How long has AI actually been used?

Time and passion from professionals

>>507551932 (OP)
We had computers back then dumbass. Not much has changed.

>>507551932 (OP)
it was created by good artists. even first world artists are shit now since they never learn how color and light work because all they do is copy images on a tablet

>>507551932 (OP)
Because CGI then was limited and thoughtful. They used it only in scenes where it made sense or was required, rather than filming the entire thing in front of a green screen. It was a more concentrated effort.

Because they paid zillions of dollars for shit you can make on your iPhone for free now.

They had to build their own proprietary software from scratch in many cases.

>>507551932 (OP)
Boring faggot award

i'm upset that star wars the phantom menace has better cgi than attack of the clones

ILM invented AI in 1979 stay woke.

>>507551932 (OP)
I think because they mixed it with traditional animation and stop motion so it seemed smooth like in the first Jurassic Park.

>>507551932 (OP)
Every now and then you have a group of giga high IQ people taking advantage of a recent development in computer science, to create something that's a deviation ahead of what's being released now.

>>507551932 (OP)
Many painfully boring months of crafting and rendering.

>>507552221
Straight White men

>>507552910
i'm upset that lucas relied so much on cgi at all in the prequels. he should have built models like in the original trilogy. they were better (and still are).

>>507551932 (OP)
That took MONTHS from professionals just to that one scene. Now? Any retard can do that in 15 minutes.

>>507551932 (OP)
His name was David Biedny. He’s dead now- but you can look him up. He was a genius with photoshop, and somehow managed the reflection by editing things frame by frame, before the “graphics” curve really hit. Also animated the fart cloud from the clown in the Spawn movie. He was my friend, and he is remembered.

>>507551932 (OP)
in the 90's not every company was 99% jeet, so white people did things like learn and use math when writing software. It wasn't all "saar, I make your spring java j2ee visual basic today morning saar" shit like today.

>>507551932 (OP)
Although that was done on SGIs, there was a program called "Morph" for 68k macs that you could do pretty much the same shit. It ran like dog shit unless you had a Quadra or other 040 machine though. And I remember it cost like $500 in 1992 money, so yeah.

Maybe DARPA tech

>>507552910
>Disney slop is bad
Yes

>>507553733
Wow thats a great post anon. Thx for it

>>507555033
Mate, I think you've got things a little mixed up.

>>507552221
fpbp

>>507551932 (OP)
Modern CGI is slop because it literally doesn't matter. Modern movies are unwatchable because directors can't hold a scene for more than 4 seconds. It's all quick jump cuts from scene to scene because everybody has ADHD nowadays.

Older movies actually held scenes for long enough to appreciate the ship or monster or alien or whatever.

Remember the Star Trek 2009 movies? Can you recall what that version of the Enterprise looked like? Yeah neither can anyone else.

>>507555302
You're paying attention to Star Wars which is gay and a cash cow by now which inevitably decreases quality. Just look at how many spinoffs that shit has

>>507553733
Thx anon.

Movies are badly made now. I think it's what jewish control is starting to slip. They used to be uncontested masters of Hollywood, their propaganda was was good people paid money to see it. But now, when's the last time anyone here went to go see a new movie in theaters?

>>507551932 (OP)
Jeets didn't run our tech at the time.

>>507555605
I can't recall that movie at all. I remember some guy falling and there was a lot of orange.

I think I forgot that movie before I even left the theatre. tbf Star Trek was always gay.

>>507551932 (OP)
i hate zoomers so much it's unreal

>>507553626
Truth, fren. It was immersive because it looked so real - because it was real. CGI still can’t touch it 50 years later.
2001 is the same.

Is it safe to assume that television technology wasn't what it is today and would blend everything together better?

>>507555728
All I was saying is that Phantom Menace and AtotC were both made pre-Disney, supporting the original anon's point. We all know Star Wars is cancer now. Also,
>You're paying too much attention to Star Wars
>But pay attention to how many spin-offs there are
(You)

>>507551932 (OP)
That effect was easier to make look good because the texture of the model is a transformation of real images

>>507551932 (OP)
My friend Ariel worked in the digital effects industry on a lot of movies and TV shows. He was working on several different shows at a time around the time Starship Troopers came out. Late 2000's and through the 2010's. He had a Silicon Graphics workstation that he used as a table to hold his beer because everyone was expected to have one but never used the expensive cocksuckers. All the 3D work was all done on the highest end PCs he could build. A lot of time and effort, attention to detail.

>>507552221
this, plus cameron is a wise craftsman with the good sense to use cgi like just another practical effect

>>507551932 (OP)
how was the first ninja turtles movie and aliens more realistic than their present day counterparts despite having no cgi?

answer to both questions is effort.

>>507551932 (OP)
there was less than 5 minutes total of cgi used in that movie and it took 10 months to render that footage

>>507556765
I have never watched a single movie lel

>>507555960
In part the Jews were losing their monopoly, so they manufactured the COVID crunch and SAG strike, killing off competitors and making fewer studios do more work with AI assistance. I am under the impression they are communally building an all purpose AI generative model based on BDSM rape pornography. Ever notice that the new films, especially the pulp series, seem to center a line coming out of the top of people’s heads? Either a division of a wall, or the side of a windowframe, or something else vertical framed riiiiiight behind the head of the actor? It’s an unintended prop effect from pulling up a choke leash to pull “actors” into position that they’re trying to cover up by filming new footage with the vertical string accounted for. Imagine if you are running multiple layers to generate something; if this was a method you used in filming the source content, it would be an artifact in a ton of shots as the model tries to make sense of the noise and vertical lines.

>>507553733
RIP, T2 is one of the top 3 movies of all time, IMDB is rigged

>>507552492
It has gotten better and faster. What used to take one dude a month or a team a week now can be done by one dude in under a week

>>507551932 (OP)
They usually combined CGI with practical so there was enough real shit on screen to make you believe it's real. Nowadays if they need to CGI they throw their hands up and just do the entire scene digitally rather than try to make it work with what they actually filmed.

>>507556253
Go to bed unc

first jurassic park is to this day the most realisic looking

>>507551932 (OP)
because they knew there were limits to the technology at the time, it was used more sparingly, but they also mixed in practical effects (puppets, real people). So this tricks your brain into thinking it's real (if it's spliced in with real stuff). Nowadays they just use CGI characters and effects for the whole film (e.g. entire characters or landscapes are 100% CG) and your brain knows that shit is fake, even if things like the lighting is more realistic, it's still in uncanny valley territory and your brain just rejects it.

Jurassic Park holds up because look at the editing. The dinosaurs are introduced in short clips, like at the beginning you see a distant shot of the large herbivores and then they quickly show you something real up close (in this case the hill of poop) and your brain is filling in the gaps. They do it throughout the film.

>>507553733
This.
Editing frame by frame.
Fuckton of work but gets the result.

>>507553373
no. plenty of white boys today, making trash.

>>507559863
>plenty of white boys today
>white boys today

He specified 'straight'.

>>507556962
yeah i mean the guy commissioned and oversaw construction of a deep sea vehicle, not a normal director, cut above the rest. plus had a reputation for wanting perfection. first post was right

>>507559771
>because they knew there were limits to the technology at the time
This is the big point. The studios cared back then, so they setup their shots in such a way to play to the strengths of the technology and downplay the weaknesses. For example, the flaws in the CGI are hard to see if the setting is dark and shadowy. That's why a lot of the T-1000's big CGI scenes are set at night. That's why the main dinosaur closeup scenes in jurassic park are set at night or in a building where the lighting isn't very bright. It's why everything was so dark in the relatively recent "Astartes" video. The CGI is more modern in Astartes, but the manpower involved in putting it together was tiny because it was the work of just a single hobbyist. The parties involved understood the weaknesses of what they could do with CGI, so they framed the scenes to obscure the flaws.

the losers of this world have been dumbing down CGI for YEARS

>>507551932 (OP)
>>507551932 (OP)
>>507551932 (OP)
its not CGI that the wonder its how can the other side of the screen hear my thoughts and react in real time to what i think want see say and do