The CGI has been no worse than in any other series, and in some instances it has been significantly better.
Hmm, would be interesting to think what CGI you think from this season has bettered, say, the Beast from Satan Pit, or pretty much all of Fires of Pompeii? And what from previous seasons has been worse than the monsters in Amy's Choice (don't just opt for the constantly trundled-out CGI wheelie bin from Rose!)
And what from previous seasons has been worse than the monsters in Amy's Choice (don't just opt for the constantly trundled-out CGI wheelie bin from Rose!)
Off the top of my head: that bloody awful Lazarus monster, the deeply unconvincing Racnoss, the Slitheen, that thing in The Long Game, the Werewolf that looked like an escapee from Scooby Doo, the Cyber King...how long have you got?
I hadn't noticed any wobbly sets! Very exciting that that old DW tradition has returned! (There's a very wobbly wall in Warriors of the Deep pt.1, which I watched a couple of nights back ... a full 2 eps before the Myrka appears and everything wobbles).
There are not now nor have there ever been wobbly sets in Doctor Who. What people have been misreporting as "set wobble" is in fact a visual shimmer created by temporal weirdnesses that follow the Doctor around. He sorts of pollutes the place. Gives the brief illusion of solid walls wobbling.
There are not now nor have there ever been wobbly sets in Doctor Who. What people have been misreporting as "set wobble" is in fact a visual shimmer created by temporal weirdnesses that follow the Doctor around. He sorts of pollutes the place. Gives the brief illusion of solid walls wobbling.
I agree, I think to most people the story is more important than the effects or sets.
The story is more important, but when you are watching, and getting involved, and something moves when it isn't supposed to, it takes away from the story, and takes you out of the moment.
The reason the picture looks different is down to the camera and lenses used. The camera sensor is a chip about the same size as 35mm film and this allows the director to shoot with a shallower Depth of Field. (the main actor is in focus but the background is trown out of focus). A large depth of field is where most of the image is in focus.
The director has the ability to determine how much this effect is used by controlling things such as aperture and focal length. also different lenses will blur the background in different ways. It's these choices combined with the colour grading that is creating this look, not the HD
I agree, I think to most people the story is more important than the effects or sets.
Off the top of my head: that bloody awful Lazarus monster, the deeply unconvincing Racnoss, the Slitheen, that thing in The Long Game, the Werewolf that looked like an escapee from Scooby Doo, the Cyber King...how long have you got?
I think those that like to indulge in mindless nitpicking obviously arent enjoying the epsiodes enough because I am so enthralled, so drawn in by the story and so thoroughly transported to the world they create that I wouldnt even notice these things if i tried.
Its understandable these things might become apparent after multiple viewings but i wonder whether some people watch it with a pen and paper purposefully looking for things.
And that just demonstrates an urge to be negative. I didnt notice any shaky sets in TPO but thats maybe because I was too busy being blown away by scenes like the majestic gathering of the alliance ships above stonehenge....a truly breathtaking sequence that bettered anything the series has managed previously.
But all said and done, I dont think any of us would be the fans we are of Doctor Who old and new if we got too hung up on the occasional dodgy set or effect. We'd probably be watching Smallville instead.
I agree, I think to most people the story is more important than the effects or sets
That's true if the sets and effects are at least 'passable'.
The story could be the best thing ever, but, if the sets or effects just don't convince on any level, it's just not going to work as a piece of visual drama.
IMHO, none of the above applies to what was a very minor, albeit noticeable, gaffe on the set in 'The Pandorica Opens'. Just to give some perspective there...
I think those that like to indulge in mindless nitpicking obviously arent enjoying the epsiodes enough because I am so enthralled, so drawn in by the story and so thoroughly transported to the world they create that I wouldnt even notice these things if i tried.
Its understandable these things might become apparent after multiple viewings but i wonder whether some people watch it with a pen and paper purposefully looking for things.
And that just demonstrates an urge to be negative. I didnt notice any shaky sets in TPO but thats maybe because I was too busy being blown away by scenes like the majestic gathering of the alliance ships above stonehenge....a truly breathtaking sequence that bettered anything the series has managed previously.
But all said and done, I dont think any of us would be the fans we are of Doctor Who old and new if we got too hung up on the occasional dodgy set or effect. We'd probably be watching Smallville instead.
That's true if the sets and effects are at least 'passable'.
The story could be the best thing ever, but, if the sets or effects just don't convince on any level, it's just not going to work as a piece of visual drama.
Regards,
Cypher
True, but since everyone has their own individual standard when it comes to deciding what's passable and/or convincing, it's a very subjective thing. Set your standards too high and nothing will ever be good enough for you-at least on a BBC budget!
I must admit I didn't see any wobble in TPO (I was so blown away by it that I wouldn't have noticed anyway) or in most of the episodes of New Who. I'm not a big CGI fan, and some American productions seem to spend more time and effort on CGI than the actual story. I don't think that has happened in New Who or indeed classic Who.
I loved the more unusual sets of classic Who as well, so I'm probably easily satisfied (as long as there is good acting and a good story with some philosophy thrown in for good measure, I'm happy:D).
Comments
Cold Blood
Vincent & The Doctor
The Lodger
The Pandorica Opens
all the others feel as though the colour has been drained from them. (Special exception for teletubby Daleks)
The CGI has been hit and miss, the Atraxi spaceships were dismal. But the Pandorica opening was wonderful.
i doubt 99.99% of people even noticed it. It;s the kind of thing only people looking to find fault would notice actually.
An unfair comment...
I thoroughly enjoyed the episode, but it stood out like a sore thumb.
Regards,
Cypher
Hmm, would be interesting to think what CGI you think from this season has bettered, say, the Beast from Satan Pit, or pretty much all of Fires of Pompeii? And what from previous seasons has been worse than the monsters in Amy's Choice (don't just opt for the constantly trundled-out CGI wheelie bin from Rose!)
Off the top of my head: that bloody awful Lazarus monster, the deeply unconvincing Racnoss, the Slitheen, that thing in The Long Game, the Werewolf that looked like an escapee from Scooby Doo, the Cyber King...how long have you got?
There are not now nor have there ever been wobbly sets in Doctor Who. What people have been misreporting as "set wobble" is in fact a visual shimmer created by temporal weirdnesses that follow the Doctor around. He sorts of pollutes the place. Gives the brief illusion of solid walls wobbling.
(the voices in my head tell me these things.)
It's the ghost of Barry Letts.
The story is more important, but when you are watching, and getting involved, and something moves when it isn't supposed to, it takes away from the story, and takes you out of the moment.
The director has the ability to determine how much this effect is used by controlling things such as aperture and focal length. also different lenses will blur the background in different ways. It's these choices combined with the colour grading that is creating this look, not the HD
Oh yes - the wobble hunter. I can think of worse people to be haunted by.
I think those that like to indulge in mindless nitpicking obviously arent enjoying the epsiodes enough because I am so enthralled, so drawn in by the story and so thoroughly transported to the world they create that I wouldnt even notice these things if i tried.
Its understandable these things might become apparent after multiple viewings but i wonder whether some people watch it with a pen and paper purposefully looking for things.
And that just demonstrates an urge to be negative. I didnt notice any shaky sets in TPO but thats maybe because I was too busy being blown away by scenes like the majestic gathering of the alliance ships above stonehenge....a truly breathtaking sequence that bettered anything the series has managed previously.
But all said and done, I dont think any of us would be the fans we are of Doctor Who old and new if we got too hung up on the occasional dodgy set or effect. We'd probably be watching Smallville instead.
That's true if the sets and effects are at least 'passable'.
The story could be the best thing ever, but, if the sets or effects just don't convince on any level, it's just not going to work as a piece of visual drama.
IMHO, none of the above applies to what was a very minor, albeit noticeable, gaffe on the set in 'The Pandorica Opens'. Just to give some perspective there...
Regards,
Cypher
Yea, what you just said...
True, but since everyone has their own individual standard when it comes to deciding what's passable and/or convincing, it's a very subjective thing. Set your standards too high and nothing will ever be good enough for you-at least on a BBC budget!
I loved the more unusual sets of classic Who as well, so I'm probably easily satisfied (as long as there is good acting and a good story with some philosophy thrown in for good measure, I'm happy:D).
I don't mind for as long as i can record it
I hope they do repeat it on BBC HD, the fuss they went through to put it in HD in the first place should warrant some multiple viewings