robertsl@stolaf.UUCP (Laurence C. Roberts) (01/11/85)
Yet another complaint about 2001, a movie which I essentially liked. This one's
about the computer graphics on the Leonov.
The computer graphics not presented as such (Jupiter and the flaming Europa-
probe -- note the particle systems) were really excellent. However, those
on the Leonov's displays were not so hot. (The control room resembeled a video
game arcade... I expected to see someone playing TRON or something) The graphic
representation of the airbag inflation (take that, Detroit) looked like it had
been produced on an Apple ][. Obviously, by 2010, they WILL have real-time
graphics that look as good as the Jupiter scenes in the movie.
I think that they should have monitors displaying simulated scenes as would
be shot from (imaginary) cameras hovering some distance from the space ship.
To distinguish these scenes from actual reality at a glance, they should be
false-colored.
In all modesty, these techniques will probably be used in the future :-)
Laurence Roberts
ihnp4!stolaf!robertsl
"Ifrit first you don't succeed, fly, fly a djinn!"gs@mit-eddie.UUCP (Gordon Strong) (01/13/85)
For a good discussion of the video displays and various special
effects used in 2010, see last month's "American Cinematographer".
It is a good publication to follow if you want to understand
the "behind-the-scenes" of what you see on the screen. There
are two relevant articles, one on video effects and one on
special effects. Apparently, they made quite an effort to be
believable. One things that comes immediately to mind is the
choice to shoot miniature scenes with no fill light. In things
like "Star Wars", they didn't care where light came from. In
2010, they are striving for technical accuracy. Long shots
give the audience plenty of time to try to dispell the illusion.
They had to be *real* careful to make it look good. I think
they did a commendable job.
Gordon Strong
{decvax!genrad, ihnp4}!mit-eddie!gs
GS@MIT-XX