What is Digg?92 Comments
- NathanCH, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3380% of car commercials are CG.
- Llanowar, on 07/07/2008, -2/+26With such a pic we should be asking proof if it is actually CG. That's crazy realistic.
- Icecream, on 07/07/2008, -2/+2495% of cars are CG
- JKAL, on 07/07/2008, -0/+19how about putting them on a most realistic server.
- PFS1, on 07/07/2008, -6/+25Those images are good work that would take talent, but for a post called "most realistic cg cars", a lot of them aren't terribly realistic...they are simply too stylized and don't look real at all. Along with the F1 racer and a one or two other from that page, THIS would be a good example of a realistic cg car:
http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/7289/mustangey1 ... - pingpants, on 07/07/2008, -1/+19The gray ambient light and ground surface aren't helping the Carrera GT.
- amanilaenvelope, on 07/07/2008, -0/+15Do you get 40 mega pixels a gallon? (MPG)
- morninglorii, on 07/07/2008, -1/+13100% of cars are not owned by me :(
- DoctuhJason, on 07/07/2008, -1/+13I drive a CG.
- Kral, on 07/07/2008, -0/+950% of the letters in CG appear in CAR.
- zedragon, on 07/07/2008, -1/+9I wonder if car websites like honda or ford use cg instead of the real thing...
nvm that is a stupid question. Of course they do! - Xpletive, on 07/07/2008, -0/+8mirror?
- hawtpawkithero, on 07/07/2008, -1/+8The only thing with that picture I can spot with my eye is that the car's contrast isn't that of the rest of the picture, but it's pretty damn close.
- Tempest811, on 07/07/2008, -0/+7Yes it is a CG car. Look at the rear wing's contrast levels versus the background's.
I do CG trust me this is fantastic work. The hardest thing to match is the flawed nature of real photos. - ghostoftomjoad, on 07/07/2008, -6/+12Umm. That isn't a cg car.
- beingdevious, on 07/07/2008, -0/+5you probably already have. they're setting you up for:
--"im eating a burger that's not real, it tastes like crap! i want what was in the ad"
--"what was in the ad was fake, you got what you wanted, goodbye!" - kiensoy, on 07/07/2008, -0/+595% of diggers are OGC
- sarixe, on 07/07/2008, -4/+9Failed to Connect
Firefox can't establish a connection to the server at www.cg-files.com.
Though the site seems valid, the browser was unable to establish a connection.
* Could the site be temporarily unavailable? Try again later.
* Are you unable to browse other sites? Check the computer's network connection.
* Is your computer or network protected by a firewall or proxy? Incorrect settings can interfere with Web browsing. - ironcrotch, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4How is this getting dugg up if the site doesn't work?
- lougoose, on 07/07/2008, -0/+457% of statistics are made up on the spot.
- Lynx34, on 07/07/2008, -1/+5100% of Pixar's "Cars" is CG.
- anagoge, on 07/07/2008, -1/+5Whoa.
- thepretext, on 07/07/2008, -0/+486% of CG is cars
- JPDyno, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4I work at a large car company, and the vast majority of press pictures or brochure pictures of new models are CG. They have a department within the design studios dedicated to making realistic renders.
I cant really comare to these ones though, because i cant see them - lfroker, on 07/07/2008, -2/+6http://maurozea.wordpress.com/2007/11/15/most-real ...
- PFS1, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3I'm afraid you're reading far too much into my "stupid comment". That's a CG car that I pulled from cgtalk over 4 years ago because I was so impressed with the detail that went into it and how real it looked. The fact that you believed it to be real only goes to prove how good a piece of work it is compared to the majority of images in the linked article, which is the point I was trying to make. For proof it is CG, look at the reflection as it wraps around the front right bumper. There is absolutely no reflection of anything that could be taking that picture.
Also, calm down a bit. - inactive, on 07/07/2008, -1/+4Three cars? Come on we need better than that.
- norman619, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3They use CG as well as real photos. :-)
- MacBandit, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3114 diggs and it's burried. Anyone have a mirror.
- morouxshi, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3There's a big difference when you are making a still render of a car than when you need the model to be rendered in real time. In GT and Forza you have to take into consideration light changes and shadow casting while going around the track. When you just put a car static you can then do various renders and pick and choose which render you like best and even render the scene in various passes getting more and more detailed every time. Belive me, they'd love to be able to do that in video games, we're just not there yet. GT and Forza are working around the clock to make it happen though.
- BigE89, on 07/07/2008, -1/+4150 diggs and the server is down :(
- InfiniteNothing, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2If car makers can use CG in ads I wonder if we'll see CG burgers next.
- Uoila, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2I don't doubt that these could be real. CG is pretty amazing these days, but there is no way to tell.
- richardle, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2What considers these CG? I don't see anything CG about these at all. All these cars are real and all you need to make them look "CG" is knowing how to manipulate light. These are works of great photographers. Take for example that Audi A8. I have no clue how that could look CG. The only CG thing about it would be getting rid of the rig that was attached to the car. The photo was simply taken using a rig attached to the car and then later cloned out using any editing program. As for no person behind the wheel, you don't need to be moving the car fast for it to look fast. Just having someone push the car in neutral at about 2 miles per hour for a few feet would get the effect especially with a stable rig and long shutter speed. No offense, but I feel you guys are ignorant for calling all this stuff CG. These are real cars and it's purely light manipulation to get them to look this way. It's awesome work by great artist, but nothing near CG, that's for sure.
- skalover, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2the first two I can really tell, but that corvette looks great, seeing as though I have the same one in my garage out back.
- Llanowar, on 07/07/2008, -2/+4I don't really think cars (with the rare exception) are really all that great CG to look at.
Sure, I can't do it. But still, compare them to the landscape CG article of yesterday and they fail in comparison.
When it comes to CG I think cars belong to the easier things. - thebestmofo, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2Where's Lightning McQueen?
- lougoose, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2*****
- Vindicoth, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1CG models of things are generally not done with just one tool, or photoshop at all. They generally use things like 3DSMax, Maya, or open source projects like Blender.
First you have to create the 3D model, then they create textures, lighting, shaders, all sorts of things to make it look more realistic. Once all thats done they have to spend a large amount of time rendering those pictures in high detail. If they wanted to they could even animate it and make a short clip, but animating is a whole other skill to master. - mentor972, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1"That doesn't even make sense."
- zaptoman, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Lambo wins. Hands down.
- Virgule, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1no, they take photos of CG stuffs.
/smug - cryonix, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Thank you, someone who understands that an object that was originally designed on a computer recreated in 3d (also on a computer), isn't really that hard.
- cave, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Impressive model, but the reflections are much too harsh.
- warsongs7, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1I OBJECT!!!!!!!!!! The most awesome is the 350Z.
- wadester2489, on 07/07/2008, -1/+2Correction. The Vette is terrible.
- hippykiller, on 07/07/2008, -1/+2Wait... So you are telling me that 95% of the cars I see on the drive into work are not even real.. WOW this changes everything.
- GreatOne08, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Sweeeeeet!
- hippykiller, on 07/07/2008, -1/+2I dugg you up for admitting your mistake.
- morninglorii, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Umm...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the definition of computer-generated (with regards to graphics) is that the image/images were entirely generated by a computer, rather than an altered photo of an object that exists in real life. No matter how photo-realistic something looks, if it's generated by a computer, it's CG.
If you're suggesting that the person who posted these on cg-files.com is lying, that's another matter. But until you can prove otherwise, the "they look too realistic" argument is really just a credit to the artists. -
Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 