Forums (I/O Tower)
Forums 
  General Discussion 
 Just another lightcycle


New New Comments | Post No Change | Locked Closed
AuthorComments: FirstPrevious Page: of 6 PagesNextLast
Cueball
User

Posts: 155
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Thursday, March, 23, 2006 5:58 PM
Hi!

Thank you all for your nice comments.

I set up a short animation, now i have to try
how do i do the walls when moving the cycles around.
I already got some ideas, ill see if any of em work

http://www.cueball.de/images/Tron/Lightcycle_Test1.avi(311kb DivX6 avi)

Dirk




 
TheReelTodd
Sector Admin

Posts: 0
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Thursday, March, 23, 2006 6:58 PM
Wow, Cueball - that last render is outstanding!

It almost looks like it is a screen cap of the film! Aside from the game grid arena missing detailing, you really nailed the look of the whole thing!

You keep them coming!



 
TheReelTodd
Sector Admin

Posts: 0
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Thursday, March, 23, 2006 7:22 PM
wwwmwww Wrote:
TheReelTodd Wrote:
I'm guessing that the overall ease of meshes over primitives has caused this major shift away from the use of primitives and therefore there is not as many software engines developed around the rendering of primitives.

Overall ease? Is it really easer to position 11,768 polys then it is 57 primitives. Being someone that's never made a mesh its hard for me to understand that but I tend to think it must be seeing how fast some of you can pump out these models. Then again I'm probably the Monk of model builders...

I think Traahn covered this pretty well already. I don't know exactly how personally, but I do know that one does not need to manipulate each polygon - they're all kind of intertwined in some kind of digital silly-putty like form. A pull here, poke here, and tuck there manipulates them all at once... or something like that.




 
Cueball
User

Posts: 155
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 5:14 AM
Hi!

After going through some frames to get some pictures of the
blinking boxes in the wheels, i found another mismatch in my model.

Changed the frontwheel a bit, i guess Carl will spot it

Ther are few more things which need to be changed,
(i.e. edge-shading) but i leave them for now.

There are more models which need to be done

Many, many Tron-models, and then there is still the Serenity waiting in my drawer....

Dirk




 
Sketch
Sector Admin

Posts: 2,939
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 8:50 AM
Wow! The cycles look wonderful Cueball! Man that's impressive! The outlines are just right, and the color and shading of the gradient areas are dead on like the film! Love the group shot image. abortion pills online abortion questions cytotec abortion

https://www.flickr.com/photos/blue_bezel/
 
wwwmwww
User

Posts: 1,230
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 9:39 AM
Cueball Wrote:
After going through some frames to get some pictures of the blinking boxes in the wheels, i found another mismatch in my model.

Changed the frontwheel a bit, i guess Carl will spot it

Hmmm... ok put me on the spot.

Since you are talking about the blinking boxes the only thing I notice is the front spoke (what I've called the blinking boxes) doesn't extend out to the blue part of the tire. Is that it? I don't notice any change in the shape of the front tire itself.

I will say this... when I first modeled my front tire I used two cones for the cutouts on the side. After watching the assembly sequence of the light cycle in the extras that came with the DVD I was convinced the cutouts should be spheres. However the change is next to impossible to spot in even my renders where I know where to look. In POV-Ray this change helped some as spheres render faster then cones. I'm guessing maybe you made this change as well but if so its very hard for me to tell.

I also want to say I think your images capture the look and feel of the movie much better then mine (even if you are using a mesh). The lighting and the outlining just can't be done this well in POV-Ray or atleast I can't get POV-Ray to give me this look. Personally I've sort of given up on copying the EXACT look and working on getting the shapes correct and trying to add a little of my own flare to the look.

Carl




 
Cueball
User

Posts: 155
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 10:55 AM
Hi Carl!

It looks like the black part of the wheel (rim) is slightly curved inwards.
There are a few shots, where you can see it.


I saw that assembly too, maybe they changed it later.... dunno

I guess there will be some secrets left.

As for the look:

Im pretty impressed, what can be done with povray,
if you consider its free!
Lightwave was a tad more expencive...

Btw, i really like your lightcycle render, where it looked
like transparent plastic!
Its for more creative than me just copying old stuff

Since the wont go out of my head, i checked
the screencaps again and i guess i can manage the treads.
I (hopefully) understand how they were build.

Almost forgot.... could it be that the solar-sailer was build
using a polygon-modeller?
I found that big printout of it, where it looks like.
That damn thing is on my list too

greetings,
Dirk
on line abortion pill misoprostol dose abortion medical abortion pill online


 
ed keefe
User

Posts: 143
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 4:22 PM
Wow and wow again. I can't keep up with all this great work. The cycles look fantastic cueball, and I love the quick animation. I can't wait to see more. I am away with work at the moment, and its so frustrating not being able check in to the forum as often as I would like.

I can't wait to see what will be here next time I log in.

edd


 
wwwmwww
User

Posts: 1,230
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 6:00 PM
Cueball Wrote:Hi Carl!

Hello Dirk,

Cueball Wrote:It looks like the black part of the wheel (rim) is slightly curved inwards.
There are a few shots, where you can see it.

I'm not so sure about that. The lines superimposed here aren't rendered or part of the model. I think this is hand drawn detailing so I wouldn't base too much on that. To me the box that makes the front spoke looks like it tilts into the rim as it moves out from the center. With the rim being solid black I really can't tell if it has any shape other then flat. As for rather the spoke SHOULD tilt into the rim to the point its completely buried before it reaches the colored portion of the tire I'm not sure. Maybe its time to study more frames. If the rim itself is dished out and not flat I can't really tell from this picture. If there are others that show this could you post them.

Cueball Wrote:As for the look:

Im pretty impressed, what can be done with povray,
if you consider its free!
Lightwave was a tad more expencive...

I'm just cheap. For me POV-Ray is also really easy to learn. Since Lightwave does so much more I asume the learning curve is a bit steeper.


Cueball Wrote:
Btw, i really like your lightcycle render, where it looked
like transparent plastic!

Thanks... I liked that look too.

Cueball Wrote:
Its for more creative than me just copying old stuff

Maybe, but what you are doing I think is harder. Its hard to copy the look of other artists exactly. When you are making your own look you have much more freedom to play around with. Personally I love the look of TRON but I also feel there is always room for improvement. Everthing in TRON looks a little flat and dull. I think a few reflective and shiny surfaces brighten things up a bit.

Cueball Wrote:Since the wont go out of my head, i checked
the screencaps again and i guess i can manage the treads.
I (hopefully) understand how they were build.

I still owe you some pictures. I'll try to get to them this weekend. Is it ok if I post them here instead of in the recognizer thread?

Cueball Wrote:Almost forgot.... could it be that the solar-sailer was build using a polygon-modeller?

It was. I'll say more in a minute.

Carl



 
wwwmwww
User

Posts: 1,230
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 6:05 PM
wwwmwww Wrote:
I still owe you some pictures. I'll try to get to them this weekend. Is it ok if I post them here instead of in the recognizer thread?

By here... I mean in your tank thread. I forgot I was in your light cycle thread for a moment.

Carl


 
Cueball
User

Posts: 155
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 6:12 PM
Hi!

Ive to capture more frames of the cycle, maybe i will find something.

As for the sailer, i was just reading that big article
you mentioned, they wrote about it.
This one will be a bit harder to re-make

I just did a wireframe-render, more coming tomorrow.

Now its time for me to hit the sack...

EDIT:
Ouch, cant hold my eyes open anymore, this picture belongs to the tank-thread.......


order abortion pill http://unclejohnsprojects.com/template/default.aspx?morning-after-pill-price where to buy abortion pillwhere to buy abortion pill http://blog.bitimpulse.com/template/default.aspx?abortion-types buy abortion pill onlineabortion pills online abortion pill online purchase cytotec abortion


 
wwwmwww
User

Posts: 1,230
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 6:34 PM
Cueball Wrote:Almost forgot.... could it be that the solar-sailer was build
using a polygon-modeller?
I found that big printout of it, where it looks like.
That damn thing is on my list too

Here is more or less the list I started with...

http://www.tron-sector.com/forums/default.aspx?do=top&id=271774  

                Designed By    Modeled By
Sark's Carrier  Syd Mead       Triple-I
Sark's Pod      Syd Mead?      Triple-I?
MCP             Syd Mead       Triple-I
Light Cycle     Syd Mead       MAGI
Tank            Syd Mead       MAGI
Recognizer      John Norton    MAGI
Solar Sailer    Moebius        Triple-I
Grid Bug        John Norton    Not CGI


The MAGI models are CSG's. I believe the Triple-I model's are meshs. However in scenes where models from both companies show up I think things got blurred a bit. For example check out this screen cap...


I'm pretty sure this carrier is a CSG made by MAGI to go with their Tank. Note it looks very different then this carrier.


I'm also inclined to believe this recognizer is a mesh made by Triple-I to work with the Solar Sailer as it looks so different then the other recognisers seen in the film.


I'm not certain of any of this but I think it makes sense.

Carl


 
TronFAQ
Sector Admin

Posts: 4,467
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 7:00 PM


Carl, I think that theory makes a lot of sense. There are some scenes where the "vehicles" (for lack of a better term) that were assigned to each company, crossed paths in the film. When they did, each company had to create their own version of the "vehicle" that the other company was specializing in.

For example, the picture you posted with the Carrier above the Tank. MAGI did all the Tank scenes. So when the Carrier needed to appear overhead, MAGI did their best to re-create Triple-I's Carrier. And sometimes when we saw Recognizers riding the energy beam in pursuit of the Solar Sailer, Triple-I put in their re-creation of MAGI's Recognizer.

This is what must have lead to the inconsistencies, that you've spotted in the models.



LDSOFacebookTwitterYouTubeDeviantArt

 
wwwmwww
User

Posts: 1,230
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 7:13 PM
redrain85 Wrote:
This is what must have lead to the inconsistencies, that you've spotted in the models.

It doesn't explain all of them. Even if you call this Triple-I's Recognizer it still looks like MAGI had 3 versions of their own.

Carl
order abortion pill abortion pill buy online where to buy abortion pillwhere to buy abortion pill http://blog.bitimpulse.com/template/default.aspx?abortion-types buy abortion pill online


 
tron_fanfare
User

Posts: 49
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 8:38 PM
Likely the desrepencies (spelling?) are due to the time it took to re-make or correct a model. For example, the Magi team are making the first reco scene and render it and print it to film, then one of the animators sees something they intended to put in and did it on the next run thinking the result was too small to show up to the average movie-goer. With the time crunch they were under it would have been next to impossible to junk a section of film and then re-render/reprint it to reflect a "minor" correction to a model or models.

"How are ya gonna run the universe if you can't even answer a few unsolvable problems?" - Flynn in the real world
 
gRiD_89a
User

Posts: 0
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 9:36 PM
always impressed with the talent here!!


 
TronFAQ
Sector Admin

Posts: 4,467
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Friday, March, 24, 2006 11:53 PM


wwwmwww Wrote:It doesn't explain all of them. Even if you call this Triple-I's Recognizer it still looks like MAGI had 3 versions of their own.
True. I wonder if the variations were mistakes, or perhaps attempts to simplify the models in order to reduce rendering times. (I don't recall right now if the discrepancies were added, removed, or simply differing details.)



LDSOFacebookTwitterYouTubeDeviantArt

 
luggage
User

Posts: 0
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Saturday, March, 25, 2006 5:57 AM
TheReelTodd Wrote:
wwwmwww Wrote:...At least in the early 80's it was easier to render and thus animate 57 primitives. If it's 57 primitives versus 11,768 polys I can easily understand why. However today that doesn't seem to be the case any more. I have to admite I'm curious why work with meshs has come so much farther then work with primitives in the last 20+ years.

Carl

I think (not positive) that meshes evolved well beyond the use of primitives because they're so much more versatile. It's a lot easier to model with meshes (at least logically it seems so - I've never tried either). It still seems to me that the use of primitives would be far more efficient than their equivalent shapes in mesh form - it's a lot less processing power needed. But then again, meshes and primitives utilize two very different ways of reflecting light.

I'm guessing that the overall ease of meshes over primitives has caused this major shift away from the use of primitives and therefore there is not as many software engines developed around the rendering of primitives.

That's my guess anyway. It would be interesting to hear about this in depth from someone who knows a bit more about the whole thing and the advantages of both.


Well, here is my opinion. Solid modelling as in the "good old times" is not dead yet. It just is not consumer ware.

The problem is: When dealing with meshes there is basically only a single primitive type: triangles. When using solid modelling you need a lot of primitives (resulting in a lot of software or a lot of hardware). However, the algorithm of 3D cards is well suited for "simple scenes" and produce images sufficient for games and the like. And I really mean simple scenes, even if you see state of the art ego shooters.

Cueball says: (12202 points, 11768 polys misoprostol dose abortion medical abortion pill online


 
Cueball
User

Posts: 155
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Saturday, March, 25, 2006 5:57 AM
Hi Carl!

I checked the DVD again and captured more frames.

Got a nice shot of Ram's Lightcycle.
(when they left the crack from the arena and turned right)



I tried 3 versions so far.

Version 1 was done with cutting a stump cone into both sides of the wheel,
and then stucked a cylinder into it

Version 2 same, but instead of the flat circle of the cylinder,
i used a very flat ball to make the rim slightly curved.

Version 3 was just using a ball which was sized to 1/2 on one axis, otherwise the cut would be too deep.
I tried, but it looked all wrong.

I think V3 looks pretty good, but im not 100% happy with it.

Dirk

Version 2:
Version 3:
abortion pills online abortion pill online purchase cytotec abortion


 
wwwmwww
User

Posts: 1,230
Re: Just another lightcycle

on Sunday, March, 26, 2006 7:23 PM
Cueball Wrote:
I guess there will be some secrets left.

Maybe NOT.

I spent a fair bit yesterday trying to prove this issue you found with the front tire was an abnormality that only showed up in a few frames. I simply felt it had to be "wrong" as it broke a symmetry the front tire had with the rear tire and besides what good is a spoke that doesn't extend out to the inner edge of the tire.

What I found...







... was that I was flat wrong on not just this point but on another as well. And more importantly I see exactly how I was wrong and I'm now working on version 4 of my light cycle. Keep in mind MAGI only had 57 primites to work with and if the spoke shapes count I'm using 56 so I don't have much to play with... and believe it or not I believe I can correct this and stay at 56 primites.

Carl




 
FirstPrevious Page: of 6 PagesNextLast
New New Comments | Post No Change | Locked Closed
Forums 
  General Discussion 
 Just another lightcycle