Is CGI Cheaper Than Practical Effects? A Comprehensive Guide

The cost comparison between CGI (Computer-Generated Imagery) and practical effects can vary significantly based on several factors, including the specific project, the complexity of the effects, and the resources available. This article explores various cost factors and provides practical examples to help filmmakers make informed decisions.

Key Factors Influencing Cost Comparison

Several key factors can influence the cost of using either CGI or practical effects in film production.

Complexity of Effects

CGI: For highly complex scenes such as large crowds, fantastical environments, or intricate particle effects, CGI can be more cost-effective. This is because CGI offers greater flexibility and can be less labor-intensive than building and animating practical effects. Skilled artists and advanced technology can facilitate the creation of such scenes with fewer resources.

Practical Effects: Creating detailed practical effects, especially for large-scale effects or animatronics, can involve significant costs for materials, labor, and time. Every piece of equipment or prop must be meticulously crafted and assembled, which can be time-consuming and expensive.

Production Scale

CGI: In blockbuster films with large budgets, studios can afford to invest in advanced technology and skilled artists. This can lower per-effect costs, as they can create multiple effects with the same resources.

Practical Effects: Smaller productions or films that prioritize a realistic, tactile aesthetic may find practical effects more economical. These setups require fewer resources and can provide a more authentic look.

Post-Production

CGI: Extensive post-production work is required for CGI, including rendering times and the need for skilled technicians. This can increase costs but also allows for further refinement of effects.

Practical Effects: While practical effects may require less post-production, they still incur costs for editing and integration with live-action footage.

Longevity and Reusability

CGI: Once created, CGI assets can be reused in multiple projects, reducing costs over time. This makes CGI a valuable investment for long-term projects.

Practical Effects: These effects often need to be rebuilt or maintained for different projects, which can add to long-term costs.

Practical Example

For instance, if you needed a superhero's costume in your action movie, it would be way cheaper to make them the right costume to begin with rather than go through the entire movie and CGI different clothes on them. On the other hand, if you required a fly-over establishing shot of a stadium full of tens of thousands of people with a massive fireworks display, a CGI creation or composite would likely be more cost-effective than staging an event with tens of thousands of extras.

Similarly, blowing up a car might be cheaper to do as CGI or as a practical effect depending on the specifics. Factors such as the car's movements, people's interactions, the background, and the camera's movement all play a crucial role in determining the most efficient method.

Smarter VFX professionals spend a lot of time figuring out the most efficient and cost-effective way to achieve the desired effects. For example, in the first film I ever worked on, we needed a scene with a big army, period guns, and costumes, including horses, all riding across a desert. Using CGI modeling would have been far too expensive for our budget.

Instead, we chose to hire a small group of actors and a few horses, then shoot multiple 'plate' shots of them in different costumes and horses in various sections of the desert. We then used CGI to stitch everything together seamlessly, effectively transforming a couple of days of shooting into a single, cost-effective shot that would have been much more expensive to do all at once.

No film has the budget to do everything they want to, regardless of the level. Therefore, a lot of the craft of filmmaking involves finding ways to maximize the resources available while working around limitations.

Conclusion

In general, CGI is often seen as cheaper for large-scale or complex effects, especially in high-budget productions. For smaller projects or when a certain aesthetic is desired, practical effects might be more cost-effective. Ultimately, the choice between CGI and practical effects depends on the specific needs and goals of the production.