Subject:
|
Re: My SW Customs version 2.0 (The Miracle of Photo Editing)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Sat, 7 Sep 2002 20:38:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
566 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Matt Sekerak writes:
> Great stuff, Brian! Your Millenium Falcon is the best out there, in my
> opinion. The overall shape and proportion are perfect! How long did it
> take you to get that just right? I've been toying with the idea of doing a
> Falcon, but I wouldn't know where to begin.
>
> > Thanks also for the managable pics!
>
> -Matt
Again, thanks for the praise, Matt! Also thanks to Gil, Jason, and Jeff! I'm
sure Han would be proud that people appreciate the work I've put into his
baby! Now to continue the answers to Matt's questions which I started the
other day:
First off, I'll start with the ship's shortcomings: In trying to be a ship
model with structural integrity, a playset, and maintain as much internal
and external accuracy as possible, it quite honestly just isn't as stable as
I 'd prefer. Mind you, it's come a long way from the old days of needing to
be propped up under the front arms and cockpit to now, when it stands stable
on just it's five landing struts (or seven if you count the doubled-up rear
ones as two each). I MIGHT be able to lift it up with two hands from
directly underneath, but I have only done it once very quickly (It sits on a
very stiff plywood sheet which is what I lift and carry to move the ship).
It's first trip in a car was a disaster, but a blessing in disguise as the
ship fell apart which led to a sturdier rebuilding! Since then it has
survived quite well through several car trips. I wrote a history of it's
journeys when I first posted pics, but I won't rehash that now, as this is
an epic response already.
Back to the structure, having a large part of it's innards as open space and
using angled plates to shape the hull while allowing headroom is a big
reason that it isn't more rigid. The "backbone" of the ship, which provides
the real support, also allows the flimsier parts to have an anchor. It is
formed by the gunwell structure along with the port and starboard structures
with airlocks on each end (the port one has the ramp) and the main "box"
structure (the piece coming from the front of the gunwell area forward, with
the front landing leg underneath. The equivalent top piece forms the
majority of the ceiling of the main hold. These form a 'T' with the port and
starboard structures being the cross part and the "box" structure as the
main part of the 'T.'
That creates support for the front 2/3rds of the ship, but the back third
(which only had an area for the rear landing struts to attach to initially,
and was completed much more recently than the front) is, frankly, a mess,
and needs MAJOR work to really be "finished." You can literally see that the
back is newer, as many of the grey plates on the top look shiny and grey,
being new, while almost all the rest of the ship's surface is a dingy, dusty
off grey (the result of being REALLY old, not being dusted, and living with
a smoker for about 8 years)! As I mentioned in my original discourse about
the ship a few months ago, I PREFER it that way, as it fits the "used" look
of George Lucas' universe, and even more so because, well, just look at a
good photo of the Falcon!
Speaking of photos, THEY are where you really want to begin if you're
attempting your own Falcon. This is something Lego apparently decided not to
do for their Falcon. Some people get upset with my critcism of Lego, but I
just feel they could have tweaked many of their designs JUST A TOUCH and
ended up with something MUCH more accurate. I know they can't make it exact,
and I also know many kids and AFOL enjoy them as they are, but making a
design that can look somewhat accurate from ALL angles doesn't seem to hard,
does it? I simply don't understand why the Lego falcon's cockpit is centered
so far below the midline that it almost touches the ground! In reality it is
centered ABOVE the midline (in the case of their Y-wing, they reversed
this,with the engine pods inexplicably HIGHER than the rest of the ship
instead of lower)!
I don't want to say people who like them shouldn't like them, I just
can'tlook at something SW and not notice when it falls short visually. So to
me, you MUST start with the reference material. SW Chronicles and From SW to
Indy Jones: the Best of The Lucasfil Archives are even better than the ILM
book you mentioned in your Shuttle reply to Jeff J. I've got stacks of
magazines (including Cinefex) and Art of SW books, etc. as well, though when
it comes to the Falcon, I've been able to see it in my mind's eye for years.
I just retain stuff I love. I actually didn't have that much reference when
I first built it, and am happy with how well that original design has held
up (as I've given it a makeover, I HAVE used photos and even measurements to
try to really shape it up, which is part of why the sightlines of the ship
hold up from many angles). It has had some inner structure overhaul, but
many things have stayed the same (I think you'll enjoy seeing the old photos
from '85, '86 and the '90s which show this evolution, if I ever get the damn
things scanned)!
As I see I'm rambling on here, I'll mercifully end it. If anyone wants
specific info on details of the ship, I'd be happy to email you. Also, I
just posted links to even MORE close-ups of my stuff, which include
on-the-verge-of-being-fuzzy isolation shots of the Falcon's cockpit, ramp,
and upper quadgun turret. Hopefully these aren't overkill, and will help
until I get those digital pics taken!
Thanks for your patience (with the length of this post), :)
Brian
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
9 Messages in This Thread:
  
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
