 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Most people assume the terms “low-budget” and “CGI” are mutually-exclusive. But computer graphics technology has come a long way since its inception, and it will continue to accelerate in the future. A lone individual with a desktop computer and off-the-shelf software can now produce what used to require mainframe computers and a team of engineers only a decade ago. Although high-quality, photo-realistic animation can still be expensive to produce, an acceptable level of realism can be achieved for substantially less money.
The following graph illustrates how the relationship between time and money affects the final CGI quality.
As you can see, the investment of time and money increases exponentially when attempting to achieve unobtainable perfection. Although investing more time results in higher-quality imagery, at some point this additional effort results in diminished returns. On the other hand, striking the right balance between time and quality can produce an acceptable product for a fraction of the cost of a big animation studios. And as computer technology continues to evolve, the visual quality level will automatically rise with little to no additional effort.
Traditional Hollywood movies, on the other hand, require an army of personnel as well as vast amounts of money and other resources. As movie budgets have ballooned over the years, studio heads and producers have become increasingly-reluctant to take risks that might jeopardize a return on their investment. As a result, they're more likely to play it safe and stick with those things that have worked in the past. This is why movies are becoming increasingly bland and formulaic, and audiences are getting gypped with an endless deluge of sequels, remakes and outright copies of other studio's box office hits. Because of this, the public is becoming more and more reluctant to part with their hard-earned money as they seek out a new source of fresh, original entertainment.
 |
 |