Mu-fx , the high end art of creature features, prosthetics , applications and cost saving cheats , Cgi, or viz-Fx , for the computer graphically darkroom video gamer junkie, the real artists and the hacks, and Practical or SPFX , the weirdos in black that make it happen practically right before your eyes! What do you think?
Post-Production : This category should have three sections by Martin Testa
This category should have three sections
Other topics in Post-Production:
Check out Trending Discussions
Register / Log In
1 person likes this
Speaking as a makeup effects artist, I believe each has its place. Nothing will replace makeup and practical effects than an actor can see and interact with live on set. However, even the best makeup has the limitation that it is strictly an additive process, you can't take anything away. Characters like Gollum would be very difficult to do with makeup because of the difficulty finding an actor that emaciated in the first place. I personally think that a blend of practical and visual effects, using a live effect on set then using the computer to push it even further, should be the future of our industry. Unfortunately many directors have the short-sighted attitude "why spend time with that effect now, we'll just do it in post" not realizing how much expensive time and talent are required to create a truly convincing visual effect from scratch. The result is so many final products with lackluster effects that pull the audience out of the moment. Okay, off my soapbox :)