Ok... I feel like we're getting closer to being on the same wavelength. Ok... let's get this started...
Thanks for the links... however the thread are about th ultimate ANH interior (two wrong things here : ANH and interior, as I said I don't care about the interior) and the other is a mesh of the exterior of the Ep VII Falcon (which is based on the 5ft).
So please show the thread about the 100% accurate meshes of the 32" Falcon that DeAgo could have used.
I can't find the thread here on the RPF but I have seen it on his personal blog here:
http:\\deeplyobsessed.blogspot.com\2013_08_01_archive.html&psig=AFQjCNGgS2RtbriYQMhKEyf9z-3jvq4Aig&ust=1447360027986498
Yes I saw his work regarding the ANH interior and Ep VII Falcon (he did a nice job) however we were talking about the 32" so I thought I missed something he may have done regarding the 32".
My expertise is only for the 32" Falcon, sorry.
Totally understandable and I don't fault ya for it!
Sorry you are mistaken Studio size and studio scale (studio scale is accurate
Don't take "studio scale" for its straight meaning, it's a kind of modelling). Do some research on this board there are ton of discussions about that particular subject (what studio scale is).
I think this has been debated to death... heck I've seen people arguing about this on not just this forum but many others over the years. It usually starts when someone asks the simple question of "What does Studio Scale mean?"... honestly, I think Studio Scale falls into the realm of dimensions, not accuracy. It's in the word itself SCALE. Scale would mean the size/shape as compared to a given measurement... not the process of being uber detailed accurate. That would fall more into the realm of Studio Accurate. Personally I feel if it appeared on film its Studio Scale. So that would mean the Almost Full size, 5 footer, 32", 2 footer, and the 3 incher Falcons (could be wrong about the reference names but I'm sure you know what I'm talking about) would fall under different scales to the Full Size actual ship which after years and years of calculating, speculation, and pouring over every detail has been generally accepted that the full size of the ship would be roughly 114' long. Which would put the scale (roughly estimating here) of the Almost full size at 1:1.12 scale, the 5 footer at 1:23 scale, the 32" at 1:43 scale, the 2 footer at 1:57 scale and the 3 incher at roughly 1:456 scale... scale is a relative term... implying measurement... not accuracy. So saying Studio Scale is completely accurate to the original would be a gross generalization of the term and grossly misses the mark in the description of the process. A much more clear and concise term for describing the completely accurate replication of a prop used on film would be either Studio Accurate or Studio Replica. The reason I choose Studio Accurate is that it is much more concise and to the point... the term Replica over the years in society has been diluted with innaccuracies that have flooded the market and changed the interpretation of the word itself.
By definition the word SCALE means this (in this context as taken from the Merrium-Webster dictionary:
a : to arrange in a graduated series
b (1)
: to measure by or as if by a scale (2)
: to measure or estimate the sound content of (as logs)
c : to pattern, make, regulate, set, or estimate according to some rate or standard
: adjust <a production schedule
scaled to actual need> —often used with
back, down, or
up <
scale down imports>
The word itself is synonymous to measurement alone... not to accuracy... But now I know when you are saying Studio Scale you mean Studio Accurate so that has been totally cleared up!
Spending a week with a model and Pantone match the colors don't make you an expert of a subject. I'm sorry he may have color Pantoned the Falcon color however his MR master paint is wrong (but MR admitted it) and what he's doing with the DeAgo (I watched the vids) won't be 100% accurate either (but will still look cool because he's a good painter).
I never said he was an expert and never will, however, the data itself cannot be disputed because it was the actual prop. If Joe Blow got a chance to take photos of the actual Falcon and had proof and witnesses that can confirm it... it doesn't make him an expert, but the photos themselves would be invaluable as reference to the actual prop itself. Now seeing as he isn't just some guy with a camera and was actually able to do more then just take pictures and did so for the sole purpose of recreating the Falcon itself makes the information that he gathered even more credible. I never said that he was an expert, but the data that he obtained is quite a valuable tool for all of us!
Yes of course, I agree with you, but my point is about a replica of the 32" Falcon can't be a perfect replica if it has something the original does not.
I don't care how much you look, search and investigate, there is no way that you'll ever be able to make a perfect replica of the Falcon. You can get close (perhaps closer then anyone ever has) but it's impossible. Why? Many of the kits that were used aren't being made anymore and don't exist, no one ever made any notes of the materials that were used (paints, glues, tools, etc) so everything that was done to make it would have to pure guess work and speculation. You'll never get the color properly due to the fact that the paint has aged over the years, been around smokers which stained the paint, been exposed to bright lights which bleached the paint, etc. Over the years of handling parts have been broken, fallen off, etc and since the 32" prop was filmed mainly for motion shots, any of the detail that was seen on screen is blurred but we can guess. So, in order to replicate alot of the pieces that are no longer available (Kool Shade for example) you'll either have to substitute something else (of course that isn't part of the original prop) or have something 3D printed (which again isn't something that was part of the original prop). It's all a matter of guess work and speculation no matter how hard you attempt to make it a completely accurate perfect prop, it is impossible!
OK so we both agree that it should go to the general forum
Actually I think they just need to make another section called Studio Replicas... general modeling would be considered of the shelve store bought kits like AMT, Revell, Bandai, Monogram etc.
I think the MR would be better has reference. It has been proved that almost everything is wrong on the FMMF. :/ The MR is quite close and Im' pretty sure they nailed every notch !
Oh I totally agree... the MR was the most accurate replica to date. The only reason I brought up the FM was because of the notches... at least they did get those right!
Except if four of them has copied the fifth one which was wrong !
Or if the 5 were given the same reference material (thinking about the MPC and Revell Vader's TIE and Falcon :/).
That makes perfect sense to me... which is why they should ask an expert like you for clairfication!
I never heard of any of those guys working on the 32" Falcon ? Because that's why we're talking about, a replica of the 32" Falcon as advertized by DeAgo not some idealized versions of the Falcon mixing the exteriors and interiors sets with all the filming miniatures.
And that's not what I was talking about... this isn't about just the 32" Falcon. I have no beef with the 32" inch Falcon whatsoever. Those guys were instrumental in their work and research to discover the scale of the Falcon. I think that's where the confusion is. You're talking about completely accurate replica of the 32"... I'm talking about the DeAgo and their lack of forsight in release without doing any research. I was justifying why everyone was so disappointed in the DeAgo Falcon and you were trying to justify what kind of kit this actually is. I tell ya... the exterior is awesome. The size, would be the perfect base for a perfect replica of the Falcon (right down the brown Han in the cockpit if you wanted). The problem I was trying to get across is that for the price, we were expecting more then what they promised... nothing more.
I think we're on the same page now right bro?
I have nothing but respect for you bro... I didn't mean to upset you or anything.
