unexpectedly big, shiny, and COMPLETELY INAPPROPRIATELY PLACED. We usually witness such stupidity only in sci-fi, where it's all made-up, so it's OK.
- Kye 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- rob74 4y agoI imagine the most annoying part of making these photos is making sure there is absolutely no dust to be seen anywhere...
- wiradikusuma 4y agoAh yes! I came from a 3rd world country. The urban planning is chaotic and pollution everywhere. Whenever I travel to a 1st world western country, both city and suburb, I see the clear blue sky and sceneries (buildings, roads, layout) that make me feel like I'm in a 3D FPS or city sim game.
- scoutt 4y agoI felt the same the first time I came to Europe (from South America). I thought I was in a Truman Show set. I eventually ended up living here.
- SturgeonsLaw 4y agoPlaces that seem like surreal 3D renders have attracted the name "liminal space" if you want some keywords to find similar material, although the aesthetic tends to veer towards solitary and slightly creepy environments https://www.reddit.com/r/LiminalSpace/ https://www.reddit.com/r/LiminalSpace/
- cyxxon 4y agoThe "logo teaser" / title announcement for the Lord of the Rings - The Rings of Power show also made lots of people think it was some form of CGI, since they felt it didn't look believable. Turns out it was actually filmed with practical effects. The teaser: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhqGCPMfkNM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhqGCPMfkNM Behind the scenes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OC_yTMST7mw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OC_yTMST7mw
- jcl 4y agoReminds me of the making of a pre-CGI HBO intro -- looks CGI but is entirely physical models, motion controlled cameras, and clever compositing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agS6ZXBrcng&t=310s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agS6ZXBrcng&t=310s
- DoctorOW 4y agoThis is a pet peeve of mine, as someone who does CG art among other things. The popular narrative is that CGI always can be spotted and it always looks bad when in fact it's the other way around. Bad looking things are attributed to CGI regardless, and good looking things are assumed to be practical.
- petodo 4y agoClickbait, real title should be "THESE CGI "Renders" Are Real Photos (2017)"
- YurgenJurgensen 4y agoYeah, cutting the 'these' completely changed my expectations for the article. Without it, it sounds like it'd be a rant about the relative artistic validity of photography and CGI.
- cal85 4y agoI think HN automatically removes certain words like "This" and "How" from the start of titles. But this only happens on initial submission - the user who submitted it can then edit the title to fix it if necessary.
- petodo 4y agoIt's quite bad system, original article use actually normal title These CGI Renders Are Actually Real Photos.
- mclightning 4y agoThere is a youtube channel which does a whole variety of mechanical contraptions, and it is absolutely impossible to tell if it is real from the videos. I cannot remember it unfortunately, but the youtuber had to show some background footage to convince people those weren't fake. edit: Found it - https://www.youtube.com/@OleksandrStepanenko https://www.youtube.com/@OleksandrStepanenko
- expertentipp 4y agoPerhaps McDonalds menus, IKEA catalogues, and Playboy shots are real photos as well? They just make an extraordinary effort and spend tons of money to make make it look fake.
- speps 4y agoRelated: I followed a link on PetaPixel at the bottom of TFA and got April fooled: https://petapixel.com/2015/04/01/these-cgi-images-are-so-realistic-that-they-look-like-actual-photographs/ https://petapixel.com/2015/04/01/these-cgi-images-are-so-rea...
- Dalewyn 4y agoI've seen behind-the-scenes stories of how those burger shots are made. They are very real photos of very real burgers, what isn't real is how the burger is assembled for the shot as compared to the burgers we eat.
- wongarsu 4y agoMcDonalds menus are real photos, just not of the things they are supposed to portray. There are lots of tricks to making burgers look good in photos, and the end result isn't edible, even if you take out the cardboard slices that make it look bigger.
- Akronymus 4y agoThe cardboard slices may very well be the most edible part about them.
- expertentipp 4y agoMake an experiment. Take a fast food "meal" back home, put it on a plate with cutlery and pour drinks into a glass, remove all branding and packages. Would you eat this or a cardboard?
- Akronymus 4y ago
- c7b 4y agoobligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/331/ https://xkcd.com/331/
- wnkrshm 4y agoThat's what the original global illumination papers for path tracing did: They built a physical Cornel box and then compared photo and render [0]. [0] http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/online/box/compare.html http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/online/box/compare.html
- omershapira 4y agoIn 2018, when launching the first real-time raytracing GPU, NVIDIA made an exhibition [2] at SIGGRAPH honoring "Figure 7" from Turner Whitted's original Raytracing paper [1]. It consisted of a forced perspective floor and some suspended spheres. Lighting was a nightmare to get right. [1] https://www.cs.drexel.edu/~david/Classes/Papers/p343-whitted.pdf https://www.cs.drexel.edu/~david/Classes/Papers/p343-whitted... [2] https://techgage.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Rob-Posing-With-Turner-Whitted-680x453.jpg https://techgage.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Rob-Posing-W...
- gloosx 4y agoWas a bit sad to discover the current studio website at this point. Everything is coerced to the past state, it's a pretty bold and artistic move. Appreciate it.