'Real' women online - a tale of CGI vs. IRL

MrBishop

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
PuterTutor said:
Whoa, that's completely computer generated?
Click to expand...

Yeah...they've come a long way from "Final Fantasy". They forced the super-geeks to NOT make perfection. The art of reality is in imperfection. God is in the details.

Now I'm beginning to wonder about the more illicit applications of such images :)
 
MrBishop

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
PuterTutor said:
No shit, celeb porn is about to explode.
Click to expand...

Celeb porn...too easy. Think really illicit...think Kiddie porn without actual kids involved. How will that affect the laws?

Hmmm...I feel a thread coming on.
 
Squiggy

Squiggy

ThunderDick
That CGI is old. I've had it on my computer for at least a year now. The discussion of CGI movies has also been one of my favorites for a long time. It won't be long before the latest release can once again star Carey Grant or Elvis..... or the lovely Miss Monroe...:brow:
 
Thulsa Doom

Thulsa Doom

New Member
Well still images is one thing. They still need to get the extraordinarily complicated physics of human body motion down. We have a lot of muscles and other parts that work in tandem to make us move the way we do. the math needed to mimc this perfectly is daunting to say the least. a lot of whats been done has been mapping against moving humans as you probably already know.
 
IDLEchild

IDLEchild

Well-Known Member
MrBishop said:
Yeah...they've come a long way from "Final Fantasy". They forced the super-geeks to NOT make perfection. The art of reality is in imperfection. God is in the details.
Click to expand...


Did you even see Final Fantasy? Sid's character designs easily encompasses those two examples you have put up in photorealistic CG modeling.

Think really illicit...think Kiddie porn without actual kids involved. How will that affect the laws?
Click to expand...

It already has. It is now perfectly legal to make, what would be considered Kiddie porn, as long as it is an animated medium....2d or 3d without any actual childern being used for references.
 
IDLEchild

IDLEchild

Well-Known Member
Thulsa Doom said:
Well still images is one thing. They still need to get the extraordinarily complicated physics of human body motion down. We have a lot of muscles and other parts that work in tandem to make us move the way we do. the math needed to mimc this perfectly is daunting to say the least. a lot of whats been done has been mapping against moving humans as you probably already know.
Click to expand...


See the animatrix for an excellent example of precision CGI. They don't need math to do this because motion capturing makes the process a lot more realistic and cost effective. A lot of CGI today isn't very relative to precise human physics because it is animated off the head or from models who pose....not motion captured.

Programming the code to mimic motion of any species perfectly....even an insect is horribly complex.....humans is whole another story.
 
Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
BCD said:
It already has. It is now perfectly legal to make, what would be considered Kiddie porn, as long as it is an animated medium....2d or 3d without any actual childern being used for references.
Click to expand...

Am I missing a ruling somewhere? Ashcroft vs ACLU 2001 said that COPA wasn't in violation of the constitution. I haven't read teh entire findings, yet. That should apply.

The Supreme Court is also going to revisit the COPA laws, this term.

Washington Post said:
Daniel L. Weiss
Media & Sexuality Analyst, Focus on the Family
Wednesday, October 15, 2003; 12:00 PM


The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to revisit the constitutionality of the Children's Online Protection Act, a controversial 1998 law aimed at protecting children from online pornography.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top