458 Videos From Mugello!!!

Interesting. Thanks for the correction and information.

 

the first RED 4k was awesome...but they've been working on 8 or 16k camera haven't they? anyhoo, the vid does look to me like some hybrid between CGI and Camera Shot...

 

Rob. With tons of due respect, and I'm not calling you a fool but...you asked for it:

"The film you are about to watch was realised without any speed-ups or special effects" -Ferrari (five seconds in)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9Br6f_BCVc&NR=1

On the "making of" video posted, can you not see the helmet rig, engine shot rigs, etc.? Sorry to belabor the discussion but if anyone thinks they'd spend a huge fortune to shoot this stuff with a top director (Alex Paul) with high-end HD, THEN spend another fortune to do it all over in CG, they're nuts!

Seriously guys, watch the video on a proper monitor. It's all live action and nicely done, as can be clearly seen.

 

LOL how funny it is real footage, looks like some people need to apologize. At first I thought it was CG but the more I watched it was just too detailed to be CG. I’m watching it on a 30” LG LCD monitor and I had a really difficult time seeing if it was real or not.
But thecheddar just proved it with that official Ferrari video that says "The film you are about to watch has been realised without any speed-ups or special effects."

 

And further to that, CGI is simply so time consuming and costly that you plan each shot and pre vis so that you only work on stuff that's going to end up in the final edit (in a sense, you edit before you produce the footage). You just wouldn't go to all the effort to produce all this footage that didn't get used in the final piece.

The detail is not necessarily a giveaway. With time and budget you can include an infinite amount of detail. In the end it comes down to the overall look. There's just something about it.

To see some really nice car CGI go here...

http://www.swaystudio.com/#

Go to AUTO REEL bottom right. Everything you see, environments and cars, is CGI. There are a few shots that don't hold up 100% but most of this is top stuff.

 

Is that CGI? No way!

 

But, seriously, you're right, great footage of the 458, real or not.

 

C'mon Rob. "I'm taking my ball and going home" isn't cool. A lot of us here are feature producers and directors or work in the industry. Calling us "fools" and comparing that video game to million dollar footage is just asking to get owned.

Besides, if your 80's home vids look like the Ferrari 458 launch, I'd love to see them. I'll hire anyone who can shoot like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9Br6f_BCVc

 

Rob, I agree that is a good video. The only trouble is in this world of one-up-manship it's a little too straight forward for some. I personally like it better too. The trouble is my 15 year old son could and will make videos of this quality when he can afford the equipment. It takes very expensive cameras with multiple lenses, booms, steadi-cams, chase vehicles, a day or two at a rented private race track(these are shot pre-release and top secret), a very good driver and a few days to edit.
This video and the 458 video actually look almost identical to the replays on countless playstation and x-box games.

Still believe the best commercial footage ever made was not made by a director so much as a racer. That would be LeMans which was all done by Steve McQueen who raced cars and motorcycles at a very high level and understood speed and how it looked and felt.

Bob

 

I'm genuinely baffled that people can't tell the difference.

 

http://www.ferrari.com/English/Ferrari_TV/Pages/FerrariTVPlayer.aspx?serverId=10532&c=Video&cat=14

http://www.ferrari.com/English/Ferrari_TV/Pages/FerrariTVPlayer.aspx?serverId=10531&c=Video&cat=14

 

To be fair, the modern CG have become so sophisticated that often one cannot easily distinguish them from real footages.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYCsnEMpFsg&feature=channel
So can anyone say with certainty that the above film is CG or real?

As far as the "official" Ferrari 458 film is concerned, there are many panning sequences that are consistent with the ones in CG hence the impression of being a CG. I personally could not tell for sure but when I first watched the footage, I thought it was CG. If it is real, then it certainly was filmed like a CG.

 

Great graphics, pretty soon we can have porno movies with perfect girls and scenes!!!

 

It baffles me that anyone could confuse that GT5 video with the real thing (or the real thing to CG for that matter)! It's practically a cartoon and bears no resemblance to film quality CG. The flatness to the images and the unconnected movements of the chassis and wheels are instant tells.

 

+1

 

You are missing the point. The OP's film was real but if you don't think a sophisticated CG can look exactly the same, then you obviously don't know enough about CG to discuss further. It cracks me up that one can be so cocky and ignorant to tell someone to get the eyes checked when he/she is the one that knows nothing about CG. So what made you so sure that the OP's film was real other than there is also a video of the "making" of the film? Can you really tell for sure that it was not CG just from watching the first 60 seconds? Bottomline is that the levels of CG sophistication nowadays often make them look indistinguishable from real video especially if there are panning shots. You might know your Ferraris but you don't know CG.
That's all.

 

I do photoreal CGI for a living. Is that good enough for you? And yes, I didn't need to see a making of to know the film was real. And yes, I do know how real it can be - see link in my earlier post.

 

I believe the video is real. My question is what gives it that flat visual effect? Is it some sort of post filtering/rendering that was done on purpose to give it that effect, or is it an artifact of the Red camera?

 

It's just discarded footage so they haven't gone to the trouble or expense of doing any post. Notice, for instance, how much more saturated the yellow car is in the finished video.