Warbird Information Exchange

Still even in movies like 'Air force' I was more entertained and the film held my interest with the models flying and crashing much more so than the poor CGI and crappy plot of 'Pearl Harbor' ... what an embarrasment it must have been to the veterans who watched the premiere on the flight deck in PH.

So far, I haven't seen a single film with CGI aircraft that I feel is worth watching. In fact, they have all annoyed me and ruined my enjoyment of the film itself. I guess I am very tired of special effects artists patting themselves on the back and not getting called to task for poor work. Skills that looks outstanding on imaginary creatures and dwarves need to have the same level of believability when applied to real world objects.(Of course, I haven't actually seen a real fire breathing dragon to be able to tell if a CGI of it looks good or not. But I am repeatedly told by advertising its great....).

Having seen a couple of WWI replicas a few months before going to see "Flyboys", my wife beat me to the punch when she thought it looked stupid with Fokkers doing aggresive aerobatics...and gaggles of Nieuports blazing into the sky in formation, while all facing different crosswinds (well, except for the CGI'ed doubles used in the same frame).

Of course, the real problem is that Hollyweird doesn't give a darn about anything except another "Love Story" or "Chick Flick". Funny, they have the most advanced tools in the world to work with...and put out nothing but steaming sewage anyway. Pretty bad when the "Spitfires in Space" on the last Dr Who season look better than feature film aircraft.....

I can tell you all that during the filming of Flyboys the film crews would turn to the pilots and ask if they could go faster, and the CGI guys told producers they could make aircraft look more interesting in flight, oh dear.

_________________
Here

From what I understand, well done CGI is pretty costly stuff. I wonder how the cost would compare to, say, well done model work. I'm not talking about the cheesy B-52 scenes (with the B-17 shadow) in Dr. Strangelove but take a look at pretty well every flying (or whatever you want to call it) scene from any of the original three Star Wars movies. For being thirty years old, those scenes look better than the CGI additions they've made in recent years. Also, if you were sure your movie would be a hit the models could be sold afterward to help cover their costs. Of course, I know nothing about the logistics of actually doing this so I could be way out to lunch.

-Tim

_________________
Keep 'em Flying.

I think you're correct. I had thought it was a Piits, but either way, it doesn't matter, they both have higher roll rates than period WWI aircraft. Also, when you juxtapose the CGI planes in "Flyboys" with the actual Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter flown for the cameras and seen in the same film, the difference between them is huge!
Jerry

_________________
"Always remember that, when you enter the ocean or the forest, you are no longer at the top of the food chain."

I was in the aerial unit for Flyboys, it was Nigel Lamb's Jungmann that was used for the motion capture. One of the problems, common with film making, was that they were trying to make a 100 million dollar movie for 60 million. We heard that the budget for the CGI was a lot larger than the budget for the real airplanes, but I can't say for sure that that's true, might have been just a rumor. You'll notice that most of the low level stuff was real airplanes, and most of the high level stuff was CGI, apparently it's easier to do clouds and sky than trees and hills. There was a lot of green screen work also at the studio in London with full size airplanes mounted high off the ground on gimballs in a huge building. I do wish that the CGI people had thought to have a pilot with them for some final editing, to pick out things like using bottom rudder in a vertical turn, and the roll rates and such. And it is always harder to please the airplane nuts with an airplane movie. They don't make them for 2,000 airplane buffs, they make them for 4 million 15 to 25-year olds.

Don't think this has been posted yet, but this guy should get some aviation film CGI work:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNJ8rIEPLOo




-

_________________
http://www.biplanerides1.com/

IL2 is getting a little dated, but it is still possible to make some very good 'movies' with it. This one dates back to 2005, but it's still one of the best done with that game. It's all in how you package it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Neka58JplAQ

Computer games can be useful tools for people who want to tell a story but have virtually no money to spend on a movie production. Do a search for "checkertails mysticpuma" and you'll find a DVD-length production (that is freely available via a torrent if you want a high quality copy) that's a 1 hour and 40 minutes long history of the 325th Fighter Group. Well, Part I, at least. Part II will probably take him another 2 years to make. It includes not only CGI battles, but also archival footage and lots of interviews with vets from the 325th. Pretty much all of the flying scenes were made with IL2, but all of the persons involved tried to make them as realistic as possible within the limits of the game. All of the paint jobs on the planes, the maps and missions were made especially for this movie. Definitely a case of getting far more than you paid for.

This link has a stream of it from bliptv and also a link to where you can get the DVD download.
http://il2mdb.flightsimmachinima.com/325th-checkertails

_________________

If this is true then the maneuvers that the Pitts Special was doing for those control deflections must have been spectacular!
Chris...

Yes,
That Mosquito landing is the best CGI I've ever seen. Probably based on the landing scenes out of 633 Squadron or Mosquito Squadron, and rightly so. It's photographic in it's realism.
Chris...

Slow site, double post, what's new.
Chris...

.....or what about this guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96Y-KmvV ... re=related

My first thought in the opening clip was "What zero is that?" Holy Cow!

Note how the footage is crafted to look like it's been literally filmed by a cameraman. Especially the bananna pass of the Oscar, you see the camera shake and everything. To me next to improper movement making CGI look cheesy, is the impossible camera angles the programers come up with that just screams out that it is fake. The lighting of the planes is terrific, the best yet. That short clip of the Tony's in formation looks so real.