27th March 2003, 11:09 PM
Fact is, we don't really need to explain WHY they don't look real. That's the job for psychologists analyzing exactly how we humans determine what's real and not real (after all, we don't just "know", it takes image recognition software which humans have the most complex of). We just can tell, at least I could, from just watching it the first time. I saw this guy and he looked awesome, but just... well, I don't know how to say it, but TOO good. My whole point was valid. In the real world such perfect shapes just aren't done. My computer isn't a PERFECT rectangle, I can see slight bends due to wear and tear, or just a flaw in production. It's hard to explain, but that clone trooper just looked, off, and so almost instantly I realized he's likely CG. When I saw the whole army of them, I was certain of it. I was also very impressed with how well done the CG was, but again, it certainly was apparent that it was CG. You may have an amazing ability to nitpick frame rates and color washout, and resolution and many other display unit related bits of data, but analyzing what's going on IN the image is a whole different beast. It's the difference between being able to see color accuracy and lighting in a painting and being able to see what's being painted.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)