This can happen accidentally as well. For example, the default Windows 10 wallpaper was created using a physical model, an array of projectors, and a smoke machine. Alas, the end result turned out to be indistinguishable from CG. [1]
I think for building anything (art, code, furniture) the tools help you find the result. Building it a second time is much easier and requires a lot less sophistication.
Yes, I don't know what to say. I just want to emphasize what you say, because it's apparently an alien concept to many people. Tools and process inform the art. How could it not be that way, really?
"Cool C64 demo you have there buddy, I could do that in Unity in an afternoon". Yes, but would you? (Edit: and even if you did, it would be a copy of a unique style born out of specific circumstances.)
That's nice and all, but isn't that a huge waste of time/money/resources? What is the advantage of doing it this way over just creating a wallpaper digitally?
With products like Windows, there's a chance that the desktop background, the startup chime and suchlike will end up as iconic as the Coca-Cola logo.
The designers would have told the CEO that this is going to be seen by 100x more people than a Superbowl ad spot, and 100x as many times per person too. So getting the perfect image/sound made for the cost of a single superbowl ad is a great deal.
Of course, whether they've succeeded at producing the perfect image is another matter.
The Windows 95 startup chime was composed by Brian Eno, so MS are used to paying for this stuff.
This kind of maximal efficiency attitude is precisely why programs aren't "fun" anymore. Oftentimes, taking the scenic route instead of the highway is how you awe and inspire people; I know I was.
If anyone reading this remembers the 90s and early 00s with Easter Eggs and other fun programs with character, y'all know what I'm talking about.
You clearly don't know what computing was like back when developers' passions were oozing out of pretty much everything they wrote. Even something as mundane as an icon left an impression.
These kinds of "Wait... Seriously? Wow!" stories play a big role in inspiring the next generation to come and do the work of the future. We're seeing far less of them now in computing, and everyone wonders why the younger generations aren't as inspired about technology anymore.
When everything is a brutal race to the bottom to fleece you for every damn bit you're worth, damn right everyone's going to find greener pastures to be inspired by.
You went of on some tangent about the 'old days of passionate software developers' which seems like something that just happened to be on your mind, not something with any connection here.
When you say 'we' should splurge you really mean someone else.
Also this wasn't a splurge, this probably took less time to make than doing it in CG and people who can do the photography probably don't know how to do it in CG in the first place.
In this case specifically it deals with light going through a pattern and into mist, which is going to have a lot light scattering inside an uneven volume. This still takes a lot of time to render and will be more difficult to match to a photograph than other things.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewmXizBqjl0