The Last Jedi new prop picture SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

[Kylo1]

It's a theory that's been around for a little while now. Frustrating that it's not possible to confirm this, even with HD screen caps.

That being said, if Sloth offered a card with the half-width trace with the different finish, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

Are you still sticking with the traces being copper(ish)? I'm thinking colour is more like Korbanths card now! And after taking another close up look, the thinner trace appears to be the same width as the black soldermask

[Joek3rr]

Are you still sticking with the traces being copper(ish)? I'm thinking colour is more like Korbanths card now! And after taking another close up look, the thinner trace appears to be the same width as the black soldermask

At this point I think it's just really really hard to say, sooooooooooo much wonky CG has gone into this saber! Just stare at the control box for awhile, it's not square, and the arrows look weird too.



Now, look at the picture with the added lines. The red is what the edge of the box is doing after the CG pass, the green is what it should look like.




I'm thinking about sanding down one edge of my slothfurnace card, and then seeing if I can darken the last trace with ageing chemecal. What do you think?

[Kylo1]

At this point I think it's just really really hard to say, sooooooooooo much wonky CG has gone into this saber! Just stare at the control box for awhile, it's not square, and the arrows look weird too.



Now, look at the picture with the added lines. The red is what the edge of the box is doing after the CG pass, the green is what it should look like.




I'm thinking about sanding down one edge of my slothfurnace card, and then seeing if I can darken the last trace with ageing chemecal. What do you think?

I was thinking of darkening the first trace too once I have a card that matches haha. What about asking Slothfurnace to make cards ever so slightly longer than the Romans box, with 13 gold traces then you would need to sand down the first trace a touch to fit

- - - Updated - - -

As I don't have access to HD screen caps yet, are there any other shots of the saber in the film that show the control box and card?

[Kylo1]

I think around 1 hour 19 min there is a shot of the saber coming from Lukes belt after he had looked into Ben Solo's future but my phone isn't clear enough to make it out properly. Can anyone get a clearer shot?

[SethS]

Just a few quibbles—

CG/CGI implies a 3D asset.
Compositing is the act of combining live assets and CG assets
Keying is greenscreen work
Tracking is locking on to live action objects in frame and using them to determin vectors for movement of a cg asset
Roto’ing is a flat, frame by frame Retouching/enhancing of the image.
@AnubisGuard can correct me if I am wrong

But the work being done to the Creepy Uncle is not CG work, it’s roto’ing. I only make the distiction because a 3D model would retain near perfect perspective, while roto work is literally painting over the image using Nuke, Flame, After Effects, or some software ILM made for themselves, If you’ve ever used ther clone/runner stamp tool in photoshop it’s the same idea.

The end result is generally perfect in motion if done by a pro, but when you go frame by frame you can catch tiny bits like the edge of the box, the notch in the buttons, etc.

[Joek3rr]

I think around 1 hour 19 min there is a shot of the saber coming from Lukes belt after he had looked into Ben Solo's future but my phone isn't clear enough to make it out properly

This picture was posted some pages back



And brightened

[lukyanov]

I think around 1 hour 19 min there is a shot of the saber coming from Lukes belt after he had looked into Ben Solo's future but my phone isn't clear enough to make it out properly

[Joek3rr]

Well look at that!!!!! 13 even traces ..........



- - - Updated - - -
@Kylo1 I think we should start with the original prop, when trying to decide the color, after all the ILM guys would have started with it as well

[elsporto]

Kylo, I think you're absolutely right. I believe that last "trace" is part of the control box/PCB-holder - a sort of folded-under-the-rails stop.

Someone pointed out earlier that it seemed to be angled differently to the other traces as it caught the light at an angle while the PCB stayed dark which does support the theory.

I'm working on a TLJ myself and this is a print screen of the design before the higher res was leaked, it shows my design with the idea of a "stop" at the back (red lines indicate an angle). Next to is a blow-up of the latest screen captures which to my eyes show a triangular shadow. I know this is pretty eye-of-the-beholder, but it's what I see.

(..and regarding "what I see", Anakin totally convinced me, the pommel cubes are symmetrical)





(EDIT: Ok, apparently I was one page late.. I don't know what to believe anymore)

cheers,
elsporto

[Joek3rr]

Kylo, I think you're absolutely right. I believe that last "trace" is part of the control box/PCB-holder - a sort of folded-under-the-rails stop.

Someone pointed out earlier that it seemed to be angled differently to the other traces as it caught the light at an angle while the PCB stayed dark which does support the theory.

I'm working on a TLJ myself and this is a print screen of the design before the higher res was leaked, it shows my design with the idea of a "stop" at the back (red lines indicate an angle). Next to is a blow-up of the latest screen captures which to my eyes show a triangular shadow. I know this is pretty eye-of-the-beholder, but it's what I see.

(..and regarding "what I see", Anakin totally convinced me, the pommel cubes are symmetrical)




cheers,
elsporto

I don't know how much you've read, but some of us have come to the conclusion that saber has been rotoscoped, as earlier in that scene the saber has 13 traces all of the same color

[elsporto]

I don't know how much you've read, but some of us have come to the conclusion that saber has been rotoscoped, as earlier in that scene the saber has 13 traces all of the same color

I've read it all.. all of it..

but it's hard to let go of convictions. We'd all like to be the one deciphering the it all - every detail into one perfect prop replica/screen accurate saber. I've discovered I'm no different.


I'm happy though, if consensus is "the trace" is a CGI flaw, makes it a whole lot easier.


cheers,
elsporto

[SethS]

It’s really the only way to explain how the details shift so much within one scene.

[Joek3rr]

I've read it all.. all of it..

but it's hard to let go of convictions. We'd all like to be the one deciphering the it all - every detail into one perfect prop replica/screen accurate saber. I've discovered I'm no different.


I'm happy though, if consensus is "the trace" is a CGI flaw, makes it a whole lot easier.


cheers,
elsporto

Easier??

I think the only reason everyone is attributing it to a CG flaw is that it changes every time it shows up in the movie. And if it is indeed the White Glove saber, then a CG card is the only way to explain it, considering that one only has 10 traces. And interestingly the two end traces are narrower than the rest.

[AnubisGuard]

@SethS: That's pretty much correct. Technically any image generated by or on a computer is CGI, but in practice the term is used almost exclusively to refer to 3D renders. (And nobody in the industry uses "CGI" as a term of art. We're always more specific than that.)

Re the shots in question, I finished watching the director's commentary last night and a surprising number of things in the movie you would assume they did with computers were practical.

A partial list:

•The bombs falling out of the racks in the bomber when Paige Tico triggers them.
•The Jedi hut exploding outward when Luke sees Rey and Kylo together. (Rian said they had wires attached to the set that pulled it apart on cue.)
•BB-8 shooting coins at the guard in Canto Bight, as well as him blowing smoke from the coin slot. The coins were "enhanced" by ILM according to Johnson, but they built a rig that really could do it.
•Snoke's arm and hand when he touches Rey's face.
•The shuttle crash at the Crait base was real. They hired the guy who did the train gag for Inception to make a full-sized shuttle that they pulled through the set.

So, with all that in mind, I have to question if there's as much CG in the close-ups of the saber as people are assuming. I rewtched the scene and there's really only one close-up that requires an actor to be holding it. All the other inserts are of the hand and saber only. No left hand, no body or anything is visible. The only motion aside from the hand moving up or down in frame is the thumb curling.

Personally, if I were designing this shot, I'd have an animatronic hand for the close-ups and avoid as much digitical work as possible. Even if I had to go with a CG hand, I'd find some other way to support the saber so as to reduce the VFX workload. Maybe some kind of rig holding it from underneath, or even hanging it from wires.

Keep in mind that the Gralfex handoff was done with a paintout and digital hand because of the complexity of the handoff motion as well as Mark Hamill being visible in almost every shot. But with the Creepy Uncle, if you hire a guy to hold the saber and then erase the hand, you've removed the only part of the actor that's even in the shot. So why bother with a real hand at any stage at all, then?

That's not to dismiss the issues with the button and the shape of the control box that people have found, but I want to be sure were not seeing what we want to see because of our assumptions as opposed to what's actually there.

[SethS]

@SethS: That's pretty much correct. Technically any image generated by or on a computer is CGI, but in practice the term is used almost exclusively to refer to 3D renders. (And nobody in the industry uses "CGI" as a term of art. We're always more specific than that.)

Re the shots in question, I finished watching the director's commentary last night and a surprising number of things in the movie you would assume they did with computers were practical.

A partial list:

•The bombs falling out of the racks in the bomber when Paige Tico triggers them.
•The Jedi hut exploding outward when Luke sees Rey and Kylo together. (Rian said they had wires attached to the set that pulled it apart on cue.)
•BB-8 shooting coins at the guard in Canto Bight, as well as him blowing smoke from the coin slot. The coins were "enhanced" by ILM according to Johnson, but they built a rig that really could do it.
•Snoke's arm and hand when he touches Rey's face.
•The shuttle crash at the Crait base was real. They hired the guy who did the train gag for Inception to make a full-sized shuttle that they pulled through the set.

So, with all that in mind, I have to question if there's as much CG in the close-ups of the saber as people are assuming. I rewtched the scene and there's really only one close-up that requires an actor to be holding it. All the other inserts are of the hand and saber only. No left hand, no body or anything is visible. The only motion aside from the hand moving up or down in frame is the thumb curling.

Personally, if I were designing this shot, I'd have an animatronic hand for the close-ups and avoid as much digitical work as possible. Even if I had to go with a CG hand, I'd find some other way to support the saber so as to reduce the VFX workload. Maybe some kind of rig holding it from underneath, or even hanging it from wires.

Keep in mind that the Gralfex handoff was done with a paintout and digital hand because of the complexity of the handoff motion as well as Mark Hamill being visible in almost every shot. But with the Creepy Uncle, if you hire a guy to hold the saber and then erase the hand, you've removed the only part of the actor that's even in the shot. So why bother with a real hand at any stage at all, then?

That's not to dismiss the issues with the button and the shape of the control box that people have found, but I want to be sure were not seeing what we want to see because of our assumptions as opposed to what's actually there.

A practical hand would make more sense... but the retouching crazy is the only way to really explain all the tiny details that change within frames of each other...

[AnubisGuard]

Somebody with Twitter should tweet the question to Rian Johnson. It's the only way to be sure.

[Filandrius]

I agree completely. Every frame with a robot hand has been retouched.

I mean, I don't know if it's just me, but the distinction between the two halves of the saber (the one that has been retouched, and the one that didn't, like in the theory I've read a few pages back) is pretty obvious in this pic. Everything from the grips to the emitter is blurrier than the rest of the saber.

[halliwax]

Man, I haven’t had a single
Minute to myself today... I got a lot of catching up to do...

[Joek3rr]

So @Kylo1 do you want to match the 'about to ignite' card?


or the 'coming off the belt' card?

[lukyanov]

The same scene...

[Joek3rr]

So I'm finding something interesting with all of these pictures. When the saber is on his belt, there are 13 traces all the same size, shape and color. But the instant he begins to pull it off of his belt, the last trace turns a different color and get narrower. It almost like that last trace is left over from the real prop and wasn't roto'd.

[Anakin Starkiller]

Did a quick comparison of the pommel on my model to these new screen grabs

[Kylo1]

So @Kylo1 do you want to match the 'about to ignite' card?


or the 'coming off the belt' card?

My preference is the 'coming off the belt' card but I have asked Sloth to look into producing both Waiting for his reply

[Filandrius]

On the "coming off the belt" it almost looks like the card is overhanging on the emitter side. On that side the trace is full sized, and on the other it's half-sized...

[halliwax]

Did a quick comparison of the pommel on my model to these new screen grabs

looks great dan!