Dragon gets Star Wars licence
- Thread starter Sergiotron
- Start date
rbeach84
Sr Member
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
Since Dragon usually includes two kits in each box of their 1/144 aircraft kits (the new releases anyway) there is a good chance these will be multiples.
Dang! So close! But they are known for their 1/35 scale armor... nothing in 1/48 scale but aircraft.
Regards, Robert
Since Dragon usually includes two kits in each box of their 1/144 aircraft kits (the new releases anyway) there is a good chance these will be multiples.
Dang! So close! But they are known for their 1/35 scale armor... nothing in 1/48 scale but aircraft.
Regards, Robert
crackerjazz
Sr Member
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
No that's a good thing. Let them not release a 1/72 or larger. I would like Bandai to get that spot
No that's a good thing. Let them not release a 1/72 or larger. I would like Bandai to get that spot
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
The list Dragon posted on their Facebook page has a lot of 1/144 scale kits, colour me cynical but Dragon may have reboxed the F-toys kits, it's not a bad thing as it could save them a ton of money in the long term and the quality of F-toy's 1/144 collectible SW kits is excellent. The AT-AT they've been hinting at may even be an enlarged and modified F-toys 1/350 AT-AT; and I'm definitely curious about the 1/144 Millennium Falcon.
The list Dragon posted on their Facebook page has a lot of 1/144 scale kits, colour me cynical but Dragon may have reboxed the F-toys kits, it's not a bad thing as it could save them a ton of money in the long term and the quality of F-toy's 1/144 collectible SW kits is excellent. The AT-AT they've been hinting at may even be an enlarged and modified F-toys 1/350 AT-AT; and I'm definitely curious about the 1/144 Millennium Falcon.
GrahamT
Active Member
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
From Dragon's Facebook page.
It's one thing to clean up or add a few details, but the basic proportions are bit off on this. The rear 3rd of the main hull is a bit short, and the skirt piece that hangs either side between the legs is quite small - not easy fixes.
From Dragon's Facebook page.
It's one thing to clean up or add a few details, but the basic proportions are bit off on this. The rear 3rd of the main hull is a bit short, and the skirt piece that hangs either side between the legs is quite small - not easy fixes.
Vacformedhero
Sr Member
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
How much would this cost ? Seriously I think this will be out of most people's budgets
anyone in the industry hazard a guess after retooling costs and plastic prices
How much would this cost ? Seriously I think this will be out of most people's budgets
anyone in the industry hazard a guess after retooling costs and plastic prices
GrahamT
Active Member
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
Aren't you a bit short for an AT-AT?
(I couldn't help myself).
I'm still excited about this, and it'll be cheaper and LOT less heavy than an MR, but it's a shame they couldn't just trace one of the gazillion reference shots of the ILM miniatures to get better proportions.
Aren't you a bit short for an AT-AT?
(I couldn't help myself).
I'm still excited about this, and it'll be cheaper and LOT less heavy than an MR, but it's a shame they couldn't just trace one of the gazillion reference shots of the ILM miniatures to get better proportions.
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
Though I was excited to read the news at first, I do have my doubts about this. I can't understand why they didn't choose 1/48 scale, wich would still be big enough and in scale with existing models. I mean, where are you going to display a huge model like this? I'm sure one of the main reasons Bandai produces smaller scales is the fact that their license covers only Japan. It's no secret that display options are limited over there. I would considder buying the AT-AT, but only if it's accurate. I've build about 10 Bandai SW kits so far and IMHO are surperior in any way to everything else that has been done in plastic. For now, I don't see another company topping this. And yes, I would like to see some of the fighters a little bigger, say 1/48 scale. But it doesn't have to be more than that, as I would like to display my complete collection, not just a few big ones.
As for the 1/144 scale kits? They're perfect for diorama builds.
Though I was excited to read the news at first, I do have my doubts about this. I can't understand why they didn't choose 1/48 scale, wich would still be big enough and in scale with existing models. I mean, where are you going to display a huge model like this? I'm sure one of the main reasons Bandai produces smaller scales is the fact that their license covers only Japan. It's no secret that display options are limited over there. I would considder buying the AT-AT, but only if it's accurate. I've build about 10 Bandai SW kits so far and IMHO are surperior in any way to everything else that has been done in plastic. For now, I don't see another company topping this. And yes, I would like to see some of the fighters a little bigger, say 1/48 scale. But it doesn't have to be more than that, as I would like to display my complete collection, not just a few big ones.
As for the 1/144 scale kits? They're perfect for diorama builds.
TazMan2000
Master Member
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
Strange how they got "some" of it correct. I'm certain that the original walkers, not to mention all of the star wars creations, were digitally scanned in, in high quality, by ILM in order to archive them...errors, missing/broken parts and all. It is doubtful that those particular scans would be available for licensees, but I'm thinking that someone who had access to the archives may have scanned in some of the models for commercial use. If I was a licensee making models, I certainly would ask for access to make my models as accurate as possible.
TazMan2000
Strange how they got "some" of it correct. I'm certain that the original walkers, not to mention all of the star wars creations, were digitally scanned in, in high quality, by ILM in order to archive them...errors, missing/broken parts and all. It is doubtful that those particular scans would be available for licensees, but I'm thinking that someone who had access to the archives may have scanned in some of the models for commercial use. If I was a licensee making models, I certainly would ask for access to make my models as accurate as possible.
TazMan2000
GrahamT
Active Member
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
Ah yes, you're right Robert. I used a side on shot of an ILM model but it could well be a close up with some fish-eye. I really only did it roughly as the Dragon looked a bit off to me tin the proportions, but I wasn't sure what. I'm convinced the back third is too short, and the legs are a bit short - though I thought it was the thigh, but I now thing it;s the "shin" that is a bit stunted.
They seem to have dreamt up some details too, like having some relief panels which should be flat with a scribe lines. To be fair, my guess is they are doing an "ideal" version of an AT-AT based on their modelling tastes, and perhaps using reference blueprints that were not intended to be studio-scale-accurate. They may even be unaware of the "accuracy" issue at all because, quite reasonably, how accurate can you be to a fantasy vehicle?
Ah yes, you're right Robert. I used a side on shot of an ILM model but it could well be a close up with some fish-eye
. I really only did it roughly as the Dragon looked a bit off to me tin the proportions, but I wasn't sure what. I'm convinced the back third is too short, and the legs are a bit short - though I thought it was the thigh, but I now thing it;s the "shin" that is a bit stunted.They seem to have dreamt up some details too, like having some relief panels which should be flat with a scribe lines. To be fair, my guess is they are doing an "ideal" version of an AT-AT based on their modelling tastes, and perhaps using reference blueprints that were not intended to be studio-scale-accurate. They may even be unaware of the "accuracy" issue at all because, quite reasonably, how accurate can you be to a fantasy vehicle?
Jaitea
Master Member
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
Cool....cant wait to see some images of the kits to see how they compare to FineMolds or Bandai....& what reference will they use for the Falcon
J
Cool....cant wait to see some images of the kits to see how they compare to FineMolds or Bandai....& what reference will they use for the Falcon
J
rbeach84
Sr Member
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
G-Man, the issue with the image distortion can be two-fold since you are working with two differently sourced images with little info on what kind of 'camera' was used for each. For example, if the rendered AT-AT from DML is using a 'camera view' (which it obviously is, given the perspective on the feet placements...) then it will not be a true view of the proportions. This is a wise tactic actually since so much can be inferred from an image these days, so it essentially provides a small measure of protection for their design work.
Just to clarify, I'm not saying you have it wrong but rather that we cannot be certain at this point because working from images is fraught with booby-traps. I'd say that (barring having a true side view of the kit *and* the film miniature for comparison) we are stuck waiting for the actual 'hardware' to arrive before passing judgement.
That said - !What! No 1:48 scale kits! Still waiting on a Y-Wing kit...
R/ Robert
Ah yes, you're right Robert. I used a side on shot of an ILM model but it could well be a close up with some fish-eye
They seem to have dreamt up some details too, like having some relief panels which should be flat with a scribe lines. To be fair, my guess is they are doing an "ideal" version of an AT-AT based on their modelling tastes, and perhaps using reference blueprints that were not intended to be studio-scale-accurate. They may even be unaware of the "accuracy" issue at all because, quite reasonably, how accurate can you be to a fantasy vehicle?
G-Man, the issue with the image distortion can be two-fold since you are working with two differently sourced images with little info on what kind of 'camera' was used for each. For example, if the rendered AT-AT from DML is using a 'camera view' (which it obviously is, given the perspective on the feet placements...) then it will not be a true view of the proportions. This is a wise tactic actually since so much can be inferred from an image these days, so it essentially provides a small measure of protection for their design work.
Just to clarify, I'm not saying you have it wrong but rather that we cannot be certain at this point because working from images is fraught with booby-traps. I'd say that (barring having a true side view of the kit *and* the film miniature for comparison) we are stuck waiting for the actual 'hardware' to arrive before passing judgement.
That said - !What! No 1:48 scale kits! Still waiting on a Y-Wing kit...
R/ Robert
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
armor kits Are usually in 1/35 and 1/72 as some pointed out to me earlier... since they do a lot of armor its consistent with themselves.
at 1/35 it will be close to studio scale as well... maybe a bit larger but another plus for the thing.
Jedi Dade
armor kits Are usually in 1/35 and 1/72 as some pointed out to me earlier... since they do a lot of armor its consistent with themselves.
at 1/35 it will be close to studio scale as well... maybe a bit larger but another plus for the thing.
Jedi Dade
Zuiun
Sr Member
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
There's also no way to know whether or not the designer working for Dragon didn't jack with the image for entirely different reasons. Such as disproportional stretching to fit the LAYOUT rather than model accuracy.
That still doesn't explain inaccuracies in other details, such as surface details ON the model. Maybe it's a rushed prototype to get out quickly for hype. I'm curious to see an actual production run version. Then we'll know for sure.
There's also no way to know whether or not the designer working for Dragon didn't jack with the image for entirely different reasons. Such as disproportional stretching to fit the LAYOUT rather than model accuracy.
That still doesn't explain inaccuracies in other details, such as surface details ON the model. Maybe it's a rushed prototype to get out quickly for hype. I'm curious to see an actual production run version. Then we'll know for sure.
Re: Dragon making a 1/35 AT-AT
I was referencing the call for 1/48th scale kits... and that its not a scale Dragon typically does due to its Armor roots.
In principle though 1/48 works terrifically for me... I'd love to see it... just not expecting it Hopefully from Bandai
Jedi Dade
I was referencing the call for 1/48th scale kits... and that its not a scale Dragon typically does due to its Armor roots.
In principle though 1/48 works terrifically for me... I'd love to see it... just not expecting it
Hopefully from Bandai Jedi Dade
Similar threads
