4 ms·

That's where you give him a pass since he's 16 years old doing this in his spare time

by majani 3y ago

stavros 3y ago
I don't, though. I'm not saying he sucks, or that this doesn't look good, or anything. I'm saying that this could be improved by having the animations looking more real by behaving more like they would in reality. Saying something can be improved is not the same as saying that something is crap.
- prmoustache 3y ago
  Well we can definitely start doing that from any movie in that case because all of them include totally unrealistic stuff regardless if it about physics or narrative. In that case, voluntary or not it give that bigger robotic feeling. But guess what, that is also part of what makes movies interesting.
  - stavros 3y ago
    There is such a thing as suspension of disbelief, though, so I disagree with you.
    - prmoustache 3y ago
      I would just argue I have not the same tolerance/expectancy regarding reality when it comes to animated movie vs those with actors made of flesh or depending which subject is treated. For example I kind of hate most action movies starring actors like Tom Cruise or movies such as the James Bond or Jason Bourne series but I do love more liberty with reality when it comes to movies treating on myths/legends, science fiction or animated movies. Everyone put their own cursor. This discussion is kind of moot anyway without knowing the author intention.
      - stavros 3y ago
        There's a difference between consistent, explained differences and inconsistent and inexplicable things. If you were watching a scifi film and, half way through, the characters became fish, without anyone acknowledging or explaining this, you might not enjoy it.
      - zimpenfish 3y ago
        > I do love more liberty with reality when it comes to [fantasy] movies I have the same - probably because you know from experience that, e.g., someone taking the punishment that John Wick or Bourne does wouldn't be running around two minutes later but you have no frame of reference for, say, an 8ft goblin doing the same. (Like the first episode of Slow Horses: there is no way a huge anti-terrorism training exercise across London stations wouldn't have every second of communications recorded for later examination and it made the whole premise of the show - that the fella is exiled because someone lied about what they said to him over those comms - nonsense to me.)
- jeffhuys 3y ago
  Being critical regardless of age is very valuable. There's this thing that if a young person does something pretty damn cool, they're made to believe it's extraordanirily good, rivalling even the best in the industry. I think it's called the "Gifted Kid Problem" in certain circles. It happened to me with programming games; I entered competitions and even won one or two, making me believe I'm just SO good. Now that I'm 30+ years old I still crave that same level of recognition which is basically unobtainable for me now as I'm just another cog in the system. Sure, I have some nice projects here and there and I get a compliment out of that some time, but never on the level I received while I was young. I think it's incredibly important to give people advice on what could be improved, while still being respectful / praising of the work that's already done. That's how, in my opinion, you get a balanced individual.
  - Arisaka1 3y ago
    >Being critical regardless of age is very valuable. There's this thing that if a young person does something pretty damn cool, they're made to believe it's extraordanirily good, rivalling even the best in the industry. I think it's called the "Gifted Kid Problem" in certain circles. I think you nailed something that I was wondering while browsing this thread. What difference does it make if a person practiced 5-10 years a craft resulting to winning an award if that person started when he was 10 vs. 25? The headline would not only be radically different if it was a 30-year old who did it because he studied since he was 20-25; We might not even have a headline. It would have been "oh, someone won the award. Yay?" Do we reward the output as as standalone (as is) during the contest, or do we also reward our perceived potential (imagine what this person would do in 20 years)?
    - helboi4 3y ago
      this is another reason why as a gifted kid who became lazy and average I feel like every effort I make now at 25 to improve myself is honestly just too late. In 5 years I will be irrelevant.
      - RugnirViking 3y ago
- demondemidi 3y ago
  To some people all criticism is bad. Even if they aren’t the target of it. There is such a thing as constructive criticism which is what you were offering.
sirodoht 3y ago
I would claim we should give a pass to everybody because we are all human. I would also claim I don’t think it’s nice to judge people based on their age, regardless if it’s good or bad judgement. Furthermore, I would definitely be annoyed as 16yo if I were deemed “good enough for my age”. He competes with peers, at the highest level, not with superiors who do him a favour.
- benj111 3y ago
  Yes and no. We have separate sports classes based on gender on age to reflect abilities. It's takes time to get good at this stuff, a younger person has inherently had less time. I'd structure it as one overall ranking, but special age rankings within that. A 5 year old could hypothetically win overall, but if they didn't they'd still be rewarded in relation to their (age) peers. There's an 'encouragement' element that you're missing. My 5 year old draws objectively bad pictures. I wouldn't tell him that though. I want him to get better so that he does become objectively good.
- ChrisRR 3y ago
  This is specifically a competition for young people. It's totally based around age and that's fine. A teenager doesn't have the luxury of 20 years of professional experience.

That's where you give him a pass since he's 16 years old doing this in his spare time

by majani 3y ago

That's where you give him a pass since he's 16 years old doing this in his spare time

I don't, though. I'm not saying he sucks, or that this doesn't look good, or anything. I'm saying that this could be improved by having the animations looking more real by behaving more like they would in reality. Saying something can be improved is not the same as saying that something is crap.

prmoustache 3y ago
Well we can definitely start doing that from any movie in that case because all of them include totally unrealistic stuff regardless if it about physics or narrative. In that case, voluntary or not it give that bigger robotic feeling. But guess what, that is also part of what makes movies interesting.
- stavros 3y ago
  There is such a thing as suspension of disbelief, though, so I disagree with you.
  - prmoustache 3y ago
    I would just argue I have not the same tolerance/expectancy regarding reality when it comes to animated movie vs those with actors made of flesh or depending which subject is treated. For example I kind of hate most action movies starring actors like Tom Cruise or movies such as the James Bond or Jason Bourne series but I do love more liberty with reality when it comes to movies treating on myths/legends, science fiction or animated movies. Everyone put their own cursor. This discussion is kind of moot anyway without knowing the author intention.
    - stavros 3y ago
      There's a difference between consistent, explained differences and inconsistent and inexplicable things. If you were watching a scifi film and, half way through, the characters became fish, without anyone acknowledging or explaining this, you might not enjoy it.
    - zimpenfish 3y ago
      > I do love more liberty with reality when it comes to [fantasy] movies I have the same - probably because you know from experience that, e.g., someone taking the punishment that John Wick or Bourne does wouldn't be running around two minutes later but you have no frame of reference for, say, an 8ft goblin doing the same. (Like the first episode of Slow Horses: there is no way a huge anti-terrorism training exercise across London stations wouldn't have every second of communications recorded for later examination and it made the whole premise of the show - that the fella is exiled because someone lied about what they said to him over those comms - nonsense to me.)
jeffhuys 3y ago
Being critical regardless of age is very valuable. There's this thing that if a young person does something pretty damn cool, they're made to believe it's extraordanirily good, rivalling even the best in the industry. I think it's called the "Gifted Kid Problem" in certain circles. It happened to me with programming games; I entered competitions and even won one or two, making me believe I'm just SO good. Now that I'm 30+ years old I still crave that same level of recognition which is basically unobtainable for me now as I'm just another cog in the system. Sure, I have some nice projects here and there and I get a compliment out of that some time, but never on the level I received while I was young. I think it's incredibly important to give people advice on what could be improved, while still being respectful / praising of the work that's already done. That's how, in my opinion, you get a balanced individual.
- Arisaka1 3y ago
  >Being critical regardless of age is very valuable. There's this thing that if a young person does something pretty damn cool, they're made to believe it's extraordanirily good, rivalling even the best in the industry. I think it's called the "Gifted Kid Problem" in certain circles. I think you nailed something that I was wondering while browsing this thread. What difference does it make if a person practiced 5-10 years a craft resulting to winning an award if that person started when he was 10 vs. 25? The headline would not only be radically different if it was a 30-year old who did it because he studied since he was 20-25; We might not even have a headline. It would have been "oh, someone won the award. Yay?" Do we reward the output as as standalone (as is) during the contest, or do we also reward our perceived potential (imagine what this person would do in 20 years)?
  - helboi4 3y ago
    this is another reason why as a gifted kid who became lazy and average I feel like every effort I make now at 25 to improve myself is honestly just too late. In 5 years I will be irrelevant.
    - RugnirViking 3y ago
demondemidi 3y ago
To some people all criticism is bad. Even if they aren’t the target of it. There is such a thing as constructive criticism which is what you were offering.

sirodoht 3y ago

I would claim we should give a pass to everybody because we are all human. I would also claim I don’t think it’s nice to judge people based on their age, regardless if it’s good or bad judgement. Furthermore, I would definitely be annoyed as 16yo if I were deemed “good enough for my age”. He competes with peers, at the highest level, not with superiors who do him a favour.

benj111 3y ago
Yes and no. We have separate sports classes based on gender on age to reflect abilities. It's takes time to get good at this stuff, a younger person has inherently had less time. I'd structure it as one overall ranking, but special age rankings within that. A 5 year old could hypothetically win overall, but if they didn't they'd still be rewarded in relation to their (age) peers. There's an 'encouragement' element that you're missing. My 5 year old draws objectively bad pictures. I wouldn't tell him that though. I want him to get better so that he does become objectively good.
ChrisRR 3y ago
This is specifically a competition for young people. It's totally based around age and that's fine. A teenager doesn't have the luxury of 20 years of professional experience.