Trivet
Junior Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by Trivet on Feb 2, 2005 16:13:06 GMT
The test footage of the Fighting Machine, released last week was as stunning as it was unexpected. The walking motion is spot on and the body shape and surface rendering perfect, but now that the wow factor has worn off it's the detailing and construction of the model I have issue with.
As the footage was released, I presume to gain feedback and while most posts have been positive and accepting I'd like to cast a more critical eye.
To start with, the back of the machine has to much chunky panelling, especially on the tail. The spine is raised to high above the brow of the hood and the detailed gap between them exists only on the old Comet miniatures model and should not be there.
The eyes appear slightly large, mainly due to the oversize leg sockets. The main reference there seems to have been the Dead London painting, but they need to be rounder with darker shaded lenses between them top and bottom, to stop them appearing squashed. Also the compound lenses are to large and reduce the scale of the machine, they should really only be visible close up. The pivot holes in the body are unnecessarily large, the pivot points can be moved out easily and the holes made smaller without affecting the model's range of movement.
My main gripe is the legs, which are composed of two tapered rods not three and as such appear far to two thin especially the rear leg and have no continuity of design with the three edged shin and foot. The intersections and brackets should be rounded and look precision made. The model has sharp clumsy looking boxed intersections with ugly, recessed bolted/riveted panels, which like the panelling on the back and tail ruin the clean lines of the original design.
Finally, the Heat-ray housing needs to be wider at the front and deeper at the back and the mouth square also the fronts of the side pods need re-shaping.
All the above changes I feel are totally unnecessary deviations from the album art, seemingly done at the whim of a modeller unfamiliar with the design. Changes should only be made for valid artistic and practical reasons and not oversights.
If it is an early test model to experiment with animating the machine, it certainly does it's job, but the finished model coul be so much better.
|
|
|
Post by the Donal on Feb 2, 2005 17:46:04 GMT
I think some of your criticism is a little harsh, but I agree with a few comments. My main obsevation is that the eyes are too large and flat- doesn't give the same air of menace as the original paintings though I agree with you about the scale of the compound divisions. My other big crit is that the style of the feet is too much of a departure from the rest of the design, too modern. I don't think that the design is far wrong here- it just needs tweaking and the detailing on them needs to fit a bit better with the body. I'm very happy with the body shape overall and the tail gives a birdlike impression- quite similar to Michael Trim's blueprints but more elegant and elaborate, but I would like the housing for the heat ray etc to be a little wider. Maybe the detail of the grime on the body needs to be a little greater to emphasize the impression of scale, but this also needs to be tested against a frame of reference to give the most accurate impression of how big it is. The rivets don't bother me on the leg intersections as it gives it more of a Victorian 'Steam Age' feel. 3 tubes in each extension would be nice though. All in all, if not much is changed, I still really love this render and can't wait to see it in action with the cable 'Picking up men and bashing them against trees' etc! I think that the walking motion is fantastic. I hope we dont' all start picking these first images to bits before we see more though- again it can be very easy to overanalyse things over a long timespan and we have 2 yearas to o yet!
|
|
CraigC
Junior Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by CraigC on Feb 2, 2005 21:52:24 GMT
"All in all, if not much is changed, I still really love this render and can't wait to see it in action with the cable 'Picking up men and bashing them against trees' etc! I think that the walking motion is fantastic. I hope we dont' all start picking these first images to bits before we see more though- again it can be very easy to overanalyse things over a long timespan and we have 2 years to go yet! " Here here... As far as I remember, these are test pieces, which one would assume are part of a..... er...... "test" thingymajig type thing. Don't shoot them down at the first furlong by picking holes in them... I been waiting to see something like this for longer than I care to admit! You know, I just sit there and look at it and ask myself "where do you start?" "How does someone take a series of paintings by 4 different painters with different scales and perspectives and make it in 3D CGI? And at the same time add a little flair and update it a little whilst retaining a continuity with the original". I'd be lost from the get go... Maybe Trivet could shed some light on the matter/process...
|
|
|
Post by jeffwaynefan on Feb 3, 2005 9:44:01 GMT
You make the point of 'album art', and thats what you are forgetting - its only album art. This machine was designed over 25 years ago just for a album cover and with the possibilities of it being bought into the world of 3D for any live shows of the time - which incidently did not take place. In short this machine and the rest were design to look good on canvas AND not to move - until now and thats were the problems arose. The CGI team who are clearly very talented must have gone through hell and back to bring that 'canvas' rendering to life. As for the details, yes I do agree on 'some' points but not others. The Martians are advanced creatures, so why cant the machines appear that way, and thats what the team have done. Once the machines have been put into a sequence, filtering will tone down those harsh looking details.
Personally I like the new look to the machine, and what we will see on the big screen in 2 years time is a testiment of how this image (iconic image) has stood the test of time.
Being a fan I am proud to see this thing come to life and I still get that buzz when I see it move, after all, us fans have waited over 25 years for this to happen.
Of a negative side to things, I am not in full favour of the flying machine. Don't get me wrong I like it, but not to the point that I feel it fits in with the story as I feel it appears to 'Terminator movie' in style, two seperate movies that have for some reason come together in style. It is too bulky, too Fighting Machine looking. I can imagine this with legs walking about more than seeing it flying. Again the CGI team have gone to great lengths to bring it to life, I salute you, but as this machine appeared in the game versions I would have liked a totaly differant looking machine. The machine will look good in the film but I feel for the wrong reasons.
H_C
|
|
|
Post by maniacs on Feb 3, 2005 12:10:48 GMT
Enjoy as something new. Dont use the old reference as a guide. The machines needed to be redesigned.
|
|
|
Post by flynnsixtysix on Feb 3, 2005 12:24:30 GMT
You need to be very careful here.
the 'myth and magic' of Jeff Wayne's WOTW is partially to do with the trigger images on the original album. They capture the ESSENCE of the piece perfectly.
If you go on an 'new - gimme new' spree you could end up introducing things which are unknown and may well be rejected. They will certainly not have the charm or the enigmatic ambience of the originals. they will be coloured by 25 years of Alien movies, Startship Troupers and Star Wars and not as was probably originally convceived a rather original and unique piece of work.
I'd rather not see any obvious 21st century design clues inserted into the piece at this stage.
For me the thing I think will be most critical is not the minutiae of the designs per se but the attentio to detail in the environment and how they exist in it. There needs to be moody changing weather, they need to rip down trees and bushes as they move, impact strikes need to be carried out with a gritty reality. the machines need to get dirty and banged up. Above all the director needs to introduce the unexpected attention to detail that cathes your eye and your imagination.
This does not want to be 80 mins of the kind of cold, 'fancy' but prim and polished cgi we get at the beginning of vide games like Halo.
The director needs to 'trick' himself into thinking he's actually out on location directing this piece...That is the clue to getting it right.
For example what would make a CGI scene with a broken fence and some barbed wire enigmatic ? the 'photo realistic' rendering of the wire or the fence OR the bit of sheeps wool fluttering on a single barb a random piece of straw blowing past - it's this kind of evidence of lived in reality which brings depth to a piece of work.
That is what we need - DEPTHS...
|
|
CraigC
Junior Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by CraigC on Feb 3, 2005 12:33:00 GMT
Enjoy as something new. Dont use the old reference as a guide. The machines needed to be redesigned. Excatly... look at Star Trek Enterprise (R.I.P) Imagin if they had actually stuck with the designs of the original series, it would not have lasted one series, let alone four. Same with Galactica...... which is character driven more than design. Yet both succesfully manage to honour their origins. Ijust say "sit back and enjoy the ride. Im certain its in safe hands".
|
|
|
Post by Gnorn on Feb 3, 2005 15:32:22 GMT
Excatly... look at Star Trek Enterprise (R.I.P) F*ck me! :-( -Gnorn
|
|
CraigC
Junior Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by CraigC on Feb 3, 2005 15:34:32 GMT
Yeah, I was really enjoying Enterprise last season, with the Zindi storyline..... And this season (4) was none to shabby either. Real shame.
|
|
|
Post by ulla123 on Feb 3, 2005 17:43:46 GMT
I agree with Craig. I think the CGI footage is superb and has taken the Michael Trim artwork to the NEXT LEVEL. Life moves on and with greater technology in our world today, we can create things that we never could have imagined (no one would have believed...) in the 1970's. I am so excited to see this movie it hurts. I think I may have to go away to a desert island for the next few years to sit it out.
|
|
|
Post by Bayne on Feb 3, 2005 23:54:37 GMT
[glow=red,2,300]I would be perfectly satisfied going to see the film with the tripod looking exactly as it does in that test animation! If they can make it better, awesome, if not, that'll do just fine thankyou [/glow]
|
|
|
Post by maniacs on Feb 4, 2005 19:04:28 GMT
You miss the point, as stated the old designs probably would have been harder to animate. The new martians had to tke into account they would be moving. The essence of the original is still there and differences are only obvious if you compare.
|
|
Trivet
Junior Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by Trivet on Feb 5, 2005 21:49:53 GMT
While I didn't wish to sound negative about the CGI teams fine efforts in my original post, The construction of the legs are a mistake clear and simple, especially from an engineering standpoint. Three bound lengths of tubing are far stronger than two. Legs composed of only two run the risk of snapping sideways, especially considering the stresses involved in supporting around ten tonnes of machinery and propelling it along, violently at speed. It's a safe bet that any large scale prop built for the stage show will use the original leg construction, for safety reasons if not aesthetic ones.
It's not a case of them having modified the design. The CGI model is no more advanced in appearance than the original art and certainly looks as good, it's just a little to freely adapted and needs a few tweaks here and there, to bring it in line with the established design. After all the album cover will be everywhere in a few months, so having a consistent design makes perfect sense.
The assertion that the original design would be incapable of movement and needed re-designing by the CGI team to make it work is absurd. The leg sockets were designed to be omni-directional and are NOT hinges, the ball and sockets mounted on the side pods prove that. The only justified change is the widening of the tail, which was far two restrictive.
Finally It's not exactly difficult to create a faithful model using the original art. To start with you take Michael Trim's Thunderchild painting as the definitve reference for the front and Geoff Taylor's Dead London for the rear-end and detailing, both while using the original concept sketches as a rough guide.
|
|
|
Post by ulla123 on Feb 6, 2005 4:05:13 GMT
I think this is a pointless debate. These are Martian Fighting Machines - the metal comes from Mars - you have no idea how strong it is.
I think the CGI test is thrilling - can't beleve I am seeing the Machines alive after almost 30 years! - and I think dissecting things like you are takes away all the fun.
Of course, you have the right to express your opinion but it's just a bit pointless to do so on matters of this kind..
|
|
CraigC
Junior Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by CraigC on Feb 6, 2005 10:08:21 GMT
Triv
You seem really het up on these three poles in the leg and the shoulder joint. Well, from what Ihave seen, how can you tell thatthe shoulder is not a ball joint, the angle of the cam is too low and you cant really see whats going on in there.
As for the legs, I agree with Ulla.... there is no definative source that stipulates that Mikes designs required three struts.
But, you seem to know what you are talking about, so hopefully your beavering away in your favourite 3D app and will show the rest of us how its done.
I think its a case of putting ones money where ones mouth is. Its all subjective. Its a test, I think the Wayne camp stipulated that from the get go... have you not watched any bonus features on any of the Pixar DVD's? Their early tests are very interesting. For a test, its pretty kick ass... Most tests or proof of concept work is a lot less complete.
|
|
|
Post by EvilNerfherder on Feb 16, 2005 16:50:29 GMT
It's very interesting to see such detailed criticism (positive though it is) even at this early stage. What do these tests mean to me? I grew up with Jeff Wayne's album and have lost count of the times I must have heard it. When I would listen to it as a kid (and even now), I would leaf through the album booklet, looking at the wonderful paintings and bringing them to life in my mind as the album played. The images in the booklet are every bit as important as the music to me. They have, over the years, merged into one 'experience' for me. Even the logo for the album has some sort of iconic importance as an important part of the whole. Each part is a gear that neatly meshes to make the whole thing work and breathe in my imagination. I've dreamed, since I first heard the album, that one day I would see Michael Trim's machines come to life. Now they have. I don't care about the mechanics of it.. my feelings for this experience go beyond that. Twenty seconds of bliss is what I see. This film is going to ROCK!
|
|
|
Post by paco417 on Feb 16, 2005 21:58:30 GMT
i personally have no problem with the fighting machine in the way it moves. i have a vague memory many years back when "eve of the war" was in the charts of seeing a music style video that had a FM moving. ok i doubt that footage still exists or if it does i have not seen it on the web. dont forget everyone 25 years is a long time for something like this to come along. as for the Flying machine originally i thought it didn't look right but it's finally grown on me! roll on 2007!
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Feb 17, 2005 2:19:33 GMT
At last I've managed to see this with Quicktime after having many problems. I'm quite impressed with the design and it stays very true to the original. Obviously with a few alterations and tweaks here and there but it looks the part.
I also like the design of the legs and feet. The eyes though still slightly bigger than I'd have liked don't look quite as bulbous as the original designs eyes - which I think looks better. Can't wait to see it on the big screen.
Even though I've managed to see the machine I'm still having problems with the animation running smoothly so it's hard to tell what it moves like.
Anyone else having problems with the clip running smoothly?
|
|
|
Post by Slick2097 on Feb 24, 2005 9:52:29 GMT
Fallingstar: clip plays fine for me. Have you made sure you have the latest quicktime etc? If you post your system specs maybe we can help you further. The clip I have seen while looking very very shiny can do with some improvements (as you would expect with a test shot), the eye's that everyone else has mentioned was the main sticking point for me, but I do reckon they will sort that out so they look wider. The feet for me look fine, although I did always imagine them with flat round feet for some reason, but that would inhibit stability, I guess I got that from watching AT-ST's in starwars :/ One thing I always assumed, not from the artwork on the album, was that the heatray was multidirectional. At the moment the entire machine has to turn and reposition to fire it. Surely they would mount it on some omnidirectional system? (Edit ... just watched it again and yes it is mounted on an omnidirectional system ... d'oh) But criticism's / comments aside, the clip is quite frankly awesome, it moves as I always imagined it would move. Top marks and a great sign of things to come. Slick2097
|
|
|
Post by almonkey on Feb 27, 2005 13:38:49 GMT
It's very interesting to see such detailed criticism (positive though it is) even at this early stage. What do these tests mean to me? I grew up with Jeff Wayne's album and have lost count of the times I must have heard it. When I would listen to it as a kid (and even now), I would leaf through the album booklet, looking at the wonderful paintings and bringing them to life in my mind as the album played. The images in the booklet are every bit as important as the music to me. They have, over the years, merged into one 'experience' for me. Even the logo for the album has some sort of iconic importance as an important part of the whole. Each part is a gear that neatly meshes to make the whole thing work and breathe in my imagination. I've dreamed, since I first heard the album, that one day I would see Michael Trim's machines come to life. Now they have. I don't care about the mechanics of it.. my feelings for this experience go beyond that. Twenty seconds of bliss is what I see. This film is going to ROCK! what he said ^^
|
|