logo Sign In

STAR WARS: EP V "REVISITED EDITION"ADYWAN - 12GB 1080p MP4 VERSION AVAILABLE NOW — Page 198

Author
Time
 (Edited)

http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/3044/hoth0101qa6.jpg

 

 

How about cropping out the offending, inaccurate parts un the AT-AT? That would be a lot easier. Ady, you did well with zoomed in shots on ANH revisited, I recall in the rebel Yavin briefing room during the death star attack you cropped it closer with no noticable graininess. The image above is a bit blurry, but I am sure you can make that scene look good in as you did with those other scenes in ANH-R.

 

Also, to make another quick comment on that scene, I think it needs to be darkened a bit as it looks too well lit to be the underbelly of the AT-AT, if they is a way you can darken it some it would be great. Maybe let it get brighter for the seconds the saber is lit.

Author
Time
Sevb32 said:

http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/3044/hoth0101qa6.jpg

 

 

How about cropping out the offending, inaccurate parts un the AT-AT? That would be a lot easier. Ady, you did well with zoomed in shots on ANH revisited, I recall in the rebel Yavin briefing room during the death star attack you cropped it closer with no noticable graininess. The image above is a bit blurry, but I am sure you can make that scene look good in as you did with those other scenes in ANH-R.

 

Also, to make another quick comment on that scene, I think it needs to be darkened a bit as it looks too well lit to be the underbelly of the AT-AT, if they is a way you can darken it some it would be great.

That's an idea.  And since he's going from a 1080p source to ultimately a 480i final product, he has plenty of room to zoom.

Hey, that rhymes!

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress

Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress

Author
Time

It's been a while since I posted here, but I've been checking in occasionally to see how this project has been progressing, and, as always, it's very impressive! I just watched the most recent clip, and I love how Yoda actually looks like he's pronouncing the "w" in the words he's saying. And, of course, the color correction work you've done is incredible -- Revisited is worth watching just for that, not to mention all the other fantastic tweaks. I agree with what others have said about the Yoda clip still needing a bit of work to make it fully believable, but I do think what you've done so far is wonderful.

All the best, as always,

Sojourn

Author
Time

The Average person never will notice those "prop bloops, and wobblyniness(oops)" but mind you I used the words Average person lol. But it's great that blasted stick is being removed. 

And I hope that you did not forget about that flake of snow on Darth Vader's Shoulder.... 

The person your searching for simply does not exist

Author
Time

hey, sojourn, good to see you around here again.

I'm a bit worried about doing any more tweaking to Yoda because it could become overdone and smearing would become very noticeable through the warping technique used to animate his face.

Sevb32, i had thought about zooming in to eliminate the leg but i have always liked being able to see the leg. I'm going to try some different ways to fix the problem first.

ANH:REVISITED
ESB:REVISITED

DONATIONS TOWARDS MATERIALS FOR THE REVISITED SAGA

Author
Time

The shadow of the snowspeeder makes no sense either btw.
It's in front of the walker, yet its shadow is behind it. The tow cable's shadow is wrong as well. (it's more evident if you watch it in motion)

Not sure if you can fix it though, but you've surprised me before ^^

Author
Time
adywan said:

hey, sojourn, good to see you around here again.

I'm a bit worried about doing any more tweaking to Yoda because it could become overdone and smearing would become very noticeable through the warping technique used to animate his face.

 

Likewise. :-)

That makes sense, about Yoda; are you using the standard distortion tools in AE, or something like the Puppet Tool in CS3? I've done my share of warping and I know what you mean about not wanting to overdo it; it may just have been that I was looking for the movements in his face, and therefore overanalyzing what I was seeing, that made it look unnatural. You've always been great at using the distortion tools subtly, which makes the changes organic rather than obviously digitally manipulated.

Thanks for your response,

Sojourn

Author
Time
The Golden Idol said:

I'm not sure if it was mentioned or not, but when Yoda chews on Luke's food stick thing, I believe there's a crunching sound, but when Luke takes it back, it's whole. Maybe remove a small piece off the top?

 

Did this bother anyone else?

Author
Time
The Golden Idol said:
The Golden Idol said:

I'm not sure if it was mentioned or not, but when Yoda chews on Luke's food stick thing, I believe there's a crunching sound, but when Luke takes it back, it's whole. Maybe remove a small piece off the top?

 

Did this bother anyone else?

yeh, i mentioned a while ago that i would be trying to fix that

 

ANH:REVISITED
ESB:REVISITED

DONATIONS TOWARDS MATERIALS FOR THE REVISITED SAGA

Author
Time
 (Edited)
DarthBo said:

The shadow of the snowspeeder makes no sense either btw.
It's in front of the walker, yet its shadow is behind it. The tow cable's shadow is wrong as well. (it's more evident if you watch it in motion)

Not sure if you can fix it though, but you've surprised me before ^^

If the sunlight is coming from a 45% angle, the shadow would make sense.  Regardless, I would add the snowy feet to the subsequent AT-AT shots within this sequence.

In regards to the "Luke scratching the AT-AT's belly" scene, maybe you could take some of the 1080p AT-AT leg shots and mask them onto the leg gear on the lower left below Luke.  The 1080p shots should be more open to enlargement for such things (with maybe a dash of extra FX - details, shadows, etc - on the leg gears to seal the deal).



I take it this is the offending element?  If anything, it seems all it needs is the outer ring you see on the model leg (the ring above is flat and smooth, whereas below the inner ring is inset).  Also, going by the picture below, shouldn't there be another inner leg joint on the lower left in the pic above (of course, it would cover up Luke's lightsaber arm and the door, which is maybe why the shot is so off - there's a missing leg!)?



Never noticed the AT-ATs bowel problems, but it looks like it needs some serious proctology there (not that it matters, being that it just got blown apart).   Still, does the tube need to be connected to what looks like a rear door?

 

         

 “You people must realize that the public owns you for life, and when you’re dead, you’ll all be in commercials dancing with vacuum cleaners.”

– Homer Simpson

Author
Time
Monroville said:

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-047.jpg

 

I think this would be preferred for both binoc shots, though I would change the red numbers on the top and bottom middle sections to be more readable - maybe change the left and right sides to be more legible too (the right side graph is obviously the range of the objects in question).

         

 “You people must realize that the public owns you for life, and when you’re dead, you’ll all be in commercials dancing with vacuum cleaners.”

– Homer Simpson

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Monroville said:
DarthBo said:

The shadow of the snowspeeder makes no sense either btw.
It's in front of the walker, yet its shadow is behind it. 

If the sunlight is coming from a 45% angle, the shadow would make sense. 

Umm...no it woudn't. The shadow of the speeder should be near the bottom (of this particular frame), 'under' the shadow of the AT-AT...no matter what the angle of the sunlight is.

It could probably be fixed semi-easily.

 

Monroville said:

Monroville said:

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-047.jpg

 

I think this would be preferred for both binoc shots, though I would change the red numbers on the top and bottom middle sections to be more readable - maybe change the left and right sides to be more legible too...

 

I do, however, agree with this.

Star Wars Episode XXX: Erica Strikes Back

         Davnes007 LogoCanadian Flag

          If you want Nice, go to France

Author
Time
Davnes007 said:
Monroville said:
DarthBo said:

The shadow of the snowspeeder makes no sense either btw.
It's in front of the walker, yet its shadow is behind it. 

If the sunlight is coming from a 45% angle, the shadow would make sense. 

Umm...no it woudn't. The shadow of the speeder should be near the bottom (of this particular frame), 'under' the shadow of the AT-AT...no matter what the angle of the sunlight is.

It could probably be fixed semi-easily.

You're right: even at 45%, with the snowspeeder UNDER the AT-AT, the AT-ATs body shadow would cover overtop any shadow the snowspeeder would produce.  I say either extend the AT-AT's shadow onto the snow dune the SS shadow is on, or lower the SS shadow onto the ground with the AT-AT shadow (so it would disappear whenever the SS shadow connected with the AT-AT shadow).  The SS shadow would also be flatter due to the angle of the sunlight.

 

         

 “You people must realize that the public owns you for life, and when you’re dead, you’ll all be in commercials dancing with vacuum cleaners.”

– Homer Simpson

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Monroville said:
Davnes007 said:
Monroville said:
DarthBo said:

The shadow of the snowspeeder makes no sense either btw.
It's in front of the walker, yet its shadow is behind it. 

If the sunlight is coming from a 45% angle, the shadow would make sense. 

Umm...no it woudn't. The shadow of the speeder should be near the bottom (of this particular frame), 'under' the shadow of the AT-AT...no matter what the angle of the sunlight is.

It could probably be fixed semi-easily.

You're right: even at 45%, with the snowspeeder UNDER the AT-AT, the AT-ATs body shadow would cover overtop any shadow the snowspeeder would produce.  I say either extend the AT-AT's shadow onto the snow dune the SS shadow is on, or lower the SS shadow onto the ground with the AT-AT shadow (so it would disappear whenever the SS shadow connected with the AT-AT shadow).  The SS shadow would also be flatter due to the angle of the sunlight.

It would be easiest to change the shadow of the speeder, due to its size, and simple shape. I'm sure Ady can make the shadows 'dissappear' properly, when needed.

EDIT: Just rewatched that part, and I think the speeder's shadow can be removed completely without a problem. There are lots of places where shadows are absent, anyway...unless all that will be fixed ;)

Star Wars Episode XXX: Erica Strikes Back

         Davnes007 LogoCanadian Flag

          If you want Nice, go to France

Author
Time



Never noticed the AT-ATs bowel problems, but it looks like it needs some serious proctology there (not that it matters, being that it just got blown apart).   Still, does the tube need to be connected to what looks like a rear door?

 

 

Hey, that's the female walker...How else do you think they reproduce!!!

 

http://www.facebook.com/DirtyWookie

Author
Time

There does seem to be an alignment problem, with that tube in the rear according to these blueprints. However, if you look at master replicas At-AT you can see that the so called alignment problem is in fact how it was supposed to be. The Master Replicas version was built right off of the actual ILM model.

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." - Mark Twain.
"A myth is a religion in which no one any longer believes"...James Feibleman (1904-1987)
www . axia . ws/axia

Author
Time
AxiaEuxine said:

The Master Replicas version was built right off of the actual ILM model.

Man, I love that thing.  I wonder if its detailed enough for close up shots for ESBR...  Anyone here have one of the 1000?

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress

Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Monroville said




I take it this is the offending element?  If anything, it seems all it needs is the outer ring you see on the model leg (the ring above is flat and smooth, whereas below the inner ring is inset).  Also, going by the picture below, shouldn't there be another inner leg joint on the lower left in the pic above (of course, it would cover up Luke's lightsaber arm and the door, which is maybe why the shot is so off - there's a missing leg!)?



 

 

 Er...didn't I say most of that (twice!) on the previous page? ;) 

Adywan had originally stated a good while back that he couldn't do much with this, and hadn't really intended to.  The thing is, adding a 'raised ring' would be a very difficult thing to do, throughout the 'movement' of that 'prop's shots....  However, it seems that he is now going to do something here....which is great, as anything he does will be an improvement, I'm sure.

That was a nice bit of thinking there Sevb32, by the way.  I hadn't thought about the 'zoom-in' thing, but can't wait to see what Ady may achieve. 

Here's my favourite piece of early AT-AT art by Ralph McQuarrie -http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/8045/mcquarrie27tv1.jpg

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Okay, this is just a little couple of things, that again, I've only just realised, before I move on from the 'props' stuff altogether....

 

As regards this 'foot' -

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-007.jpg

I've just realised that apart from the 'wobble'....what also gives this shot such a 'mid-air', dangling-look to me, is the way it has been framed against the background it's been given....  It just seems that compared to all the other AT-AT-foot 'close-ups', there is no hint of the ground seen around it, and it could pass for being as high-up as a 'cable-car' or something, going by the way we just see the mountains that are behind it here!  Not seeing the bottom of the 'prop' foot has really ruined the effect of this shot I reckon...which could have worked better if we had, and if it had also been 'zoomed-in' on a little bit more, enough to still capture the part where the cable tow 'attached'....

Adywan, while I don't know if this is an option or not, or know yet if you happen to like the current 'prop' foot too much to lose it....can I throw this out there, that if you are definately keeping it, that the background be altered in some way to seem like it could be nearer the ground? 

Here's the kind of other backgrounds that we see in comparison to the 'prop' foot's one, whenever we see 'close-ups' of AT-AT 'feet', to show what I mean -  

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-020.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-021.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-022.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-023.jpg

The main effect we see in these shots above is an overall 'whiteness' and lack of background detail, and just a hint of 'ground' effect nearby.  Not the 'mountains set against sky' backdrop that the 'prop' was filmed against.  Unfortunately, none of these particular shots above seem quite long enough to use / or 'flip' into reverse, for use instead of the 'prop' shot, as they are too brief. 

This one below, on the other hand, is long enough, if manipulated.  I didn't previously suggest that the actual footage could be just re-used without 'flipping it into reverse, if you wanted the cable tow to seem as if it was hitting the REAR, LEFT foot in the foreground , on the same side as it does in the 'prop' shot.  With a little alteration, it wouldn't seem an obvious 'total re-use' of the shot, by the time we get to it again (with Luke in it) roughly 4 minutes later.  There has been lots of action / other AT-AT shots going on in-between times to make it pretty 'un-obvious' by then....

Although the same shot 'flipped' in reverse would probably just have any new 'rappelling' cable appear just after the foreground foot passes (matching the sound effect on the soundtrack of course), I think that the 'change of side view' of the REAR, LEFT foot that this would entail, from that previously seen, would work okay too, as I personally always like shot changes from differing sides in certain scenes.  And the fact is that there are intercut shots of the pilots between what comes before and after the 'prop' shot anyway - 

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-017.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-018.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-019.jpg

 

Or the 'flipped' shot as seen below -

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-024.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-025.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/doubleofive/IF-Hoth/Hoth-026.jpg

 

Okay, I'm done.  I can get onto some of the more 'fun' little AT-AT things now....  :)

 

Author
Time

I notice in that schematic dealy that AxiaEuxine posted that on the bottom right, near the top of the walker, it says Vehicle Bay. What would they carry? Speeder bikes? TIE fighters? I know this goes into EU territory, having never been shown in the movie, but what's supposed to be in there?

My crazy vinyl LP blog

My dumberer blog

My Retro blog

Author
Time
Ripplin said:

I notice in that schematic dealy that AxiaEuxine posted that on the bottom right, near the top of the walker, it says Vehicle Bay. What would they carry? Speeder bikes? TIE fighters? I know this goes into EU territory, having never been shown in the movie, but what's supposed to be in there?

Speeder bikes.

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress

Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress

Author
Time

I guess all this proves the ol' "ESB doesn't need much done to it." to be B.S. huh?

Author
Time
doubleofive said:

 

 It looks like the AT-AT has eyes that are looking up in its upper foot. LOL!