| the-pi-guy said: The only argument I can see it not count as acting - is if the motion capture is just capturing basic motions - like someone who's walking. Something like that, I could see an argument that they're not acting. Small alterations to a performance though - they're still acting. Even in film, plenty of actors get altered with CGI. |
Extras / background actors are considered actors as well in movies. Just standing around or walking past a scene. It's still different from filming a reality show with people doing they're everyday stuff in the background.
But yeah, if mo-capping a horse to get those walking movements right, is the horse acting? (I guess not, although show horses can act, or is it the human training / controlling the horse lol)
Is the animator looking at a horse and coding the movements for RDR2 an actor? (like a puppeteer or stop motion artist)
Anyway mo-cap is just a different from of camera and post processing doesn't change the nature of what happens in front of the camera.
And isn't life acting anyway, as according to the phrase "people act differently in different situations" :)
