Seriously!

I'm serious, it drives me fricking nuts when documentaries about space exploration use computer-generated graphics where actual footage could be used.

The worst example I've ever seen was in a NASA-funded film about the New Horizons spacecraft. Because Pluto is a fairly distant target and the energy demands are pretty high, they used an Atlas V to launch the thing, instead of the more common but smaller Delta IV (though in the real glory days, I imagine it would have been a Titan IV). So they show the booster sitting there on the strangely sterile-looking "clean pad", and then it launches, and instead of using any of the millions of feet of videotape that were doubtless captured during the launch, they switched immediately to really bad CGI that appeared to show the RD-180 engine puking out a series of stationary cotton balls.

There was better footage of V-2s during World War Two, for crying out loud, and that was what, sixty years ago?? It's insulting the way these digi-morons think that CG is automatically better than actual footage. "That's so analog," they seem to be saying. Yeah, well, your digital crap is so stupid.