Computing desk
< August 25	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 27 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

August 26

Unable to enable Legacy Boot

If my Intel CPU is too new, is Legacy boot not supported? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I understand it is not related to the type of CPU used at all. You can use both BIOS/UEFI modes. Ruslik_Zero 18:39, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From a Google search it seems this will be dependent on your BIOS version and configuration and also perhaps also some other settings such as secure boot. I suggest you try to find a support forum for your specific brand of computer and ask there. RudolfRed (talk) 20:48, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many recent motherboards have poor/no BIOS boot support. 96.224.93.240 (talk) 23:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thegooduser, why do you want to enable legacy boot? Installing Windows 95? Elizium23 (talk) 02:10, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of reasons to use legacy boot. OP is probably using legacy boot and wants to swap out the mobo+CPU without reinstalling the OS. 93.142.100.19 (talk) 21:21, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why CGI fails to look real?

I see a lot of 3D movies. But all have something in common: the objects look too smooth. my question, is why CGI tends to look unreal? Is it because smoothness? --Exx8 (talk) 16:51, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's lots of reasons. For CGI people, some of the issues are noted at Uncanny valley. --Jayron 32 17:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's a style of computer animations that do not seek realism, sometimes called non-photorealistic or toon-like. It's possible that you find cgi realistic but you only notice it when it fails, to cite the most modern and expensive case of cgi, in Game of Thrones dragons look very real, so do other effects like smoke and terrain that you might have considered to be computer generated. --TZubiri (talk) 04:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that one looks just like the dragon that keeps coming to my birdfeeder every day. Very real. --Jayron 32 10:50, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is discussed in this video. It is also noticed on the talk page of CGI. It may have been the filmmaker's choice to prefer a slick look over a gritty one (The CGI of the 2009 film Avatar was much slicker than that of the 1999 The Matrix), but there is also the issue that adding realistic grittiness is not at all easy. --Lambiam 11:27, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding realistic gritiness is more work and also adds a lot of complexity. Avoiding repeating texture patterns, adding 3D noise (rough surfaces) etc. all take more computing power. Not that long ago the strongest computers simply couldn't render a picture with realistic complexity in any kind of realistic timeframe, and today it can too be passed up due to costs or deadlines.

Also as others have said, (some people believe) the audience already expects a visible level of unreality, hence slick CGI and new Fast & Furious cars handling like feathers in the wind. Over the last decade CGI has become a sort of brand unto itself, with filmmakers bragging about it instead of hoping it'll be imperceptible as special effects were supposed to previously. 78.1.146.196 (talk) 19:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]