Avanaut
Well-Known Member
When the first glimpses of the Y-wing in Rogue One arrived, I was convinced the design was different. I was sure there were panels on the hull, shields covering some of the more greeblied areas. With this still from the movie, it is obvious that this is not the case, the details are all there, at least to a degree. What I wonder though, is that the details are not as prominent as I’d expect, the Y-wing looks flat. Did I "see" the panels because of that? Is it me and my ideal mental image of the model, or is the CGI version really flat? Please also note that there is only one Y-wing in the still image multiplied:
Looking at the area behind the big 8Rad piece on the neck, the port flank around the Kettenkrad track part, front of the wing root. The details are mostly there but they don’t stand out much. The model seems to be missing some of the piping as well. The lighting on that area is flat, but I wonder. Comparing it to an original filming model shows that the details indeed seem to differ. Here’s a photograph of one of the originals from an angle closest to the screenshot I could find, the Triangles in an archive photo flipped sideways. Please look at the engine struts on the nacelles, they are clearly bigger on the Triangles. The engine details in general are flatter on the CGI model.
I first thought that the flatness was just a question of maybe lack of painted detail such as the digital equivalent of washes and drybrushing. But if the details are actually smaller, then that won't cover it. Now, I was suggested that a Y-wing was scanned for Rogue One, which one would that be is unclear. Maybe it was the Master Replicas model seen in this video. If it was scanned and, as the video explains, they went deep in digital modeling by scanning original vintage kit parts for other models, where does this impression of flatness come from?
My question is, should the digital models be accurate to the original they recreate, or should they be accurate to the impression of the original? It seems to be two different things, maybe the CGI process still has room to develop and we get to see even better, more organic models in near future. Models genuinely indistinguishable from the real thing.
There is also the question of what is the reasonable amount of work that can be invested in a digital model that makes a few quick passes on screen? Making special effects is a tough business and you can't spend much time on something you don't really need. The Y-wing was most likely not on the A-priority list and do not reperesent the best the industry can create. These birds looked great on screen though, and while I would have wished for more depth in details, their performance was still right on the nose.
On a sidenote, someone asked why didn't they use the old 3D files created for the Special Editions back in the 90's. I have no idea if they did. But if they did use those old files as a base, it would perhaps explain some of the flatness. In the 90's the computers weren't as efficient as they are today and to make effects they had to be economical about the numbers of polygons they use. It was details with mapping on flat surface when possible. Who knows? I'm sure we get answers some day, maybe in the Bluray extras.
Ps. The forum does not have the tag "Star Wars Rogue One". I'm not allowed to create one. Admin?
Looking at the area behind the big 8Rad piece on the neck, the port flank around the Kettenkrad track part, front of the wing root. The details are mostly there but they don’t stand out much. The model seems to be missing some of the piping as well. The lighting on that area is flat, but I wonder. Comparing it to an original filming model shows that the details indeed seem to differ. Here’s a photograph of one of the originals from an angle closest to the screenshot I could find, the Triangles in an archive photo flipped sideways. Please look at the engine struts on the nacelles, they are clearly bigger on the Triangles. The engine details in general are flatter on the CGI model.
I first thought that the flatness was just a question of maybe lack of painted detail such as the digital equivalent of washes and drybrushing. But if the details are actually smaller, then that won't cover it. Now, I was suggested that a Y-wing was scanned for Rogue One, which one would that be is unclear. Maybe it was the Master Replicas model seen in this video. If it was scanned and, as the video explains, they went deep in digital modeling by scanning original vintage kit parts for other models, where does this impression of flatness come from?
My question is, should the digital models be accurate to the original they recreate, or should they be accurate to the impression of the original? It seems to be two different things, maybe the CGI process still has room to develop and we get to see even better, more organic models in near future. Models genuinely indistinguishable from the real thing.
There is also the question of what is the reasonable amount of work that can be invested in a digital model that makes a few quick passes on screen? Making special effects is a tough business and you can't spend much time on something you don't really need. The Y-wing was most likely not on the A-priority list and do not reperesent the best the industry can create. These birds looked great on screen though, and while I would have wished for more depth in details, their performance was still right on the nose.
On a sidenote, someone asked why didn't they use the old 3D files created for the Special Editions back in the 90's. I have no idea if they did. But if they did use those old files as a base, it would perhaps explain some of the flatness. In the 90's the computers weren't as efficient as they are today and to make effects they had to be economical about the numbers of polygons they use. It was details with mapping on flat surface when possible. Who knows? I'm sure we get answers some day, maybe in the Bluray extras.
Ps. The forum does not have the tag "Star Wars Rogue One". I'm not allowed to create one. Admin?
