This 35-Year-Old Effect CHANGED MOVIES... How hard could it be? 

Yeah but they should get some real actors 😂

@@paulmichaelfreedman8334 This is not a channel about actors.

@HenritheHorse No but it is about making (short) movies. And guess what you need for movies.

Yes, and just think that his intentions were to make things look completely realistic.. Now we are at the point that we can, yet everything moves and looks completely fake. Look at the just the sky alone in ANY Marvel film and you can see that it looks terrible. All of the floating and flying people are not believable and while watching , you aren't swept up into the fantasy, because there is not a single thing , "Fantastic" about it.

@@paulmichaelfreedman8334 Stunt actors are more important in this context.

Came to the comments to say this lmao

Love the little smirk he does after saying it lol. You can tell he busted out laughing 0.5 seconds after the cut 😂

Technology is indeed crazy. As someone who's been invested into this type of work and technology and is now 64, how do you feel about OpenAI's Sora? AI generated video seems like magic doesn't it?

Ever participate in the IRTC (Internet Raytracing Competition)?

Do you still have it?

Now I can yell a couple sentences at my phone and a Language Model will literally make me an infinitely better haunted house exterior within seconds. Times have changed grey-bush.

Haha I'm with you, I tried to do the same thing on my Amiga 500 1MB with Cinema 4D, waiting hours and hours to render one image, praying that it won't go OOM/Guru Meditation. And now nowadays we have photorealism in real-time, or almost...

We need him here

I guess you've seen it but the documentary about him (Jurassic Punk) is really great.

That is so cool to have a connection to people who were involved in the early days of VFX who changed cinema forever (and blood relation no less). I hope you do VFX or some kind of art IRL

@erutan108 It was great growing up in that space. I always had amazing Haloween Costumes. One year my step-dad was working on Star Trek: Deep Space 9 and brought home one of the Ferengi prosthetics. They are a short alien species so the actors heads were close to the same size as my giant kid head. My mom made me a cool wizardesqe robe and I went a a Ferengi wizard. We had a workshop in our garage filled with old zombie busts from the "of the dead" series, some Kingcong lives props, and tons of cool little things from other movies. I got to see and sometimes help with the production of all this stuff. I watch videos of people doing effects now and it just seems so easy compared to what my parents used to do. So many plaster casts, rubber molds, mold casting, hair pinning, etc. I don't work in special FX at all, but I do a TON of different hobbies like knife making, wood working, general art, and sewing. I constantly use techniques I remember them using in my hobbies.

@@erutan108the early days of VFX? - you mean around 1920?

@@litjellyfish hehe, not that early… I recommend you watch Light and Magic documentary, then you’ll get my perspective

where did you mom's jacket go? im 28 never seen this movie, only heard the name. It is extremely impressive. still looks good to this day, that could be a scene in a modern movie if you changed the clothes/hair styles haha

Yeah they hardly ever talk about it...

Who the was thrown off even RLMs best of the worst music started playing in the video as jordan talked hahaha

They missed a joke, have Jordan giving up and Wren going damnit! You never give up on anything!! Liiive! Ed harris style haha

It's an annual tradition

@@KaladinVegapunk Wren slapping Jordan over and over again, screaming at the top of his lungs...Sam and Niko looking on hopelessly...

Yeah, just imagine: if the Knoll brothers hadn't been so rushed, maybe Photoshop would actually have a decent underlying architecture instead of being the huge mess it is. :-P

@@RFC3514 Now you're just being mean 🤣You're probably not even wrong either 🤣

@@stylis666 - I'm not. Photoshop is absolutely prehistoric in the way it does most things. I mean, they've slowly started to add more modern, non-destructive features (like adjustment layers and dynamic objects), but most people still use the old methods (which are still the default ones in the current version) that actually cause information loss every time you make a change. After Effects has a much, much better internal architecture (in fact, I'd say the After Effects team has been miles ahead of the rest of Adobe for at least a decade and a half), almost on par with the "big guns" like Nuke. Everything is undoable, readjustable and reorderable at any moment (because it doesn't replace the original data), there's never any irreversible loss of quality or information.

I would say that the liquid metal effects in the newer Terminator movies looks far more matched to the real mercury used in T2. There's that disconnect in T2 where the real mercury was used vs the CG effects, where the real mercury was far more reflective and less cloudy looking compared to some of the CGI effects.

Probably because CG artists in modern films don't get 7 MONTHS to work on 75 seconds worth of footage.

That's like comparing a 197/80s Lamborghini Countach, created as a groundbreaking/tentpole showpiece, to a 2024 Nissan Sentra, a mass-market econobox designed to get you from A to B. They might both be cars, but they are in very different categories. Of course the 40+ year old supercar is still "better" than a lot of average cars you see on the road today.

@@locinolacolino1302 rendering 75 seconds of footage probably took over half of those 7 months with the technology they had. You also seem to forget that the software we use for 3d is just way way way more easier than what they used back in the day. Today, a 5 year old could easily sculpt a 3d model

@@crashtestdummy87 It's not way easier when artists are given mere weeks to execute complex VFX sequences, and expected to work 80+ hours a week, most of which is just fixing other peoples problems. That is the unfortunate reason this effect holds up better than those in modern films. Also, PIXAR notes that each new film takes the same, if not longer time to render than the last. As the faster computers get the more we demand for them, make reference to Wirth's law.

Wow ur dad was a child, incredible.

I'm pretty sure Cameron made Abyss as a technology demonstrator for Terminator 2. If the water works, so will the liquid metal -> go for the big bucks.

@@I_enjoy_some_things Everyone was a child.

​@@Valkonnenew, you were a child? gross

@@Andrew-md1gl It was...I would shit my diaper regularly.

100%

I feel like the piece about the ripples being done IN CODE because you couldn’t actually display it is gonna be unappreciated by a lot of people.

@@z_Moose And they look better than the noise technique used by these guys.

did you see it in theatre?

​@Dylan-ir2yo I'm also 49 and I did see it in theaters! Was so inspired, thunder and lighting, rainstorm and my buddies and I played in the rain on the back deck, pretending we were in an undersea base that was coming down around us. I'll never forget.

I saw it on tv in early 90s and literally nobody talking aboout cgi or knowing what it is. We think its another camera trick lol

I had a computer then and knew this was done on a computer and just was amazed at it but didn't think much of it. Terminator 2 which had similar effects really got me thinking though because it was through the entire movie. @@dzenacs2011

Development of the actual algorithms took longer; most of them had been around for years (decades, in some cases). It's just that computers got fast enough to make them viable, and so a lot of theory that had been floating around could suddenly be applied to moving pictures.

On Captains videos, learned how fast it was really going. Back to the Future 1 to 3, the technology was used was in 2 for both old way in 1 and new way in 3.

@@RFC3514 Um... thats not true? As shown in this literal video, they created TONS of completely new and never before done algorithms for just this specific scene, totally in house. From animation to rendering. You're seriously undermining the immense effort teams like ILM put into completely in house algorithm development Not everything was "already around." In fact, it was the opposite. CAD programs were not rendering engines that had to be written completely from scratch, building off little to no practical engineering knowledge.

@@jonnyj. - Um... it is. Looks like you need to watch the video again. They specifically mention papers from previous years that they based their code on (and there were many more that they don't mention here but which I'm sure they'd read too). And even those were based on previous work. These are highly competent professionals, that keep up with their field and are aware of their abilities. They would never bet a movie (and, indirectly, their own career and ILM's future) on effects that they had no idea how to do. Raytracing had been in development since the 1970s. Silicon Graphics was founded in 1981. By the late 80s there were free and open-source raytracers capable of rendering reflections and refractions on most platforms (Unix, Amiga, Archimedes, etc. - and it wasn't long until DKB and POVRay became popular on home PCs too). Most of them just weren't very well integrated with _animation_ software, because they were so slow. Yes, ILM artists / engineers coded their own renderers (or at least extensions / optimisations to existing ones). So did the ones at Pixar ten or twenty years later. That still happens today, albeit not as much (I've been working in visual effects since the late 80s, and I do a _lot_ less coding nowadays). But they were using commercial laser scanners to digitise actors' faces and doing the animation in Alias workstations, this wasn't the middle ages. I recommend studying the history of SGI and Alias (and maybe reading or at least looking at some SIGGRAPH papers from that era).

The ripple algorithm they had to do from scratch but there where already movies with CGI, even full CGI scenes with animated objects and movement, the challenges where different but the tech and the tools was already there for most of it@@jonnyj.

Plus his finger didn't get wet from putting it into the water weenie like it did in the Abyss

Also, I reckon the water had too much colour saturation or something? The colour looked off to me. Otherwise, fantastic job!

YES! DEATH BLOSSOM!

Good suggestion. I think Flight of the Navigator would be a good subject for a video of this nature. It has a great blend of VFX and practical.

​@@lordomacron3719captain disillusion made a 41 minute about flight of the navigator a couple years ago. It's so thorough and amazingly well done that the movie 's effect never need another revisit.

​​@@JinKeeI really loved that movie from my childhood too. To be fair though, I don't the last Starfighter's VFX were innovative in that tron did stylized CGI a couple years earlier (1984 vs 1982). And besides some motion scenes that couldn't practically done with models, going the CG route didn't look better at that time than the physical models being used by Star wars and Star Trek during that era.

​@@calvinl2149my first thought as well. The Captain's video on the subject is stellar... stellar... Get it?

i expected him to say "3."

​@@K__a__M__I you cant do nr 2 without doing nr 3. I will not elaborate.

I was hoping his answer would have just been "Yes"

The fact that Ben tasted it got me

@@isaackim7675 Ben? Is that short for Jordan?

I especially love that the issue on the top of the stack features the boss demon from SPAWN on the cover. Some of the jankiest CG ever to make a theatrical release.

And, that movie was directed by Mark Dippe. @@thork6974

@@thork6974They might’ve placed it there because Spaz was the VFX supervisor on that film, and Mark Dippé was the director!

@@Daveyboy100880 Oh of course. And the issue on top of the other stack is Lost World Jurassic Park...

just me

They need to get Steve Williams!

It's because everything is so much sharper and higher resolution unlike back then it was in a way smudged and smooth so now it's like you can literally tell when there CGI