Cool, since you have that version of the film I’m sure you’ll be willing to share it? I’ve seen 2 matte versions, but none like you’re describing.
You don’t seem to understand what this sub is for. Since your uncle worked for Nintendo, I’m sure you know the moon landing took place a few years before OPs example of awful CGI from 1996. I argued that much better CGI existed in 1993. That’s still at least two years off from the moon landing.
Everyone is making fun of people who claim it was faked. I’m glad your cousin was the King of Space. That’s cool. I missed it by 3 space votes in the last space election. I’m jealous.
Honestly, while the cgi shown is trash, it really isn’t all that bad considering what they had at the time for a kid’s show. They were producing a 30 minute episode a week on a budget that was surely a pittance, much less than 1/4 I’m sure, of a 2 hour film that we would consider really good at the time.
I didn’t mean to insult your show, I just don’t see why anyone would have been watching that when way more awesome things like Gargoyles existed at the same time.
Ha! I loved beast wars, but yes, there were a great many much better shows… but also as a nerdy kid with only rabbit ears and a once every two weeks trip to the library, I watched whatever I could.
Yup, that’s just the movie without the matte. Like all versions of the movie, it has the CGI scenes present. He said he has a version where those aren’t there, or the scenes containing CGI are notably cropped compared to the others. I’d love to see that.
That’s not just the movie without the matte. That’s the exact version of the movie @olejellylegs@lemmy.zip was referring to, in which the all-practical scenes appear in an open-matte square frame while the scenes containing CGI are cropped and zoomed to widescreen. Scroll to exactly 20 minutes in and keep an eye on the screen size from cut to cut.
No it isn’t. Olejellylegs wrote, “the open matte version of the film where only digital shots are cropped”. In this the open-matte scenes are uncropped (the editor hasn’t yet removed the top and bottom of the frame to make a widescreen final shot) while the CGI scenes are cropped to widescreen (because they’ve been through the optical printing process to render the CGI back to film, and lost the extraneous top and bottom of the frame in that process.)
Especially back when this level of CGI was hugely expensive and laborious, when doing the digital FX shots they were only going to spend the time and money to render the widescreen area and they weren’t bothering with the areas of the screen which would just get cropped off.
Thank you. Basically anything requiring a digital intermediate rather than a full optical pipeline.
It’s also been widely recognized that the t-Rex specifically was physical unless it moved. It’s one of the more predictable props and it’s reinforced by the open matte version you mention.
Don’t know why that’s the dudes point of argument.
From his description it sounded otherwise. Regardless, it doesn’t change the fact that the CGI scenes in the movie look much better than the CGI in the OP’s image. And again, this is a shit post. The point was never doing deep research into a topic and winning an argument on the internet. It was making stupid jokes.
Cool, since you have that version of the film I’m sure you’ll be willing to share it? I’ve seen 2 matte versions, but none like you’re describing.
You don’t seem to understand what this sub is for. Since your uncle worked for Nintendo, I’m sure you know the moon landing took place a few years before OPs example of awful CGI from 1996. I argued that much better CGI existed in 1993. That’s still at least two years off from the moon landing.
Everyone is making fun of people who claim it was faked. I’m glad your cousin was the King of Space. That’s cool. I missed it by 3 space votes in the last space election. I’m jealous.
Honestly, while the cgi shown is trash, it really isn’t all that bad considering what they had at the time for a kid’s show. They were producing a 30 minute episode a week on a budget that was surely a pittance, much less than 1/4 I’m sure, of a 2 hour film that we would consider really good at the time.
I didn’t mean to insult your show, I just don’t see why anyone would have been watching that when way more awesome things like Gargoyles existed at the same time.
Ha! I loved beast wars, but yes, there were a great many much better shows… but also as a nerdy kid with only rabbit ears and a once every two weeks trip to the library, I watched whatever I could.
God damn, there’s way too many people in here disrespecting Gargoyles. I watched that on ABC, we didn’t have those fancy rabbit eats. :)
https://archive.org/details/jurassic-park-open-mate-1993-35mm-1080p-superwide-open-matte-v-1.0-repack-vf-ld-pal-v-ger-06
Yup, that’s just the movie without the matte. Like all versions of the movie, it has the CGI scenes present. He said he has a version where those aren’t there, or the scenes containing CGI are notably cropped compared to the others. I’d love to see that.
That’s not just the movie without the matte. That’s the exact version of the movie @olejellylegs@lemmy.zip was referring to, in which the all-practical scenes appear in an open-matte square frame while the scenes containing CGI are cropped and zoomed to widescreen. Scroll to exactly 20 minutes in and keep an eye on the screen size from cut to cut.
It’s the inverse of his description, though.
No it isn’t. Olejellylegs wrote, “the open matte version of the film where only digital shots are cropped”. In this the open-matte scenes are uncropped (the editor hasn’t yet removed the top and bottom of the frame to make a widescreen final shot) while the CGI scenes are cropped to widescreen (because they’ve been through the optical printing process to render the CGI back to film, and lost the extraneous top and bottom of the frame in that process.)
Especially back when this level of CGI was hugely expensive and laborious, when doing the digital FX shots they were only going to spend the time and money to render the widescreen area and they weren’t bothering with the areas of the screen which would just get cropped off.
Thank you. Basically anything requiring a digital intermediate rather than a full optical pipeline.
It’s also been widely recognized that the t-Rex specifically was physical unless it moved. It’s one of the more predictable props and it’s reinforced by the open matte version you mention.
Don’t know why that’s the dudes point of argument.
From his description it sounded otherwise. Regardless, it doesn’t change the fact that the CGI scenes in the movie look much better than the CGI in the OP’s image. And again, this is a shit post. The point was never doing deep research into a topic and winning an argument on the internet. It was making stupid jokes.
You asked for the thing to be shared with you, and I gave you the link. 🫡