Dogfight

On Jan 14, 12:20 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
FledgeIII wrote in news:712ca3ba-88e2-47e2-a8c9-
:



One quibble is that attention to detail accuracy seems to either slip
or get a little spectacular at times - especially post *boom*; a Mig
gets hit and goes on to defy rational physics before/while coming
apart - or one of HMS Hood's rear turrets gets thrown several hundred
feet in the air from a Prince of Wales' bridge POV shot, perhaps for
"dramatic effect".

Yeah, the airplanes don't go whare they should in accordance with the
attitudes they are in .

Bertie

History Channel's been running an afternoon marathon of sorts today.

Spotted another little niggle: they were just showing a Spad XIII
rolling inverted and going by in a head-on pass from an opposing
pilot's POV in an Albatross. As the Spad whips past, the perspective
goes into super-slow-mo mode...

So I idly glance at the screen, and something don't look right. Take a
closer look, and lo, either that 'ole Hispano's spinning the wrong
way, or somebody put the prop on backwards; it's spinning *against*
the pitch. Doh!

No big thing, but it was cute to catch that one...

FledgeIII wrote in news:d5fc1fd9-aed8-4270-9d1e-
:

On Jan 14, 12:20 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
FledgeIII wrote in news:712ca3ba-88e2-47e2-
a8c9-
:



One quibble is that attention to detail accuracy seems to either
slip
or get a little spectacular at times - especially post *boom*; a
Mig
gets hit and goes on to defy rational physics before/while coming
apart - or one of HMS Hood's rear turrets gets thrown several
hundred
feet in the air from a Prince of Wales' bridge POV shot, perhaps
for
"dramatic effect".

Yeah, the airplanes don't go whare they should in accordance with the
attitudes they are in .

Bertie

History Channel's been running an afternoon marathon of sorts today.

Spotted another little niggle: they were just showing a Spad XIII
rolling inverted and going by in a head-on pass from an opposing
pilot's POV in an Albatross. As the Spad whips past, the perspective
goes into super-slow-mo mode...

So I idly glance at the screen, and something don't look right. Take a
closer look, and lo, either that 'ole Hispano's spinning the wrong
way, or somebody put the prop on backwards; it's spinning *against*
the pitch. Doh!

No big thing, but it was cute to catch that one...


I've seen that one. the way the Spad and the others manuever is just
ridiculous. There's no way a Spad could roll in that way. That stupid
movie 'Flyboys' is just the same. The dogfight program is still good,
though. Flyboys was a huge disappointment!
When you think they could have made a real movie about the Lafayette
Escradille and the opportunity lost...


Bertie

On Jan 14, 9:17*am, FledgeIII wrote:


Dudley could likely ask someone in the sim biz and find out who's
system is doing the rendering. I'd think that's a fairly tight
fraternity.

Not sure what the benefit of using a flight sim program would be. I
assume they would use the same animation software that they use for
anything else. They're more concerned with texturing then realistic
flight. They map out the flights before hand so a flight sim program
that injected "real world" affects would just be a nucense.

-robert

On Jan 14, 12:36 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
On Jan 14, 9:17 am, FledgeIII wrote:



Dudley could likely ask someone in the sim biz and find out who's
system is doing the rendering. I'd think that's a fairly tight
fraternity.

Not sure what the benefit of using a flight sim program would be. I
assume they would use the same animation software that they use for
anything else. They're more concerned with texturing then realistic
flight. They map out the flights before hand so a flight sim program
that injected "real world" affects would just be a nucense.

-robert

Didn't mean to say that a particular *sim* was doing the show - rather
that there's any number of off the shelf flight model/graphics
engines out there that could be generically applied.

IOW, it's doubtful that someone developed a proprietary system solely
for a single show.

Other than that, I personally wouldn't know.

This page makes me think the computer-generated effects mostly came
out of a program called LightWave, running on a few unspecified
"workstations" (the product is available for both Macs and Windows
PCs), in the hands of an animation/visual-effects shop called
Radical3d:
http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/prof...ight/index.php

You now know as much as I do and hopefully not less than you did
before.

Cheers,
--Joe

On Jan 14, 9:07 pm, Ad absurdum per aspera
wrote:
This page makes me think the computer-generated effects mostly came
out of a program called LightWave, running on a few unspecified
"workstations" (the product is available for both Macs and Windows
PCs), in the hands of an animation/visual-effects shop called
Radical3d:http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/prof...ight/index.php

You now know as much as I do and hopefully not less than you did
before.

Cheers,
--Joe
Well, that about sums it up. Thanks...

"The animation was of sufficient quality to make some History Channel
representatives believe they were viewing actual historical camera
footage."

Oh my.

On Jan 14, 10:19*pm, FledgeIII wrote:
"The animation was of sufficient quality to make some History Channel
representatives believe they were viewing actual historical camera
footage."

Oh my.

The first time I saw it, I tuned in midway through the program and I
was astonished that they had found a Mig-15 and F-86 in that good of
condition to re-enact a scenario. It wasn't until there was a kill
that I put two and two together. Now I've got Season 1 on DVD. Love
the show.