Investigative Study 1

Week 1 – 

Why do some filmmakers say no CGI?:

I reckon some filmmakers say no CGI because it could be for the audience to feel more of a practical effects

but saying no CGI doesn’t have to take away from the art form it usually just highlights a stylistic choice. But if its  framed as better than CGI, its risks dismissing the creativity and skill of visual effects artists, since CGI is own valid art form.

but as del toro said I agree with him people will have great resources and not execute using them in the film right but with longer experience you will learn how to use them better.

 

COMPOSITING

  • Core Concepts

    • Layering

    • Masks / Mattes

    • Alpha Channels

    • Keying (Green/Blue Screen)

    • Rotoscoping

  • Techniques

    • 2D / 3D Integration

    • Tracking (Camera / Object)

    • Depth Compositing (Z-Depth passes)

    • Multi-pass Rendering

    • Projection Mapping

  • Tools & Software

    • Nuke

    • After Effects

    • Fusion

    • Flame

    • Natron

  • Workflow

    • Plate Preparation (clean-up, stabilization)

    • Keying & Roto

    • CG Integration

    • Color Matching

    • Final Delivery

  • Creative Uses

    • Invisible VFX (wire removal, set extensions)

    • Stylization (graphic overlays, surreal effects)

    • Seamless World-Building (CG + live action blend)

  • Challenges

    • Believability (avoiding “floaty” composites)

    • Lighting / Shadow Mismatch

    • Grain / Noise Matching

    • Color Space Consistency

 

 

 

deepfake is a Ai or manipulated digital software, such as a video, image, or audio recording, that appears convincingly real but conveys a person saying or doing something they never actually.

How has digital colour grading changed the way filmmakers shape mood and tone, and does it make films feel more immersive or less authentic?

Key Ideas –

Audience experience – for emotion story telling

creative impact – mood and tone shaped by colour grading

believability shaped by compositing

case studies –

Mad max fury road: 

looking at this frame from mad max it looks dominated by warm oranges, yellow, and rusty browns create a feeling to the audience of heat, dryness, and intensity.

the sky is tilting more to the orange side which I think suggest the removal of cool and calming tones.

watching the trailer showed me there was very little blue and green being used implying the world just feels more hostile and stripped of life and comfort.

so for the mood and tone i think they were successful at giving of urgency, desperation, and violence.

another idea could just be to build a simple composite and apply different grading styles and study how it changes the tone from there just reflect which felt most authentic.

Modelling:

JUST A IDEA OF QUESTIONS?

Do photorealistic digital human make films more immersive or less believable?

How has the development of real time 3D modelling tools impacted the speed and efficiency of VFX production?

How has 3D modelling transitioned from pre rendered film VFX to real-time applications in games and virtual production

Do photorealistic digital human make films more immersive or less believable? 

Intro – technology now allows filmmakers to create digital humans that look almost real using 3d modelling, motion capture and compositing. These characters can make films feel more immersive, but sometimes they feel unnatural or creepy, which can distract audiences. This research will look how photo realistic digital affects how viewers experience a film.

Things to research – 

how digital humans are made using modern technology

explore how artistic choices affect how believable or immersive these characters feel

digital copies of actors

see how audiences respond to photo realistic digital humans in films

study films like avatar, Irishman, Gemini man, and final fantasy what has fully CGI humans early attempt of photorealism.

WEEK 2- Developing research area by filling in a template 

 

My final question : Do Photorealistic digital humans still evoke the uncanny valley, or has it diminished within this modern age?

Week 3- linking to week 2 template review ^

Week 4 –

uncanny.pptx presentation

WEEK 6 –

Annotated Bibliography – Tinwell, A. (2015), The Uncanny Valley in Games and Animation

Tinwell’s book looks at why some digital characters feel weird or “off,” even when they’re meant to look realistic. She talks a lot about facial expressions, eye movement, and emotional timing, arguing that even tiny mistakes can make a character feel unsettling. This connects really well to my research because I’m also looking at how modern audiences react to photorealistic digital humans in films. Tinwell basically gives me the theory behind why people might still feel uncomfortable, even with today’s advanced CGI. The source feels reliable Tinwell is well known in this field, and the book is published by an academic press, so it’s not just someone’s opinion online. This book will definitely help shape how I analyse scenes and explain why certain digital performances (like in Gemini Man) don’t fully land emotionally. It gives me a solid framework to compare older uncanny reactions with modern ones.

WEEK 7 –

Methodology

To answer the question “Do photorealistic digital humans still evoke the uncanny valley, or has it diminished within this modern age?”, my overall methodology combines qualitative analysis with audience focused research. Because the uncanny valley is essentially about emotional perception and viewer reaction, a methodology based on interpretation, pattern finding, and audience insight makes the most sense. This approach also aligns with the core theories I’m drawing from, mainly Masahiro Mori’s original uncanny valley concept and Tinwell’s work on emotional realism in CGI performance.

Methods and Justification

Film Analysis:
I will closely analyse key scenes from films that feature photorealistic digital humans, including The Polar Express (2004), Tron: Legacy (2010), Rogue One (2016), Gemini Man (2019), and Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (2023). These films span nearly two decades, which helps show whether the uncanny valley has changed over time. I’m focusing especially on emotional close-ups and performance-heavy moments, because these are the scenes where audiences typically notice something “off.” This method is appropriate because previous research (like Tinwell, 2015) highlights facial expression realism as a major trigger for uncanny reactions.

Audience Response Review:
Instead of conducting my own large-scale survey, I’ll analyse existing audience and critic responses—things like reviews, commentary, and discussions. My goal is to look for recurring descriptions of discomfort, detachment, or emotional disconnect. Since the uncanny valley is a subjective experience, understanding public opinion is essential. This also ties directly into Mori’s theory, which is grounded in human emotional reaction.

Media Theory Application:
After gathering film evidence and audience patterns, I’ll interpret them through uncanny valley theory and contemporary research on digital humans. This theoretical framing helps me connect practice (films) with psychology (audience response).

 

Key aspects – 

Key Method in My Research

The main method I’m focusing on is a theory-led look at how audiences react to digital humans. Since my question is about whether the uncanny valley still affects people today, it makes sense to compare what the theory says with how real viewers respond. The uncanny valley is all about emotional reactions, so paying attention to what people actually feel is the most direct way to study it.

Why This Fits My Topic

Mori’s uncanny valley theory and Tinwell’s research both point to one big idea: the closer a CGI human gets to being “real,” the easier it is for small mistakes especially in the face and eyes to creep people out. By looking at reviews and comments about films like Gemini Man or Rogue One, I can check whether audiences still use words like “weird,” “off,” or “creepy,” or if modern CGI has finally gotten past that.

There’s also a clear gap here. CGI has gotten way better, but people still complain about digital humans feeling emotionless. My project basically tries to understand why that is.

Practical Plan

  • Practical Plan (Research-Focused)

    What I’ll Do:

    • Conduct a close analysis of selected films featuring digital humans, focusing specifically on scenes where emotional expression is most prominent.

    • Collect a sample of audience responses from reliable sources such as critic reviews, published interviews, academic commentary, and structured online discussions.

    • Organise these responses into clear categories (e.g., realism, emotional disconnect, uncanny feeling, successful believability).

    • Compare these categories across films released in different years to track whether audience discomfort has decreased as technology has improved.

How I’ll Judge the Results:
I’ll look for patterns. If lots of people still feel uneasy, the uncanny valley is still here. If not, maybe it’s finally fading.

Mini Timeline

Week Task
1 Collect theory + choose films
2 Rewatch films and pick scenes
3 Gather audience reactions
4 Sort reactions into themes
5 Compare older vs newer films
6 Write up what I found