Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Economics. It's way cheaper to buy a few old instruments (buy extra in case you want to do multiple takes) and just record them being crushed than to pay a team computer artists for weeks to simulate the physics and draw this all in photorealistic CG.



CGI is way cheaper than a full crew arranging, shooting, cleaning and rearranging this shot multiple times.


No it's not. Not even close.

CGI modeling of a shattering string instrument that looks realistic would be an insane amount of work, and insanely expensive.

This was definitely mostly practical. The squished emoji ball at the end might have been CGI, but not most of this.


Why do you think its insane to model realistic looking explosions? It's done all the time. Even if it started as a practical prop it was certainly doctored to all hell. Stone statues don't squish and guitars don't actually explode...

If you look through it you can see the top of the guitar is even cut off at the neck, either as a prop or digitally.

Movie magic, guys!




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: