STAR WARS: EP V "REVISITED EDITION"ADYWAN - 12GB 1080p MP4 VERSION AVAILABLE NOW — Page 628

vaderios said:

Snow Speeders's Wing flaps.

Which reminds me..I really need to give that chick I met the other night a call

adywan said:

ImperialFighter said:

Can't wait to see what Adywan has decided to do with his whole Vane sequence eventually....

well originally it was going to be done in a similar way to Darth Editous' brilliant concept (BmB, how the hell can you say that it wasn't done well, especially how good that shot looks and i doubt thats even his finished version), but ever since DE showed everyone how he had done it i really needed to go down a different route or it will just look like i was copying his idea. I'm heading for a large model of the shaft and vane but will be a longer zoom in shot blending in the matte shot and the shot where luke walks towards the entrance.

Looking at the matte shot it really does make the vane look really thin, but when we see it from underneath we can see that it is a lot fatter than we originally thought. The other thing to fix in those scenes is the position of the window. It keeps changing its position and is way to low down after the first matte zoom shot

If you didn't use something just because someone else did it, you'll be doing this edit for a looooong time. ;-)

But seriously, unless you are redesigning the vane from scratch, I'm sure DE won't be offending if you use his idea.

BmB said:

Huh? What else would it be? A million tonnes of white paint someone spilled? :P

Jokes aside, it's visible in every single shot of the background. There's always that greyed out haze fading the highlights and brightening the blacks. Fog is one of the better tools for giving depth to an image like that. That's another problem I have with the shot in the final trailer btw, the haze has been removed and the background now appears almost too sharp. Which I think removes some of the sense of scale.

As for greebles, I think there's plenty of the lines in the background that look like they could be rather large indentations. Not to mention the red exhaust shafts like the one luke falls into. And the move isn't particularly small either. Considering the scale of the thing, even a relatively small motion like the one you showed is a rather large distance covered fairly quickly.

I'm sorry but you clearly do not know what you are talking about. You keep mentioning fog which is a cg tool when they clearly would never have used a technique like that in 1980 because it wasn't even around then. The lighter areas we see on the matte paintings is supposed to be nothing more than light bleed. That is all it is meant to represent. There is no haze, as you put it, added into any of the shots and i clearly see no "fog" in any of the shots with Mark Hamill.  The shot in the trailer has not been sharpened in any way. All that was removed was the light reflections on the set background which was a few feet away from the actors which lit up during every flash when it was supposed to be hundreds of feet away and the light would not have affected the background

And then you are saying how DE's video test looks all wrong because the red exhaust shafts that Luke goes into are large indentations and there is no parallax on the movement when zooming in. Well you have much better eyes than me then because you are seeing details which clearly are not there, or didn't you notice that they failed to add the exhaust shafts on the vane matte painting?

BmB said:

Then why add the 3D effect at all? It's not like there's anything wrong with zooming in.

That was the clincher for me. When you zoom in on a flat image it remains flat and nothing moves. But when you zoom in on an object in 3D space, like in reality, there is clear spacial movement of said objects. As you zoom closer objects become more affected by the zoom while objects further way will be less affected by the zoom. Thats a pretty basic rule in 3D space and something that DE's clip clearly demonstrates.  And for you to say that there is nothing wrong with the zooming in on the original flat matte painting makes it look like you don't know this very basic rule.

There is a difference between Zooming and Camera movement.

camera movements either is on rails or just moving to a direction creates lens distortion as it moves.

It helps to pop up some detail and forms.

Zooming can create a good focal change and focus as well

How all this started?

-Angel

BmB said:

Where?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-D4qXG8locM

I think you are mistaking zooming for dollying no?

 

Also no, I do believe fog and haze has been around longer than the Earth, and has been a regular painting technique for many hundreds of years to add depth, particularly to large sceneries and such. I think the haze is clearly visible as a luminous grey colour over the background here:

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/dvd/ep5/duel4.jpg

And in the same shot, I thought the exhaust vents were those red things also visible, and there's a whole ring of them under the vane in the big overview matte. I thought maybe this ring was what Luke fell into. Or maybe the ones he falls in aren't even visible there.

don't try to turn it around to make it look like i don't know what im talking about. You were clearly talking about 3D fog which is a tool in CG and not some natural occurrence in everyday life. You were talking about fog at the bottom of the shaft matte painting, which it clearly isn't.

What you are seeing in the vader pic has nothing to do with added haze but down to the studio environment and studio lights

And you better check again about the exhaust vents. The red ring is not the exhaust vents but lights. have a look at other shots where you see the round vents in a cluster of 6 and you will find the ring of red lights visible in many, but they failed to add them to the  vane matte shot

Oh, and i do know the difference between zoom and dolly. I was using the term zoom because that was what you were were using. And even in zoom there is 3D spacial movement and focal change

Nuff said really...

ImperialFighter said:

You reminded me of something else too vaderios.  :)  (no, not Dagobah, yet....)

Thanks :D

Cant wait!

-Angel

fishmanlee said:

BmB said:

You guys are worse than George you know that?

 i think you forgot what is being edited
the revisited edits are to FIX the SE not the OUT
sure things from the SE are being replaced with things
from the originals but still this is not a OUT edit its a
SE edit

2nd!!!!

Jacen said:

I hate to confirm what BnB said about zooming, but it is correct that when you zoom in on a 3D image, the "closer" elements do not move spatially against the "further away" elements.  The reason is simple-- your position behind the camera has not changed.

However, if you are physically moving towards the 3D image, the spatial elements do indeed change, because there is no actual zoom taking place.

That said, I totally disagree with BnB's attitude and position.  That "giant fin" clip looks dynamic and interesting, and I think that such a change would be a welcome addition.  Let's just not call it a "zoom" but simply a "moving camera shot."

Also, BnB's position about "fog" increasing as the distance down the shaft increases is equally incorrect.  Ady is right.  That is nothing more than light bleed, which is quite simply, a natural limitation to human vision.  The further away something is, the more difficult it becomes to pick out fine details.

And actually moving looks more realistic than zooming. I like the sense of moving forward.

HotRod said:

vaderios said:

Snow Speeders's Wing flaps.

Which reminds me..I really need to give that chick I met the other night a call

You old smoothie!