It is currently October 21st 2018 3:52 pm




 
Post Posted: January 13th 2016 7:06 pm
 

Join: January 12th 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 64
https://www.sendspace.com/file/3u4tsd

Looks pretty neat.


Post Posted: January 13th 2016 7:24 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 2nd 2010 7:40 am
Posts: 631
So much for that BS "pratical" PR talk.


Post Posted: January 13th 2016 7:38 pm
 
Bush Pilot
User avatar

Join: March 23rd 2005 3:46 pm
Posts: 1456
Anyone save this before it went private?

The reality of filmmaking today is that it's loaded with CGI. There was a ton of traditional set building, creature shop work and puppeteering as well. There were even practical ship model tests before the decision to go entirely CG was made.


Post Posted: January 13th 2016 7:45 pm
 

Join: January 12th 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 64
I saved it. Trying to figure out how I can upload for some people to see and won't have my youtube revoked.


Post Posted: January 13th 2016 7:57 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 16th 2014 7:03 pm
Posts: 82
Topeka wrote:
Anyone save this before it went private?

The reality of filmmaking today is that it's loaded with CGI. There was a ton of traditional set building, creature shop work and puppeteering as well. There were even practical ship model tests before the decision to go entirely CG was made.

There are a few mirrors already posted to r/starwarsleaks on Reddit.

And yeah, I don't get why some are still so up in arms over there being CGI in the movie. I know the producers talked up the positives of practical props and sets, but anyone that took that to mean everything was going to be models, puppets and matte paintings simply read way too much into it.


Post Posted: January 13th 2016 8:16 pm
 

Join: January 12th 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 64
Sometimes I think Lucas also showed people too much behind the scenes, even as much as I personally love it. It was kind of interesting for JJ to almost shut people out of it for the most part. I remember we'd get a lot of movie photos out a year or more before the movies were released. The SW INSIDER magazine had them. They didn't have anything early with this movie.


Post Posted: January 13th 2016 8:25 pm
 

Join: January 12th 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 64
https://www.facebook.com/DaqueleFilme/v ... 414848495/


Post Posted: January 13th 2016 11:11 pm
 
User avatar

Join: January 22nd 2004 10:02 pm
Posts: 1025
Location: south of Mars and north of Hell
Thanks for posting this. I love seeing the evolution of the effects and how they were accomplished.

The maquette of Snoke gives a much better look at how damaged his face is. I like how they used actual glowing props for the saber duel this time to give real ambient light to the surroundings. They used glowing saber props in AOTC but only for that brief sequence in the dark. All around cool stuff, I'm still waiting for sites like fxguide to put up their vfx coverage, they always an in depth article.


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 12:05 am
 
User avatar

Join: April 26th 2005 11:20 am
Posts: 1171
Big fan of these VFX breakdown reels. Also, what a treat watching so much of TFA so soon from the comfort of my home office. :)

---

Thundercracker wrote:
They used glowing saber props in AOTC but only for that brief sequence in the dark.


Always deserving of special emphasis whenever my favorite moment of my beloved prequel trilogy is referenced. :metal:


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 12:16 am
 
User avatar

Join: December 22nd 2015 8:05 pm
Posts: 38
Location: Skellig
Awesome!! Man, I can't wait for this to hit Blu Ray


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 1:31 am
 
User avatar

Title: Lover of ALL SW
Join: October 8th 2014 9:20 am
Posts: 165
Location: Germany
Alexrd wrote:
So much for that BS "pratical" PR talk.


THIS.

I facepalmed so hard when I saw this Video. Its pathetic how they used cheap Propaganda to get the internetmob on their side.


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 2:19 am
 

Join: January 12th 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 64
So you expected them to use no blue/greenscreen at all? Their main point is they used it a lot less.


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 2:55 am
 
User avatar

Title: Lover of ALL SW
Join: October 8th 2014 9:20 am
Posts: 165
Location: Germany
DINVADER wrote:
So you expected them to use no blue/greenscreen at all? Their main point is they used it a lot less.


Which they didnt obviously. They used the same amount as in the Prequels. Look at the Hangar Set, very minimalistic. there is so much blue and green Screen just as in the other movies. BB8 is completly CGI in many shots, they tried to sell it as pure pratical effect at celebration.

All the fighter shots are CGI. I remember that many of the Ep I and II shots in space very made with models.

Its just ridiciouls how it their Marketing campaign falls apart with this Video.


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 7:05 am
 
OBGYN
User avatar

Join: August 25th 2004 12:31 pm
Posts: 3456
KyleKartanMG wrote:

Its just ridiciouls how it their Marketing campaign falls apart with this Video.


What marketing campaign? All I ever officially heard was that they were going to use "all the tools in the toolbox." Anti-CGI nutjobs decided to interpret that as "CGI BAD! NO CGI IN TFA!! HERPA DERP!" :whateva:

Also, a lot of what we see in the upper left in that video is pre-viz animation, with the final result on the lower right. It's like watching a moving storyboard, then seeing the final shot. There's a lot that happens in between, including model photography, digital animation, the whole nine yards. It's not just one extreme or the other.


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 7:42 am
 

Join: January 12th 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 64
I guess he expected them to build an entire hanger which they didn't even do in the original films, they used matte paintings to augment them. How else would the bridge scene on Starkiller Base have been done? That staging of First Order troops and speech scene? They would have had a soundstage thousands of feet. They specifically chose more green/blue screen stuff to show in the 10 min reel so they could show how well they could do with it. BB-8 was practical in about 2/3 of the shots with painted out puppeteer. JJ Abrams always said there would be an enormous amount of CG in the film, but they tried to build as much as they could most of the time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P68ahq9 ... ture=share


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 8:55 am
 
User avatar

Join: October 2nd 2010 7:40 am
Posts: 631
Bandersnatch wrote:
What marketing campaign?


Come on. Their marketing focused on the "return" to pratical effects, "real desert" (worthy of a facepalm), how they were doing it like the old days, etc... Completely ommiting the fact that pratical effects were heavily used in all six movies before it and that they can't return to something that was never gone to begin with. I have nothing against the use of CGI. But they were the ones who chose their own PR talk by feeding ignorance to the ignorant.


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 9:35 am
 
OBGYN
User avatar

Join: August 25th 2004 12:31 pm
Posts: 3456
Comments taken out of context do not constitute a marketing campaign.

Yeah, I thought "real desert" and "going back to the old ways of doing things" were strange things to say, but it never once struck me as being some sort of corporate conspiracy. I could be wrong, of course.

What about Hamill saying "everything's changed, yet nothing's changed." WTF did that mean? Simply what he said, or some other grand campaign to fuck the PT in the ass?


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 10:20 am
 
User avatar

Title: Lover of ALL SW
Join: October 8th 2014 9:20 am
Posts: 165
Location: Germany
U know exactly how they pushed the pratical stuff with the interviews of some actors like Daniels, the Behind The Scenes reel of Comic Con with even started with a speach of Mark Hamill about practical effects and stuff. They tried to sell BB8 as pure practical effect at Celebration and just talked about beeing on Location and Shooting real stuff and so forth.

Of course they where doing CGI. I knew, u knew it, every sane Person knew it. They just tried to tell us that CGI wasnt the used much in TFA and the fact is: it was. Massive...which is totally ok. Iam not ok with the way the propagandaed the pratical stuff when in fact there wasnt so much stuff to begin with...

Ep I has easily as many pratical stuff as this movie...easily...


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 10:32 am
 
OBGYN
User avatar

Join: August 25th 2004 12:31 pm
Posts: 3456
KyleKartanMG wrote:
They just tried to tell us that CGI wasnt used much in TFA...

When did they say that?


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 10:58 am
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2541
Location: Toronto, Canada
If you enjoyed the effects work in TFA that's all that should matter, irrespective of whether it was accomplished via practical or CG. The reality is that most people don't even know what's practical or CG anymore; they just assume everything is CG.

While Episode I did a great job blending practical location filming and effects with miniature and CG work (way better than the everyday observer gives it credit for), Episode II and III were infamous for being "digital backlot" films. And it looked that way.


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 1:06 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 31st 2003 7:00 am
Posts: 578
Location: Michigan
I'm over the "WE'RE USING REAL MODELS AND REAL LOCATIONS" gimmick. In terms of trying to draw a contrast with the prequels, it was so much horseshit. I accept its horseshittiness and move on.

I enjoyed all of the effects of TFA, as I enjoyed them for the previous 6 films.


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 1:48 pm
 
User avatar

Join: September 4th 2011 6:10 am
Posts: 132
Location: UK
I instantly recognised some of the areas when the Falcon flies to Maz Kanata’s planet Takodana when I watched the movie.
I live in a small town in The Lake District & immediately recognised the mountain called Helvellyn as the Falcon flies in around the edge of the mountain on the left (which was a prime scene in one of the trailers) http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/sta ... 1221044623

… Helvellyn can be seen in the centre background as can part of Lake Thirlmere below...it looks like they only used the shoreline of the lake as the rest looks slightly different from how the lake actually is.

I’m 90% certain when the Falcon comes into land that it is the shoreline of Lake Buttermere as well.
A friend of mine thought it was a digital background, but coming from the area where it was filmed I gave him the heads up that it was a real location.

As for the debate on the CGI & practical effects…I totally agree with GoGro's statement on this.


Post Posted: January 14th 2016 2:08 pm
 

Join: January 12th 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 64
With AOTC they did go to Italy, Spain, and The same locations in Tunisia that were used for EPIV Lars Homestead and such.


Post Posted: January 16th 2016 4:14 pm
 
OBGYN
User avatar

Join: August 25th 2004 12:31 pm
Posts: 3456

Well shit. Looks like all video links to this have now been removed. :mad:


Post Posted: January 18th 2016 11:26 pm
 
User avatar

Join: December 1st 2004 9:42 pm
Posts: 428
CoGro wrote:
If you enjoyed the effects work in TFA that's all that should matter, irrespective of whether it was accomplished via practical or CG.


This. Everything in filmmaking is a lie. That's the magic of it. I don't care how a filmmaker achieves anything provided it works.


Post Posted: January 19th 2016 9:24 pm
 

Join: October 6th 2004 6:01 pm
Posts: 233
Location: Los Angeles
Agreed. Practical or CG. I really dont care how they do it. Everyone thought the bread was cg when in fact it was practical.

But. I just rewatched parts of (forgive me) Harry potter and the deadly H part 1. And some of the Cg characters look WAY more realistic than Maz. While TFA looked good and retro, I didn't care for snoke or Maz. They looked both LOTR fake to me. Of course your milage may vary but nothing in TFA is mind blowingly amazing in my book.


Post Posted: January 19th 2016 10:50 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2541
Location: Toronto, Canada
The problem with CG characters has, and will always be, inconsistency of the artists and animators working on that shot. Maz looks pretty great in the scene she's interacting with Rey in the basement, but in others it's like she's holding the sign "look at me, I'm a CG character." That said, I think she's objectively better than most CG characters I can think of but it speaks to how challenging it is to create a photo-real CG character effect.

On the whole, I think Maz works because it's a unique alien that you can't really compare to a living breathing thing of this Earth. Snoke on the other hand did not need to be done as CG, and I think it hurts the character. It's fantastic motion-capture work, but altogether unnecessary because of how close Snoke looks to a human being. Comparing Snoke to Gollum is absolutely fair, and not just because of the actor portraying him.

Anyway, I think we take for granted how unbelievably realistic VFX are these days that when there's a shot that seems "slightly" off we jump all over it. The effects in TFA are remarkable. I just don't think the audience cares anymore about flashy VFX sequences; we just want great stories with inventive action. When I think of great action scenes from TFA, I think of specific clever action beats (like when Rey kills the engine on the Falcon to set up Finn's kill shot) not the VFX that support them. That's a good thing.


Post Posted: January 20th 2016 4:05 am
 

Join: October 6th 2004 6:01 pm
Posts: 233
Location: Los Angeles
CoGro wrote:
The problem with CG characters has, and will always be, inconsistency of the artists and animators working on that shot. Maz looks pretty great in the scene she's interacting with Rey in the basement, but in others it's like she's holding the sign "look at me, I'm a CG character." That said, I think she's objectively better than most CG characters I can think of but it speaks to how challenging it is to create a photo-real CG character effect.

On the whole, I think Maz works because it's a unique alien that you can't really compare to a living breathing thing of this Earth. Snoke on the other hand did not need to be done as CG, and I think it hurts the character. It's fantastic motion-capture work, but altogether unnecessary because of how close Snoke looks to a human being. Comparing Snoke to Gollum is absolutely fair, and not just because of the actor portraying him.

Anyway, I think we take for granted how unbelievably realistic VFX are these days that when there's a shot that seems "slightly" off we jump all over it. The effects in TFA are remarkable. I just don't think the audience cares anymore about flashy VFX sequences; we just want great stories with inventive action. When I think of great action scenes from TFA, I think of specific clever action beats (like when Rey kills the engine on the Falcon to set up Finn's kill shot) not the VFX that support them. That's a good thing.



Well i still dont think Maz looked great when compared to a 5 year old Potter movie. That Elf looked pretty darn good. With Maz I thought ahh cg without hesitation. Not a big deal but the fact that what after 22 yrs of Jurassic Park CG is still not that much better kinda makes you wonder. But I sure have a picky eye. No sweat...

reg Stories: TFA was the most unoriginal SW movie out of the 6. So all it had going for it were the flashy FX sequences, IMO. But i feel like im already beating a dead horse. I dont want to ruin it for people who loved it. Its just at times frustrating because I wanted to love it but i just can't. Ah well, life goes on.... :funkyjedi:


Post Posted: January 20th 2016 1:03 pm
 
User avatar

Join: July 31st 2004 8:45 am
Posts: 432
Any links available to watch this?


Post Posted: January 20th 2016 2:56 pm
 
Bush Pilot
User avatar

Join: March 23rd 2005 3:46 pm
Posts: 1456
https://www.sendspace.com/file/3u4tsd


Post Posted: January 20th 2016 4:10 pm
 
User avatar

Join: July 31st 2004 8:45 am
Posts: 432
Topeka wrote:
https://www.sendspace.com/file/3u4tsd

Thanks!


Post Posted: January 21st 2016 12:56 pm
 
User avatar

Title: Lover of ALL SW
Join: October 8th 2014 9:20 am
Posts: 165
Location: Germany
Topeka wrote:
https://www.sendspace.com/file/3u4tsd



Great work, THX!


Post Posted: January 21st 2016 8:19 pm
 
User avatar

Join: January 22nd 2004 10:02 pm
Posts: 1025
Location: south of Mars and north of Hell
Here's another one from fxguide



Post Posted: January 23rd 2016 11:04 am
 
OBGYN
User avatar

Join: August 25th 2004 12:31 pm
Posts: 3456
Here's a short video about TFA VFX, mostly centered on Maz:



Post Posted: January 25th 2016 7:18 am
 
OBGYN
User avatar

Join: August 25th 2004 12:31 pm
Posts: 3456
Another FX breakdown. Some of the same shots, but a few new ones too:



Post Posted: January 25th 2016 6:13 pm
 
User avatar

Join: September 4th 2011 6:10 am
Posts: 132
Location: UK
Bandersnatch wrote:
Another FX breakdown. Some of the same shots, but a few new ones too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRQPwJ0 ... RJMuOeAIjQ


Loved this one...absolutly stunning!

I hope they make it to the Blu-ray extras.


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 



Jump to:  




millenniumfalcon.com©
phpBB©