The Scarcity of Practical Effects is an Unacceptable Hindrance to Production Design Realism

The over-reliance on CGI for environment building is fundamentally undermining the realism and tactile authenticity of modern production design. While CGI offers undeniable flexibility and broad strokes, it almost always falls short in conveying the nuanced textures, light interactions, and physical presence that practical sets, even partial ones, effortlessly achieve. I've composed for countless scenes where a practically built ruin or a tangible period-specific room immediately grounds the performances and my score in a way that CGI, no matter how detailed, struggles to replicate; the actors move differently, the light catches surfaces in an organic way, and it simply feels more real to everyone involved. We're sacrificing a tangible, immersive experience for the sake of often questionable efficiency or ambitious scale.

Of course, completely avoiding CGI is impractical for many projects, and it excels in creating elements that are genuinely impossible to build practically, like fantastical creatures or vast landscapes. However, the prevailing trend seems to be to CGI even simple background details or set extensions that could easily be constructed with practical elements, often resulting in a visually sterile and weightless environment. Are we truly gaining more artistic freedom by abandoning the sensory richness that practical production design inherently provides, or are we simply becoming creatively complacent?