Why CG Explosions Suck (but they don't have to)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2022
- Squarespace ► Head to squarespace.com/corridorcrew to save 10% off your first purchase!
Join OUR WEBSITE ► www.corridordigital.com/signup
Check out our new Stunt Show Punch 4 Punch ► • The Corridor Crew Recr...
THIS EPISODE ► Ever since he was a young child, Niko has loved Explosions. REAL Explosions. But as practical pyrotechnics fall out of favor in Hollywood, CG Booms are becoming prevalent and he's become disenchanted. Hopefully Jordan Allen can convince him that all hope is not lost, and there is a way for CG explosions to achieve cinematic greatness.
A big thanks to Urban Bradesko and Matt Puchala for their help with this video! The explosion in the video that was originally credited to Urban Bradesko was actually created by Matt Puchala. They are working together and we mixed them up. Our apologizes to both of them!
For more information on the tool Matt used to create his beautiful CG explosion, you can visit ► theoryaccelerated.com/
SUPPORT ►
Join Our Website: bit.ly/Crew_Membership
Instagram: bit.ly/_Corridor_Instagram
Twitter: bit.ly/_Corridor_Twitter
Buy Merch: bit.ly/Corridor_Store
OUR GEAR, SOFTWARE & PARTNERS ►
Our Go-To Gear: bhpho.to/3r0wEnt
Puget Systems Computers: bit.ly/PC_Puget_Workstations
ActionVFX: bit.ly/TheBest_ActionVFX
Lighting by Aputure: bit.ly/CORRIDOR_LIGHTS
Cinema4D: bit.ly/Try_Cinema4D
Greyscale Gorilla: bit.ly/GreyscaleGorilla
Nuke by The Foundry: bit.ly/Nuke_Compositing
Insydium: bit.ly/Insydium_Plugins
Octane Render by OTOY: bit.ly/Octane_Wrender
Boris FX - Mocha, Sapphire & Continuum: bit.ly/2Y0XLUX
Motion Captured with Xsens Suit: bit.ly/Xsens_MoCap_Suit
Reallusion: corridor.video/Reallusion_3Ds...
Unreal MegaGrant: bit.ly/Unreal_MegaGrant
MUSIC ►
Epidemic: bit.ly/Corridor_Music click this link for a free month! - บันเทิง
I’m at the point now with corridor titles and thumbnails where I know I’ve got to be in this one before even clicking 😂
Same
Hi guys please see my fight scenes if you’re free
Surprisingly Tom Scott can claim this as well, with that scene, from that video.
If they do a deep dive of shooting mugs with bullets next I know all your slow mo shots will be there
I was watching this and was like “I need to see what TSMG have to say about this”💀
Honestly I'm just super tired of gasoline explosions. Most of the time it doesn't make sense. Iron man dropping HE on the enemy? Gasoline. Plane dropping a bomb? Gasoline. Hand grenade thrown into a house? Gasoline.
My Grandad told me I was drawing explosions wrong when I was a kid. He drew one for me that follows a little of what Niko was saying there - dark on the outside, with little red flecks coming off it, and yellow on the the inside. He was in D-day.
The grimmest explosions in cinema are the ones that don't look like a bunch of petrol - the grey, dusty stuff from the Hurt Locker.
It's drives me nuts also. Especially in war movies - i.e. Hacksaw Ridge.
Yeeeah, i thought about it too. Not every explosion should have gas at the beginning, or cool instantly and not have bright yellow on the outside.
I understand what you mean, and it's frustrating because I know why it's done. Firstly, the camera has a better time catching a gasoline explosion than an ordinary explosion. Secondly, gasoline explosions look more cinematic, which is why they became so popular. Lastly, using that over other volatile or explosive materials is safer.
this is a great point. gas should be used for vehicle explosions mainly. I think these guys actually have another video discussing how its the pressure waves and shrapnel that are missing from so many movie explosions.
An occasional fireball is fun, but I am always more impressed by concussive shockwaves with minimal pyro. They just feel more visceral, not to mention more realistic (since most things in real life don't contain hundreds of gallons of gasoline).
Same. Top Gun: Maverick did this amazingly.
Gus Frings Death in Breaking Bad is a prime example for me
@@BritneyLaZonga this is sarcastic hope
his explosion was closer to a fart whooshing into a hallway than a real explosion even if it wasn't a gasoline fireball.
After watching mythbusters nearly vaporize a cement truck I lost most of my love for the gas explosions. They look cool, but the sharp, almost cracking, OOMPH that happened when that truck blew up was so much more visceral and intense. You could almost *feel* it through the screen.
Agreed, trying to recreate the fake explosions that use gasoline seems like the wrong goal.
I wish more movies would replicate the look and behavior of explosions like the one shown in the Beirut explosion footage. The speed and scale at which everything occurs is absolutely terrifying, and leaves way more of an impact on me than the giant gasoline fireballs.
So true, they're not even talking about how to emulate a bomb exploding with CGI here, complaining about lack of fuel and whatnot. That's if you wanna replicate a hollywood fireball.
oh how you came to eat your words...
Just watched that explosion. wow. it happens so fast. step 1: a bright flash blows out the camera, step 2: a fireball/smoke stack expands quickly, step 3: the explosion is obscured by a huge blast wave coming right at you, and as it comes you see dust and debris flying off of the buildings before they get quickly consumed by the blast wave, step 4: the blast wave reaches the camera and knocks it over. If you think about it, it plays out with story beats. A Hollywood fireball might look beautiful, but an explosion like this is actually scary.
I'm glad you included that Tom Scott bit. The best videos on actual explosions come from people who do them for real, like Tom and The Slow Mo Guys.
The irony is that they used the fragment of Tom Scott’s video where he demonstrated how the fake Hollywood explosions look like, in order to compare that to a real explosion. It’s kinda weird hearing them call some of those Hollywood explosions realistic simply because they were a good practical effect (or a faithful simulation) which, in many cases, is still really far off from how explosions look like irl.
@@MaxIsStrange1 i guess their focus were more on how to avoid that an explosion looks like a 3d simulation and not on how to make it look like a real explosion
@@MaxIsStrange1 Fair point. On the previous video I commented asking if we were trapped into Hollywood FX explosions since audiences are conditioned to expect them, and real explosions would look tame to people who don't understand them.
@@thetalantonx I would agree that a part of the problem is that the audience members, being so used to the gasoline fireballs, probably imagine that real explosions look like that and they’ve come to expect to see them by now, which means that effectively conveying the power of a realistic looking explosion would most likely require a different approach to filming such scenes (and probably quite a bit of trial and error) but I still think it’s worth attempting and it would most likely improve the experience, especially in war movies which attempt to be somewhat realistic, depict real events, etc. (watching a war movie and seeing a hand grenade, C4, a mine, etc. explode in a large fireball of burning gasoline can really take you out of the scene).
@@Sebbir That’s a fair point. It’s just that they kept using the word “realistic” and for me, those Hollywood-style explosions are inherently lacking on that front, even if it’s a practical effect or a really good sim.
What a banger episode it was super interesting and entertaining! We need more VFX breakdowns like this for other common hollywood effects like muzzle flashes, water interactions, blood spurts, etc.
d
hehe, banger
@@gfhk5085 banger? I don't even know her
My brain knows there's something off when I see a bad CGI explosion, but I don't have the expertise to explain it into words. That's why I love this video so much. It puts into words all the things that I notice but cannot explain.
That shot from the Mandalorian with TIE-Bombers passing over the explosions, you say they're smaller bombs, but if you look at the ground around them you might notice that they're very far up and that those probably are nukes.
And the Death Star test firing in Rogue One is one of the most beautiful scenes I've ever seen in a movie, the Death Star eclipse turning day into night just as they blast a little bit of apocalypse onto Jedha is mesmerisingly gorgeous.
He said the explosion moves at the speed of a smaller bomb but looks like a nuke.
2:02 Yeah, but that 'Knowing' scene was nuts in the theater.
The audience has no idea what's going to happen, you just see Nic Cage getting anxious and then the surround sound kicks in and it feels like you're under the plane.
For what the explosion lacked, the sound design made it real!
There are 2 explosions I've ever seen in movies that made me go "holy shit, that was a real bomb" and had an actual shock factor: Sicario Day of the soldado supermarket bombing and zero dark thirty bus bombing. With those 2 exceptioms, 99.999% of movie explosions just feel like gasoline being spread in the air and set on fire (which they essentially are). Those are the only 2 explosions that felt like they carried some punch.
The supermarket bombing in Sicario 2 is mostly CG. The VFX breakdown for the scene is on TH-cam.
And the explosive in the armoured van in Heat. That was good- super small and realistic but still impactful.
The dynamite MacReady threw in The Thing was real. Like, the actor literally threw a lit stick of dynamite. Apparently.
The Hurt Locker did it really well too. Real HE explosions don't produce fireballs at all.
I'd like to recommend a really realistic explosion: the hand thrown dynamite explosions near the end of the movie Sahara. There's an aerial shot where you can see shockwaves followed by smoke and a lot of sand thrown into the air.
I love seeing VFX artist reacting to practical effects. It takes a lot of study of the real world to get things right in the digital world. The funny thing about the War Machine explosions from Avengers is they actually shot those practically (I was doing Previs across the street and we heard about 10 loud booms in succession). But like what usually happens when things are shot practically these days, they were probably nit-picked and digitally manipulated to hell until they didn't look real anymore, or just replaced with CG entirely.
wait... that particular scene...??
might have been another scene semi related or is on cutting floor...
Jordan is honestly such a great addition to Corridor. Love the excitement!
The thing that drives me the most nuts about big Hollywood explosions is that the light and sound arrive concurrently. In the James Bond one shown in the last VFXAR, MI6 is hundreds of meters away, but the explosion and the sound are right at the same time. Same with Rings of Power in the most recent episode.
How hard is it to remember the the old thunderstorm trick of 3 seconds per kilometre distance?
That would've also helped with the vibe they were mentioning too. As in the lack of one. "Oh look at that." Whereas if there's a delay in what you're seeing vs hearing or even feeling, it would add to the chaos and sense of shock.
Or even play it the opposite way, where we as the audience see that the building in the distance has been sploded, but the people on screen aren't looking at it, so haven't seen it. So it takes the noise reaching them a couple seconds after to alert them.
Filmmakers: "People would get confused if they arrived at the same time". Hopefully it's that the majority of people who know better just don't really talk about it much for various reasons, and not that there's more than a tiny minority who are confused.
@@DS127 for this hypothetical: I mean anyone who's seen lightning will have experienced it and excusing yourself by insulting your audience will always be a low bar
And it just feels so much more intense like that, I don't know maybe it's just me but the silent explosion followed by the shockwave is so much more impactful than "oh look an explosion"
my friends are gonna be so impressed when I pause the movie to tell them why the explosion wasn't very impressive
😂
You joke, but still. I don't think it's good if you didn't care about something and copy a sentiment from someone who does care.
It's fine to try to understand an expertise and THEN care about it, but blindly following some professional's passion shouldn't be the way to go. This is often how people act when watching vid essays.
@@Rethardus the original comment was a joke, but I do agree with what you said.
@@why_tho_ I know it's a joke, but it's not far from the truth. Most people would listen to pros like Corridor and (rightly so) trust their opinion.
Sure, they know their stuff, but it doesn't mean you'll feel the same once you're at their level.
Often younger viewers treat their idols opinions like a gospel. To me, video essays is about you feeling an emotion, and essayists try to explain to you WHY you feel that why.
But if you don't feel a certain way, one shouldn't watch a video and think "aha! Now I HATE CGI explosions too!". I notice that sentiment a lot.
@@Rethardus thanks for putting words on something I never quite managed to say properly.
I love it when you guys make slightly more technical videos! It's, interesting, educational and fun!
Niko, Jordan! This is so educational and inspiring. I love comping explosions (poorly) but learned a lot from this.
Oh my God it's you!
i completely forgot about this channel. you are a huge part of my childhood!!
Personally, when I see what I'd really like to see as CG matures is more variation. Practical effects use fuel explosion a lot because, well, all sorts of reasons, but it would be nice to see CG branch out into more variety than emulating practical effects. The sheer, blinding speed of high explosives or the condensation clouds that form midway through when you have something really big all feel like they could be used to play into different narrative beats.
Sure, I agree to an extent. However, that's one of the paradoxes of filmmaking - often CG's job isn't emulating reality but perceived film reality. Fuel explosions are something that audiences have gotten used to. It's a style choice more than anything.
Hey, that why animated explosions are generally better. You have no simulation to rely on, so you rely on timing and artistic flashiness.
My favourite explosions are usually the ones that don't have any fire at all, or at least a very little bit. The ones where it''s pure enegery and shockwave that sends dirt and debris flying around in the blink of an eye.
As a USAF EOD veteran I'm with you :)
There's a beauty to movie explosions but as he kept mentioning, they're not explosions they're thrown fuel vapor being ignited. Granted a fuel air bomb is the same system and does exist but they're also not usually called an explosion by experts. explosions have brisance and impact that movie explosions lack.
It depends on the explosive, and the amount of it. Go look at the beirut explosion, there is a HUGE fireball.
@@PBMS123 No there was not. Ammonium nitrate explosions don't produce fireballs. After the detonation there was'nt anything left to burn in that cloud.
@@gert-janbonnema Bro go watch all the angles, there is 100% a fireball.
So you mean real world explosions? most Hollywood explosions are artificial. They showed the clip from Skull Island where the guy had two hand grenades and they went up in a ball of flame and smoke. In real life there would only be small flashes and a little smoke....and the guys body being blown apart. Unless that guy had like 10 gallons of Gas on him we didn't see that's not how it would have gone
I'm a production coordinator, and I find this kind of deep dive into the design and artistry of FX work absolutely facinating! I love learning what the artists I work with are doing and how, and getting to see the curtain pulled back like this in such a frank and analitical manner is awesome! Keep it up!
I loved that they caught the overpressure wave from a gasoline explosion on film in Raiders of the Lost Ark (the Flying Wing scene). Using gasoline for the pyro was valid in-context for a change because it was an aviation fuel source in the narrative.
A lot of what you say about the middle of fire looking white is because of low dynamic range cameras and displays. The problem is, for the last several years, we've had HDR TVs, and cameras that can capture much more dynamic range as well. When making use of HDR displays properly, the core of the fire should NOT be white anymore, but orange/red, with a lot more detail. For some great examples, watch the 4K Blu-rays of Mad Max Fury Road, The Greatest Showman, and Batman v Superman (original release, not remaster) and you'll see fire making proper use of the extra dynamic range. In fact, when you use those old SDR ideas in an HDR video, it looks pretty washed out and well... SDR, which is a problem.
The issue is that a lot of colorists don't know how to take a proper HDR image, and color grade it to SDR properly. A lot of them will want to maintain the bright colors present in the HDR image. They shouldn't be. When dynamic range is limited, so too should be the color volume in the highlights. The same problem exists with HDR TVs. If the image is brighter than the TV's capabilities, the TVs often tonemap in ways that try to maintain the color volume of the highlights, when really they should focus on a more realistic luminance falloff instead.
Underrated comment
4:25 that "MoOoOove" though😆
It shows how excited he is about what he's talking about.
We all know that seismic charges from Attack of the Clones/The Mandalorian S2 are the most satisfying explosions in film history.
BWOOOOOOOOOOOM
Yes, and that's because ILM's beautiful visual effects were combined with Skywalker Sound's awesome sound effects... and this is one thing that the Corridor guys didn't mention in the video. Sound is also very important when you talk about movie explosions and how the viewers might experience them.
Great video! I think this topic deserves a followup video titled: Why real explosions look so real, in which you ONLY look at your favourite real explosions and then have a competition to re-create those explosions using a combination of real explosions and CG. When we were working with Clint Eastwood on the explosions for the film Richard Jewell, he insisted on having zero greenscreen and zero CG, so we had A LOT of roto to separate out each actor from in front of the small explosions in the background and we also needed to enhance his explosions using only elements that were actually exploding. We had very skilled Houdini artists standing by in case he changed his mind, but with thousands of Wacom brushstrokes, we were able to accomplish it all by hand in 2D with no 3D sims.
This is a great format for a video. I love the green couch and the laughing between the crew, but this feels like a class. I really enjoyed this video. GG Guys!
Can you guys take a look at the effects from 1979 “the black hole?”
Great practical models, Matt paintings, wire stunts, and explosions
Love that movie 💛
Great film.
Oh Matt? Love his paintings!
The Black Hole is a guilty pleasure of mine. The movie itself is trash but the special effects were an amazing mix of tried and true techniques.
@@Ivrin3 Hehehe
Id love if you guys did more deep dives like this! Thats one of the reasons I love the podcast so much, I love just hearing you guys deep dive about a particular thing in movie making and I feel like you guys could have a really great channel series for this sort of thing with video reference. Hope to see more! A deep dive on rotoscoping and green/blue screens could be neat!
Do more ASAP! Very well formatted honestly, keeps the vibe going
More deep dives for sure! I don't do vfx or cgi but I love seeing the details I've never known I've noticed before and how y'all are complete nerds about all these things. Love seeing the passion for crafts.
I would be thrilled to see you guys follow up more on anime explosions, which ones work best, which ones don't work, different kinds of explosions (not all are fire-based!), etc. I really love when you pick apart animation and give credit and adoration to the insane amount of detail that gets lost in a split second frame.
13:58 my theory is they wanted to emulate the clouds/water vapor in the atmosphere condensing due to pressure as the explosion pushes outward from the middle, and since it condenses into water, it cools the edges of the fireball leading it to become dark rings
I could be wrong tho my grasp of thermodynamics is like that of a dog's grasp of object permanence
Great insights and explanations of a complex process. Thanks Nico and Jordan!
Please continue to do more video like this. It’s educational and entertaining at the same time. So much to learn. I’m excited! 🤘🏽🙂
Great episode! I'd love to see a deep dive into squibs vs CG bullet hits. That's something that's been bumming me out in movies today. It's frustrating because I think it actually can be done seamlessly in CG if it weren't treated like a simple drag and drop effect
I agree, but that requires creating a fluid simulation. You have to input viscosity, blood coagulation, and several other factors. For drag and drops, you may have a folder of 100s of prerecorded footage that once you find one that looks good, you're done. So unless it is an artistic blood spatter, a drag and drop is going to be infinitely easier AND less expensive.
@@JordanWeberMusic
None of that is necessary for good results with explosions or bullet impacts. Look at video games there are plenty that get it wrong (most) and very, very few that get it looking kind of right, critically almost zero video games use simulation for explosions or blood spray.
@@VariantAEC which still needs to be programmed. Clicking a file will always trump it.
@@JordanWeberMusic
Huh?
@@VariantAEC Maybe I misunderstood your point, but I was saying the games still require the programming for blood effects and would still be expensive compared to a 2D sprite that could do the job.
Please do more videos of this format. Loved it!
This is what I needed to hear, THIS. Like I’ve seen plenty of things on “oh here’s how to make a building explode!” Or “here’s how to match a miniature!” But rarely do people talk about how to match the LIGHTING or COLOR. Case in point, making a realistic explosion. The fact that there’s multiple layers you’ve gotta consider, the ignition, the heat being INSIDE, the shockwave and the shape of the explosion.
VERY valuable, thank you very much.
I can't believe you did so much Star Wars, but didn't mention the Seismic charges from the chase in the Geonosis Asteroid belt in Episode 2. I still remember how impressive those were when I first saw then in cinema. They're a good example of a non-realistic boom that follows animation rules yet doesn't break the immersion. The anticipation and then broaarrp was just awesome.
I liked the use of seismic charges in Mando as well. The fact that they're in atmosphere this time, and there's an echo from the ground below? Ah! _chef's kiss_ Beautiful!
You guys ever see Alpha Dog, the 2006 movie? The gunshot wounds at the end of that movie always stuck with me as seeming very realistic. No blood just a bunch of holes appear in the shirt and the guy goes limp, it was pretty brutal, maybe you guys can check out that clip.
well a real gunshot would leave some blood cause a bullet doesn't just go straight through you. It will be carrying Bone Fragments and a bit of viscera with it so there probably would be a small spray of blood. You also would start bleeding pretty fast from a bullet ripping through you.
I miss the days of ridiculous practical squibs but having seen people shot & having shot people myself those toned down hits got me too. Right up there with William Dafoe in Platoon when the squibs just didn't go but that was the best take performance wise.
seeing the secondary explosion "breathe life" into the primary explosion was super interesting! It's the little things like this that keep me coming back to this channel. You guys help explain things we would otherwise never notice about IRL or VFX phenomena. Magic, man!
After watching Oppenheimer with a non-CGI explosion, that feeling finally hit.
Would love to see you guys review the CGI in Deepwater Horizon. The effects in that film were really convincing to me.
Yes! Please more deep dives. And I've enjoyed getting to know Jordan. His passion is infectious and it's genuinely interesting to hear him unpack his insight
i’ve been eating up your content as of late and i’ve learned so much! ive been catching up on some older stuff so i’m not sure if you covered this yet, but i just saw barbarian last night and the flashback scene threw me for a loop. HOW tf did they do that?! it seems like the movie used a lot of practical effects as well so i’d love to hear what you guys have to say about the film.
also why does the plane keep flying on it's side instead of cart wheeling from the wing hitting the ground cause that would happen in a real life crash on the side the the plane as the wing digs into the ground
This was so awesome. Would love to see more deep dives like this
I'm so happy that you included Your Name as a good example. Watched it a few weeks ago and that one is just hitting hard.
This was an absolutely inspiring and informative video, thanks a lot for diving into this so thoroughly.
Good episode. You should do more Sfx vs vfx breakdowns like this, best car crashes, best melting, best sword fight, best claymation, best animated animals
Thank you for adding sponser segments!
Great video! I know almost nothing about pyro, and some of the principles Niko was explaining went above my head, which doesn't normally happen. In future, might be a good idea to have one guy in the video who can be the 'dummy' and question Niko to help clarify the more advanced concepts.
Would love more videos like this just breaking down whatever you guys are passionate about
Good video, I like the deep dive and looking more at the artistic side of FX
Great stuff! Very interesting. I recently got Backdraft on 4K, and I am looking forward to seeing the real fire on the format.
This Deep Dive is awesome‼️Should DEFINITELY do a CorridorCrew:DeepDive series🙏🏼
Keep doing these! Would love to see something on gun recoil/muzzle flash or big battle simulations with tons of CG characters vs in camera people fighting
14:02 not quite, a nuclear explosion only starts as a white fireball when it's an *airburst*. The Jedha City explosion appears to have occurred mostly underground, where's way more mass for the superlaser beam to vaporize and turn into deadly burning plasma stuff. Jedha itself is a desert moon. There is a lot of material (dust) to be thrown into the air and obstruct the fireball. So they kinda did their homework.
Except that those rings and caps are essentially condensation clouds, created thanks to the pressure difference in high humidity air. A desert world isn't really humid, but maybe if the shockwave is strong enough, there could be enough water vapor in the atmosphere to condense to that point.
@neoqueto. It's called a Wilson cloud. It can also be seen around airplanes when nearing the sound barrier.
Fantastic video! Makes me feel incredibly inspired to pick back up Houdini ngl
That secondary explosion color change is a damn good spot! I bet you from now on you’ll start seeing it.
absolutely loved this episode! More CGI/VFX breakdowns like this please! I especially love it when the topic is something personal to you guys like giant fire balls are to Niko 😁
YO! Rate the explosion from the end of the rings of power episode 6 it was gnarly!!
I love how you guys break down shots and show us the problems or the things done well in them. Feels like a focused critique, letting us make better projects ourselves by being able to spot what makes a shot look "wrong".
Love what you do, keep it up :)
I have a lot of fun with this channel's sillier videos, but this was probably the most educational video I've seen here, and I found it utterly fascinating. More stuff like this would be most welcome!
I was waiting for this all day since last upload lol. Great videos hope you guys keep up the great work! 👍
This was so interesting! Felt like a short lecture on explosions lmao, when's the test?
dadz
If they could team up with an explosive's expert and catalog a reference library for explosives that would be very valuable, I think. Probably also take a lot of time too.
Oppenheimer has one of the best practical explosions I’ve seen.
Really love the format!
Yes please, do more videos like that. It would be amazing if you could also bring people from the industry to comment on that and teach "from the inside", the same way you do with VFX Artist React series. THx!
More deep dives, very enjoyable episode!
Excellent video, guys. Very well done! You've really ironed out the uncanny valley of explosions but at the same time, this video and pretty much all of your other videos have made me an insufferable nerd, explaining to others why various VFX shots just don't cut the mustard
I think educational videos like this are incredibly helpful for people like me. I'm not a CGI artist or VFX artist, but a fan of it. I know that if I want to do a CGI explosion in my scene, I know to bring in a CGI artist early on so we can plan to shoot the scene in a way that gives the CGIer everything he needs. I learned that from you guys and videos like this.
Compositing. sheeeeeeesh. the talent required to pull that off. Hats off to all you compositors out there.
I think this is where Michael Bay works best. He combines real explosions with ILMs incredible CGI.
tred
That actually the one thing i appreciate about Michael Bay. He’s good at finding people who are super talented at a very specific thing and then he just lets them do their thing
As far as I'm concerned he hasn't directed anything good since that Got Milk commercial in the 90's but I will concede the man really does know how to use practical elements on set really well to inform the VFX guys in post.
This bit in 13:43 always make me think of the final explosion from Aliens, it was supposed to be huge and colossal and they did it very simples: a lot of cotton, the center of the explosion was a piece they would lift with a lever and a big light inside.
YES, more deep dives, please! This is great! :D
I honestly really enjoyed this style of video and the topic it was on. I hope other videos like this follow soon!
I would actually love a more in-depth deep dive on compositing. That segment of Jordan talking about how vfx artists hand off their models to compositors had me super intrigued
yeah, and honestly, that is the REAL bottleneck for visual effects and always has been. probably 99% of the time when people say that a cgi shot looks "bad", what they mean is, the compositing looks bad. pretty much every example people have given me for so called "bad cgi", the cgi itself looked great, it was the compositing that looked off.
Same. That stuff is hard to self-teach.
@@tyler8320 I dunno about that, its generally one of the most common type of fan videos, and is usually the first thing people learn after they get a grasp of basic scene splicing.
Think of AMVs, PMVs, etc. the most common is basic videos, just scenes cut to music. but almost immediately people move into complex videos. those are pretty much entirely compositing. adding layers, creating vectors, even lip syncing as you get more advanced.
I think the issue is more that its considered the most expendable part of a film's post production. either suits coming in and saying "this is done enough for me", or just a lack of quality checks and control. esp since this would come in at the very end of post production, so is likely more susceptible to crunch, and budget and time issues.
I'm loving these informative breakdown videos lately! VFX artist react is entertaining and all, but I'd love to see more videos like this!
3:19 I thought he was going to say, "camera angle changes".
I love the deep dives, keep them coming!!
Man, I wish more filmmakers are watching the content that this crew always give. I feel that they can learn a lot about how to shoot vfx heavy scenes very well
Why is Hollywood, and even this video, obsessed with gasoline explosions when with CG you can create visuals that look like actual explosions. Gasoline explosions look weak because they're not real explosions, at least not in the same sense as something like TNT explosions.
Even the mushroom cloud of a nuke, is NOT the explosion, it is literally just the fireball that's left AFTER the explosion.
at 5:02 you point to a tiny explosion within the ignited gasoline and that is what makes the shockwave. The gasoline igniting does not create a shockwave like that, because it does not expand anywhere close to the velocity required to create it.
It's like old films were forced to use tiny explosions so they had to make it look flashy by igniting gasoline, and now for some bizarre reason, they're stuck in that limitation. Of course a gasoline ignition doesn't look right when scaled up as an explosion, because it is not one. All you're doing is creating CG gasoline ignitions.
Totally agree
I hate hollywood "explosions". 99.9% of the time it's cringe worthy at best 🤮
Generally hollywood "physics" make me want to drill my eyes out with a kitchen mixer 😵
7:35 The asteroid impact in Your Name hit deep, not just because of the superb animation. One of the best.
The thing you didn't discuss is that movie explosions aren't like real explosions at all. Huge fireballs of burning liquid rarely happen like they do in movies. What you're arguing for is that CG explosions should look more like fake explosions because that's what we're used to. Maybe we should get past that and make movie explosions look more real and a bit less cartoony.
Indeed, it reminds me of the "masks and puppets (used for creatures, monsters, aliens, etc) are better than CGI animation" debate, where people are usually arguing that CG animation should look more like fake, plastic/rubbery puppets, or like people dressed in cheap, plastic/rubbery costumes, because they got used to it during the '70s and '80s.
My brain knows there's something off when I see a bad CGI explosion, but I don't have the expertise to explain it into words. That's why I love this video so much. It puts into words all the things that I notice but cannot explain..
Loved it…learning about the mechanics of the fires…great stuff.
That was fab!
It reminds me of the earlier "Good and bad" VFX vids, where you went into why something looks off.
Super informative. More of these!
I don't really care what the specific subject is. :p
2d animators really know how to separate explosion's into their most impactful parts, I've seen plenty of artists study impacts and explosion's almost exclusively
The explosions in Dune were probably the first CG explosions I've seen that looked photoreal. (I'm talking about the ones filling up the shields as the highliners explode). Was surprised you didn't mention those.
They looked amazing in the theater, but once I got the disk in 4k and HDR, they looked SO much better. HDR really makes a world of a difference, especially because it was night, so you have the massive contrast between the dark night background, and the super bright explosion.
I think they gushed over them in their Dune video
Jaw was dropped though out the whole attack scene. So good in cinema
great video, enjoy the nuance and nerdy deep-dive about why things work and feel right
Please do more of these, they are super interesting.
I would also think that directors, vfx supervisors, and cinematographers can come in at the last minute and change literally anything about the explosion. I'm sure some of these "bad" looking explosions may have been because one of these people made a stylistic/tonal choice for their film, sacrificing a bit of realism.
I love how this video comes out right after I made my first explosion simulation in Blender 😅
Lol they're watching you
@@711pizzaslice Actually surprisingly… I got quite a bit right! I used particle sims mixed with mesh expansions to capture “fuel”, and instead of it going straight up I simulated it coming more from the side (to be fair, that was more of a artistic choice but I’m glad I did it). It also “cools” down from the outside first, and I even left some fire burning in the middle after the explosion. I think a lot of it looking pretty solid (for a first sim) was I really worked on the shader before I rendered it. I will say, I have some brown smoke here and there, but it isn’t post processed or anything yet. I’m sure there are lots of room for improvement but after watching this I’m a lot more proud of the outcome, especially because it uses blenders Mantiflow, and not something fancy like Embergen!
This was great! Please do more!
This was great, I would 100% watch more of these.
mythbusters videos always have the best real explosions for reference
Hol up i use your things to make vids, awesome website guys
Which also shows why CG explosions don't need an expanding fuel source like movies because most explosions don't
I remember the cement truck
I’d love an additional video on this topic about the earlier mentioned “everything is a gasoline explosion”, but also how in VFX they often show the explosion and subsequent fire, but they forget to impact the scenery/materials around the explosion (like in the Stealth clip; the whole wall of the hangar blows up, but the windows above the explosion don’t even wobble or crack).
Love the deepdive stuff. Would love to see one about vehicle chases and slow-mo
In my opinion, you guys are so cool and you disprove the saying "cool guys don't look at explosions" with this video! All you do is look at explosions and make a GREAT video out of it.
You are SO COOL! Thank you for another entertaining and informative video! Looking forward to the next one!!!!
Greta video, loved the way you explained the scenes. I felt like i actually understand something 😏
I really enjoy seeing people talk about stuff their excited about and that is the vibe I'm getting from this video, so if there are other topics you guys are passionate about I would gladly watch a video about it
My first comment on your channel - best video ever! Felt those things, but never knew the physics‘ facts. Great work! 👍🏻
Now this is a freaking TH-cam video!! One of my favorites I learned a ton
After the (hilarious) Little man rant from the other video, I was waiting for this :)