Chronicle: Rotunda Rex

[Chrisrex82]

Man that's a lot of discussion...couple sentences told me all I need to know.

[Shoo]

[El Diablo]

Originally Posted by Leekson

The neck is there for sure, just a bit more turned than it should be
So, what you're saying here is next... Imagine we are having exact CGI model in a form of 3D statue... It looks good from the specific movie angle, but it looks like a giraffe from other angles
Here we are having statue that doesn't look good from movie angle we all remember but it looks good from other angles, specially from behind
If I'm to choose between these two, I would choose the first one

If you want something that only looks good from one angle then you should just get a poster and save a load of cash

[Giu3232]

The TRex from JP1 was animated using the dinosaur input device (D.I.D), a mechanical piece of harware created by Tippett Studio, so I doubt they touched the lenght of the neck for that particular shot because of the limitation of this hardware.

And you need to keep in mind they had to make rigging and skinning in order to be able to animated the model, considerating they used the dinosaur input device and that the IK/FK switch were surely not available back then I doubt they would have been able to make the neck longer without breaking the rigging but I can be wrong.

Even in actual blockbuster having a controler which can change the lenght of a neck is a huge task.

It s hard to believe that TRex was just good under one precise angle. Only the hidden side may have had issues and it should be easy to fixed it without altering the visible side too much.

No way for a hero model visible in it s full glory on a money shot not to be able to rotate a bit on itself. It must have been ok on one full side or minimum 90 to 180 degres.

Last option would be shotsculpting, but they used alias back then if I well remember, and if you think shot sculpting on cash animation was available during the production in 1992 I would be very surprised

But that s just my humble opinion on the technic behind that shot from the original film.

[VickPS]

Originally Posted by wpmedia

I'm okay with the statue being slightly off-film-reference

Would be okay for me as well, i swear, if the thing didn't looked like a dwarf T-Rex the first time i saw it. lol

Originally Posted by wpmedia

Let's agree on a big thumbs up for no black spots on this amazing paint job, right?

Hell yeah, finally!

Originally Posted by El Diablo

No its not, and unless you can get the EXACT same angle then the comparison is pointless.

You are right, but sorry if i haven't been able to find a better, 100% match on wireframes pictures from '93..
It's still close enough to show what's wrong i think.

Originally Posted by Fu_Manchu

If you scrutinize the scenes, you'll notice some changes. In this one for example the neck is shorter and the hips are repositioned upwards. For the obvious purpose of the scene:

Fu, you can't see the model changing proportions at all in the scene, the neck looks like this some frames prior:



That is just the angle.

Originally Posted by Fu_Manchu

I can't see the maquette doing a full turnaround like in the rotunda picture, there's no way with this body:

Right, unless you "animate" the neck to achieve the pose you want to recreate.. you know, the kind of things people do when they create a statue? :P

Originally Posted by Fu_Manchu

So my guess it that they (ILM) elongated the neck and modified the torso to be able to do the full turnaround in the movie. There was no other human way to achieve that:

You see, in this frame it looks like a giraffe. Compare this neck with the other scene above:

But the neck is the same in all the sequences, it's just animated differently according to what the animal is doing, like the little hump on the top of the neck being stretched when the animal roars..

Originally Posted by Fu_Manchu

This is why I say this is complicated. Simply because there was not an unique CGI T-Rex refence in the movie, there were several of them!

You mean like a different model for every single frame? lol
Come on now, there's one model, a model you have to be prepared to animate though, if you want to achieve a particular pose.

Originally Posted by Fu_Manchu

So my humble conclussion: this is why you won't see the rotunda picture at all on this statue, like I said it's impossible to reposition the model in that stance without heavy modifications that would make it ugly and we all would be complaining about.

But why?!

Why haven't i read a single complaint about the Breakout neck?





What's up with all these "giraffe" comments now?

They nailed a much harder and extreme pose on their last statue, (a pose which was achieved with this tool in the movie, unlike the rotunda sequence), and that's why i'll defend the Breakout to death, because it's ----ing accurate like no other statue around, and that's because they did what they had to do to recreate the pose.. unlike what happened here.

I mean i said i prefer the Breakout to Julien Rex JUST because of this:

Originally Posted by Phil the sixth

I think CC made the right decision to keep it more natural looking.

I think what really happened is that this time Chronicle decided to not fully sculpt their Rex, like they did with the Breakout, and go with a pre-existing neck and head instead (the 1:5) which don't fit the pose.

Originally Posted by Leekson

It looks good from the specific movie angle, but it looks like a giraffe from other angles
Here we are having statue that doesn't look good from movie angle we all remember but it looks good from other angles, specially from behind
If I'm to choose between these two, I would choose the first one

Would just look like the animal in the movie from all kinds of front views, and like this in profile.

[rjszar]

Ouch. The rotunda rex is $1350.

[VickPS]

Originally Posted by Giu3232

The TRex from JP1 was animated using the dinosaur input device (D.I.D), a mechanical piece of harware created by Tippett Studio, so I doubt they touched the lenght of the neck for that particular shot because of the limitation of this hardware.

And you need to keep in mind they had to make rigging and skinning in order to be able to animated the model, considerating they used the dinosaur input device and that the IK/FK switch were surely not available back then I doubt they would have been able to make the neck longer without breaking the rigging but I can be wrong.

Even in actual blockbuster having a controler which can change the lenght of a neck is a huge task.

It s hard to believe that TRex was just good under one precise angle. Only the hidden side may have had issues and it should be easy to fixed it without altering the visible side too much.

No way for a hero model visible in it s full glory on a money shot not to be able to rotate a bit on itself. It must have been ok on one full side or minimum 90 to 180 degres.

Last option would be shotsculpting, but they used alias back then if I well remember, and if you think shot sculpting on cash animation was available during the production in 1992 I would be very surprised

But that s just my humble opinion on the technic behind that shot from the original film.

This.
With a little clarification on the Rex D.I.D., which was only used for the Breakout scene. Just to give credit to all ILM animators.

Originally Posted by rjszar

Ouch. The rotunda rex is $1350.

Well, it's a huge piece.. but still an hard pass for me atm.

[Leekson]

Originally Posted by VickPS

Would be okay for me as well, i swear, if the thing didn't looked like a dwarf T-Rex the first time i saw it. lol


Hell yeah, finally!


You are right, but sorry if i haven't been able to find a better, 100% match on wireframes pictures from '93..
It's still close enough to show what's wrong i think.


Fu, you can't see the model changing proportions at all in the scene, the neck looks like this some frames prior:

That is just the angle.


Right, unless you "animate" the neck to achieve the pose you want to recreate.. you know, the kind of things people do when they create a statue? :P


But the neck is the same in all the sequences, it's just animated differently according to what the animal is doing, like the little hump on the top of the neck being stretched when the animal roars..

You mean like a different model for every single frame? lol
Come on now, there's one model, a model you have to be prepared to animate though, if you want to achieve a particular pose.


But why?!

Why haven't i read a single complaint about the Breakout neck?


What's up with all these "giraffe" comments now?

They nailed a much harder and extreme pose on their last statue, (a pose which was achieved with in the movie, unlike the rotunda sequence), and that's why i'll defend the Breakout to death, because it's ----ing accurate like no other statue around, and that's because they did what they had to do to recreate the pose.. unlike what happened here.

I mean i said i prefer the Breakout to Julien Rex JUST because of this:




I think what really happened is that this time Chronicle decided to not fully sculpt their Rex, like they did with the Breakout, and go with a pre-existing neck and head instead (the 1:5) which don't fit the pose.


Would just look like the animal in the movie from all kinds of front views, and like this in profile.

Totally agree with you

[CAIN MKII]

I'm not sold on this one, I don't like the pose and at $1350, I pass with no regrets.
I have the BO, the female 1/5 bust, it's enough for now.

[Kefka2200]

So is the price actually $1350?