I agree they have come a long way. But needing real actors to first make the emotion isn't coming very far at all. It's just good imitation at that point. Her movements were not as fluid as one would expect from a real person and her eyes didn't behave naturally.
Why on earth would you use a real actor, to make an animated version of them, look as much like them as possible. What's the difference between that and actually filming the real actors? Am I lost here? Because this makes no sense to me.
HP's Jon Rubenstein told us that his company wanted to veer in a new direction, and veer it surely did -- the HP Veer 4G will arguably be the smallest fully-functional smartphone on the market when it goes on sale May 15th.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I agree they have come a long way. But needing real actors to first make the emotion isn't coming very far at all. It's just good imitation at that point. Her movements were not as fluid as one would expect from a real person and her eyes didn't behave naturally.
THE ENTIRE CONCEPT IS STUPID ALL TOGETHER!
Why on earth would you use a real actor, to make an animated version of them, look as much like them as possible. What's the difference between that and actually filming the real actors? Am I lost here? Because this makes no sense to me.