CGI for a Merlin
Discussion
www.alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/2006-merlins.mpeg
Very clever stuff...
Edited: Best to 'Right Click->Save As...'
>> Edited by eharding on Monday 16th January 22:20
Very clever stuff...
Edited: Best to 'Right Click->Save As...'
>> Edited by eharding on Monday 16th January 22:20
Eric Mc said:
I saw that a while ago and was extremely impressed.
CGI is coming on in leaps and bounds and it will not be long before full length feature films showing long extinct aircraft in a realistic way should be totally feasible.
Yeah, they'll be able to remake The Dambusters, only this time the Yanks will be flying, all the dams will be hit and Leonardo Dicrapio will rescue a one-legged black Jewess slave-labourer (his sister, probably) from a Konzentrationslager hut seconds before 50 trillion gallons of water washes it away.
And the dog will be called 'Kaffir'.
Eric Mc said:
They may very well be re-making "The Dambusters" too.
It would be worth it to see a whole squadron of CGI'd Lanacsters belting along at low level in the moonlight - in colour.
Sorry, I can't willingly suspend my disbelief long enough. For that same reason I can't watch Titanic. I know damn well the real ship is rotting away 12000 feet down and no amount of computer wizardy can bring it back for me. At least Memphis Belle used real planes (even if the acting was more wooden than Pinnochio)...
Oh, and in moonlight, there's very little colour rendition
You've got to admit that the original film, whilst great in many respects, is a tad ropey in places. And they were never allowed show the bouncing bomb mechanism properly or describe how it REALLY worked as it was still on the Top Secret list in 1955.
I obviously have grave reservations too as to what an American backed film might degenerate into - but I am pretty sure that, if it stuck to the truth and was honest about what really happened, (which the original film wasn't that accurate in amny places either) then it would be truly spectacular.
>> Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 17th January 00:22
I obviously have grave reservations too as to what an American backed film might degenerate into - but I am pretty sure that, if it stuck to the truth and was honest about what really happened, (which the original film wasn't that accurate in amny places either) then it would be truly spectacular.
>> Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 17th January 00:22
wedg1e said:
For that same reason I can't watch Titanic. I know damn well the real ship is rotting away 12000 feet down and no amount of computer wizardy can bring it back for me. At least Memphis Belle used real planes (even if the acting was more wooden than Pinnochio)...
Off topic a little, but the Titanic is one of the most historically correct films ever made. Sure there was a few liberties taken with songs and characters and dialogue, but regarding the ship, it's nigh on perfect. James Cameron is a Titanic nut, having visited the wreck several times outside of the film and the more recent "return to Titanic" thing on Discovery. The level of detail they went into is incredible. As a bit of a Titanic nut myself, I love the film for this reason. The acting and dialogue is an abonination, but look beyond that and it's an incredible specticle.
I'd hope that a dambusters film would do the same. Ignore the silly love story, and enjoy the view.
Edit: The majority of what is seen in the Titanic is hand crafted sets in excact scale and colour. Not too much cgi except for full ship shots.
>> Edited by up-the-dubs on Tuesday 17th January 00:29
up-the-dubs said:
For that same reason I can't watch Titanic. I know damn well the real ship is rotting away 12000 feet down and no amount of computer wizardy can bring it back for me. At least Memphis Belle used real planes (even if the acting was more wooden than Pinnochio)...
Off topic a little, but the Titanic is one of the most historically correct films ever made. Sure there was a few liberties taken with songs and characters and dialogue, but regarding the ship, it's nigh on perfect. James Cameron is a Titanic nut, having visited the wreck several times outside of the film and the more recent "return to Titanic" thing on Discovery. The level of detail they went into is incredible. As a bit of a Titanic nut myself, I love the film for this reason. The acting and dialogue is an abonination, but look beyond that and it's an incredible specticle.
I'd hope that a dambusters film would do the same. Ignore the silly love story, and enjoy the view.
Edit: The majority of what is seen in the Titanic is hand crafted sets in excact scale and colour. Not too much cgi except for full ship shots.
>> Edited by up-the-dubs on Tuesday 17th January 00:29
I appreciate all that; my trouble is that I have no imagination
Eric Mc said:
You've got to admit that the original film, whilst great in many respects, is a tad ropey in places.
Oh, it's not too bad... OK, the effect of the columns of water from the explosions is a bit cheesy. But so is CGI. And effects like that are just what CGI is worst at. I think I prefer breaking waves through a cutout myself.
Eric Mc said:
And they were never allowed show the bouncing bomb mechanism properly or describe how it REALLY worked as it was still on the Top Secret list in 1955.
I think if you compare it with the now-declassified clips of the tests of the original, it looks jolly good. Maybe they asked the Germans about it
Eric Mc said:
I obviously have grave reservations too as to what an American backed film might degenerate into - but I am pretty sure that, if it stuck to the truth and was honest about what really happened, (which the original film wasn't that accurate in amny places either) then it would be truly spectacular.
...And if it avoids excessive CGI.
Edited for formatting
>> Edited by Pigeon on Tuesday 17th January 14:17
CGI is moving on at an incredible pace. Have you watched those Moaquito shots? They are the best CGI renditions of aircraft I've ever seen. The only thing that lets it down is the soundtrack. Apparently it originates in Japan and perhaps he didn't have easy access to genuine Merlin sounds. In fact, for purists like me, even a Merlin on its own wouldn't be good enough. The Merlin in a Mosquito, because of the wooden airframe, sounded quite different to say a Spitfire or a Lancaster
mybrainhurts said:
Ah, yes, got it now.....Sigh for a Merlin.
Just reading it at the moment - got to the part where
Henshaw describes barrel-rolling the Lancaster.
(Just found out that one of the regulars at last
years Standard level aerobatics competitions,
campaigning a Christen Eagle, won't be competing
this year, owing to a more pressing commitment -
his employers decided that with all that tail-wheel
experience a spell in the BBMF would be just
the thing. I have no doubt Henshaw would be able
to bring a Spitfire along to any competition and
walk off with all the silverware, but sadly
Smithy won't be allowed to indulge in such
high jinks...the lucky so-and-so.)
What's wrong with the action scenes in Battle of Britain - they ARE real (with the odd exception).
Where a Barttle of Britain movie could be improved would be the portrayal of the Spitfires using the right marks (only Mk 1s were in service in 1940) and the use of genuine German versions of the Heinkel He111s and Messerschmitt Bf109Es (Spanish Merlin engined versions of both were used in the film). Indeed, types which were not included at all in the original film could now be inserted (Dornier Do17s, Dornier Do215s, Junkers Ju88s etc).
Where a Barttle of Britain movie could be improved would be the portrayal of the Spitfires using the right marks (only Mk 1s were in service in 1940) and the use of genuine German versions of the Heinkel He111s and Messerschmitt Bf109Es (Spanish Merlin engined versions of both were used in the film). Indeed, types which were not included at all in the original film could now be inserted (Dornier Do17s, Dornier Do215s, Junkers Ju88s etc).
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff