posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 08:43 AM
I fully agree - CGI is definitely part of most of these discussions, as well they should be. A film clip or still photo is many times all we have to
Yet, the OP makes a valid point: what we are referring to here is not simply reaching a determinant: whether a visual medium is computer-generated or
not. It is the "beating of the dead horse" syndrome that we tire of. Once we have accepted that a given shot is CGI, it seems that many arm-chair
CGI-pros, "experts", and a small army of vocational CGI-wannabes then want to continue arguing with each other ad nauseum about which one of them
knows more intricacy about the CGI-filed than the other.
Yes, discussing CGI has merit. But once we've all agreed an item is cgi, can't we move on? The drones threads is a perfect case-in-point. Nearly
everyone participating has accepted the CGI argument, most believe the drones to be a hoax. Then, every once in a while, some new guy jumps in who
hasn't read the previous posts proclaiming that he/she thinks the crafts may be real. Immediately, the CGI-fanatics then pounce all over each other
trying to "top" one another with "proof".
You see - we don't mind discussing CGI - in fact, we readily accept it as a vital tool in our arsenal of investigation. What we are expressing some
frustration over is "ATTITUDE" - the 'holier-than-thou', 'better-than-all-of-you', 'you-fools-don't know-squat' degradation of the thread
when the CGIers, once again, start their disrespectful rants.
I've worked with computer graphics all my life - 23 years professionally, yet I immediately run for the hills when the screaming starts. What does
that add to our knowledge. How is that sharing, denying ignorance for all to benefit?
Some of these CGI-pundits are clearly young, immature, self-centered, and just lack armloads of people skills. Too much time in front of the screen
battling figments of someone else's imagination, I guess.
We would simply like to argue other merits of a given case, in a civil, polite, mutually respectful, mutually beneficial manner without having the
discussion disintegrate into CGI pissing matches every few pages or so.
Ok - I'm off the soap box... thanks to the OP for at least shining a little rayvision-illumination on the topic.