# Will computer graphics ever be as good as the telly?



## ELO (Nov 25, 2006)

(purely asking for fun and out of interest)
Just looked at the new WII thing from nintendo, and it's good- but not that good. 

Could we ever have the ultimate-computer graphics that look totally realistic-as good as regular 625 line TV pictures? Roughly how far short of this are we now, in terms of processing power and memory.

Or is it not as simple as mhz and megabytes?


----------



## obanite (Nov 25, 2006)

the Wii is the least graphically powerful of the next-gens, nintendo decided to bail out of the specs war and go for innovation (good on em). PS3 and 360 have roughly the same power, but it'll be a bit till devs can really utilize it - they're both parallel machines which means a lot of hardcore programming to get the most out of them.

in terms of what this means for graphical realism... well, graphics have been getting more realistic with each hardware iteration, but in my opinion the improvements are getting less and less.

games like metal gear solid 4 on the ps3 look pretty damn realistic, but a lot of studios these days are tired of going for allout, ultra realism and are doing stylised stuff instead (like gears of war) - they still look sexy but aren't necessarily realistic.

just some thoughts anyway  personally i reckon that yes, eventually realtime computer graphics will look life like, but for everyone except the hardware manufacturers, it's not really the highest priority....


----------



## Hagal (Nov 25, 2006)

yes, and in 3D/virtual reality but kids will still get bored with it six months after christmas and you will be able to pick them up for nothing on ebay a couple of Christmases after.


----------



## lobster (Nov 25, 2006)

I personally don;t think the aim of graphics is to be a replica of real life.
One reason brings me to that, computer graphics do not have even the correct colours that represent real life, computer graphics are always too vivid and too smooth.

ie 






That colour of the womans body , only has seems to have one tone , that is too smooth to be real..


----------



## lobster (Nov 25, 2006)

the snowman in this photo looks pretty realistic imo


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Nov 25, 2006)

Graphics certainly will reach something like photorealism but if they move? Moving ultra realistic graphics is another thing entirely...


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Nov 25, 2006)

Of course they will. Thirteen years ago I upgraded from a 48k Spectrum to an Amiga and was blown away by how good graphics were.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Nov 25, 2006)

It'd be nice to extrapolate the development of 3d rendering into the future, lets' face it, the graphics needed for making terminator II were stunning.



> six month on more than thirty Silicon Graphics Iris 4D workstations to create the special effect which reflects the surrounding environment on the shiny chrome Terminator.



But now we can almost replicate them in real time. It's not impossible for effects like those seen in Shrek to be possible in another decade or two on home computers. However assuming that current trends will continue is about as stupid as assuming that since you crossed a road at 11:13:25 today that it'd be safe to do it again tomorrow blindfolded.

Then there is the other stuff that's being played with, for games like BF1942 they are trying to create camera blurring and other "cinematic" type effects, not to simulate reality, but to simulate the way films set in that era look. Last i heard on that was a year ago and it took around 2 seconds to render each frame, but i dare say that's reduced heavily since then.

Will they ever look as good as a real movie? Depends how fussy you are. How good can they get? Very.


----------



## cybertect (Nov 25, 2006)

A little quiz for you 

http://www.autodesk.com/eng/etc/fakeorfoto/quiz.html


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Nov 25, 2006)

Computer generated is not the same as computer graphics, static pictures in simple situations which are easily modeled and simulated, that are rendered and then saved, a process that can take minutes, hours or days, is very very far off what ELO was refering to.

Of those pictures the only one that is at all challenging (done with CGI) is the car, and if you look at the larger photos it's clear that something is wrong with the cobblestones.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 25, 2006)

cybertect said:
			
		

> A little quiz for you
> 
> http://www.autodesk.com/eng/etc/fakeorfoto/quiz.html


9/10 right - fooled by the BMW, which I shouldn't have been. I could only really do it because I take photos though, and know what to look for in CG models.


----------



## lobster (Nov 25, 2006)

Bob_the_lost said:
			
		

> the graphics needed for making terminator II were stunning.



It was obvious to anyone that it was computer graphics...
Ive yet to see anything done completely from scratch using computer graphics.


----------

