timdiggerm

How many people here are familiar with the term "circlejerk"?

I would love to see you try that. Partly because I don't think you'll be convinced that it won't work until you see it for yourself and partly because I'd love for you to be right, for it to be easy & cheap.

I think there's a reason the folks at openmoco.org talk about servos and stepper motors. It's just not simple.

ibleedspeed said:

hmm sounds like a cheap shot at somebody.... who could that be? i wonder..

Sorry man, I hope you're not too offended.

As for Motion Control and model work, it's more complex than it sounds at first.

building camera tracks to film model ships you could do that with some construx dude

It's not just having tracks. As I understand it, in order to composite multiple model shots together, you film each model separately (or maybe a group of them....maybe) and then stick the shots together. The camera has to either move in exactly the same way for each different model if the ships (assuming these are ships) are moving together or in very precisely different ways in order to achieve the illusion of motion. Having tracks is a good start, but then the motion along those tracks has to be the exact same constant speed each time, or the speed has to very in exactly the same way for each pass. You need precise, repeatable control.

Furthermore, it's not just a matter of a track - Optimally you want several axes of control so you can roll, tilt, etc your camera in any direction. Otherwise your ships are going to be very limited in how they move. And of course each of those axes needs to be precisely controlled.

we are talking about 1970's style film making here

We're talking about groundbreaking 70s special effects with a budget. Their camera had 7 axes of control, which is a lot more than 1 track.

duct tape a tripod to a beagle and teach him to walk in circles. instant 360 degree pan shots. and for tai fighter scenes teach him to roll over...

I don't even....

I couldn't find a better photo than that, unfortunately, but the model is completely still, on a rod, and the camera does all the motion. There's a track, and on the track is a platform, and on the platform looks to be a second, shorter track, and on that is a turntable, and on that is the counterweighted-arm system, and at the end of that are more axes of movement.

If this project doesn't get more attention, it's cancelled!

I'm kidding, I'm kidding!

Found this today - http://openmoco.org/ - Looks like just the sort of thing I wanted.

greenpenguino said:

But I can't stand the audience at the beginning. WHAT THE FUCK ARE THEY LAUGHING AT?? HE HASN'T DONE ANYTHING.

In their defense, the moment the show starts on tv/youtube is not the first moment the audience sees/interacts with Craig. I think there's usually comedian before him, to warm the audience up, so they're already in a silly mood, and then Craig comes out. He's already been talking to them, being funny, for a little bit before they turn on the cameras. Does that help make it make sense?

Admittedly, the shiny new Y-Wings with the original outer coverings is done correctly in The Clone Wars : http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/BTL-B_Y-wing_starfighter

TIL that we can address our thanks to Ady without even seeing his presence.

Ray, I definitely saw those criticisms coming, and I agree with them, to a certain extent. I think there's something to be said for the level of detail and complexity that CG allows, but perhaps sometimes it goes too far. It may just be a problem with what we're used to - We're so used to only certain kinds of shots being possible that anything too far beyond that seems terrible, in which case the children of the future (what a phrase!) will have no problem with it. I, however, suspect this is not the case.

I don't know if you're UK or USA or what, but here in Amurica, they introduced a camera rig to football (you know what kind I mean) that swings over the field on ropes, swooping, capturing some really great views of plays. At first, it was slightly disconcerting, because I had never seen such a thing before, but I quickly got used to it and now love when they use it, even though it does come close to mimicking the camera moves in video games. I suspect that there are two reasons

1. It's real footage of the real game - Okay, that was obvious.
2. Even though I hadn't ever seen a camera move quite like that before, it does move like a real physical object, albeit one suspended on ropes.

Perhaps the problem with the ROTS sequence isn't that the CG isn't realistic enough or that we're un-used to it, but that the camera isn't (which yes, is part of the CG process, but bear with me). I'm reminded of some part of a behind-the-scenes thing for Wall-E that I saw, where the good folks at Pixar talked about all the work they put into the camera system for that film, simulating different lenses, cameras, shutters, etc. If they didn't (I don't remember), I'd also lump in camera-movement into that. Even in films where the camera is apparently traveling through the vacuum of space, there should be some realism to its movements, some limits on what it can do.

On the other hand, I had no problem with rushing forward and plunging over the edge of the abyss with Gandalf and the Balrog and thought it was fantastic, which perhaps goes to show that even impossible shots have their place - in moderation. The ROTS battle just goes on and on and on.

Thus, I suggest that the ROTS battle needs less dynamic shots and maybe even some model-shot-replacements, while the ROTJ battle would benefit from more shots of gunners, a heck of a lot more capital-ship action, even some shots in the style of the ROTS battle... but not too many.

For the record: I would love a modern remake of X-Wing.

It's hard to deny that the battle between capital ships at the beginning of ROTS is superb, if superfluous to the plot. I'm not quite sure how one would go about making the ROTJ battle a bit more like this (ie time consuming & expensive to do it right), but that's really the direction I'd like to see the ROTJ battle go.

WhatsMyName said:

Bingowings said:

His verdict after seeing all three was he liked Jedi the most and Empire the least (because the Falcon kept breaking down).

 

i thought the same thing when i was a kid

On a serious note, I think this is probably something worth considering. Do faneditors remake the films in such a way that kids won't like them as much?

We could talk about that sometime, I guess.

kenkraly2007 said:

Harmy said:

But it wouldn't bother you if it didn't happen?

No it whould'nt.

Then how is it a must?

Darth Bizarro said:

I also find it interesting that the words "Star Wars" don't actually appear anywhere on the cover of the original edition of the books but does mention the "Adventures of Luke Skywalker."  I think you mentioned that in Secret History as I recall though.  

Well that makes sense. Until ESB came out, no one knew that the whole series was titled "Star Wars". "Star Wars" was a movie that came out in 1977, and "Splinter of the Mind's Eye" was its book-sequel.

Disclaimer: Haven't read Secret History

The X-Wing Series was put down for being too exceptional.

I wish there was a way to make Anakin crash into Quadrinaros, causing the destruction of the pod.

To be honest, that red R2 is pretty distracting. I understand that it fixes a continuity issue, but it really draws the eye and attention towards it, because it's such a familiar character and yet.... not. It's very distracting.

No, it's sporting lack-of-texture in order to show off only the model's form.

Just an anecdote:

I saw Toy Story 3 in 3D. A few weeks later, I saw Toy Story 3 in 2D. Obviously the movie had no problems with being in 3D, as they could easily render a second camera - no crappy upconversion. But there was nothing added to the movie by being in 3D either. It was a great film, but not even the descent into hell scene was particularly enhanced by the third dimension.

Adywan banned?

I'd love a myspleen invite, if there any left.

Excited to see this set!

I assume there's some reason why Vimeo isn't being considered? It has a great reputation with folks who seem like the sorts that would hate facebook's compression modifications and you don't have to join a facebook group to see the content.

I thought CG-Yoda in TPM on BR was a well accepted fact.

I watched it again (again) and I'd to recant my earlier statement - It's not too distracting.

(Everyone still needs more Ronto-butt, of course)

Jeyl said:

Great job so far Adywan. I really liked what you did with the coloring on Han's rescue of Luke. Very appropriate. If there's one thing that stood out for me that I would like to address, it's this shot.

This added rebel trooper is just poking me in a bad way. I'm watching the shot of Han riding back into the rebel base when all of a sudden this big beige colored thing comes in and takes up the almost half of the screen than we instantly cut to the inside of the base. To me, it makes the cut from outside to inside feel a bit disjointed because the added trooper takes so much of my attention away from Han.

I agree - This scene needs more Ronto-butt.

No but seriously, that was distracting.

An AT-AT? Wow. Ady, I don't want to discourage (not that it would mater)... but I sure hope you know what you're doing. I await December a little nervously.

I mean, there are drafts of ESB where Luke's Father appears as a ghost, Obi-wan style... And Vader was definitely still alive at this point. Need I say more?