Santa Cruz Battle in 3DCG

[Local Yokel]

I'd forgotten that there is a quite detailed drawing in 'Shattered Sword' of the lighting aids on Japanese carriers. It looks as though this is derived from the Tailhook Association article in your link - says it's 'Adapted from Carl Snow and A.T.I.G.'

Interestingly, the SS drawing does indicate the presence of a white light in the centre of the red light array for signalling to the pilot, but I agree with your assessment.

I think the Tailhook article may be wrong in assigning wave-off responsibility to the hikôchô: SS is very clear in saying this was the seibin's job.

[Subchaser]

The landing lights really looked all white from a distance, especially in bad weather, because of of their high intensity. Here they look white simply because of the poor quality of the clip, nevertheless in a latter sequence you can see they are of a proper red and green colors (although green looks a bit more like a light blue in this video). Thanks for the article, it adds up some more details, there is also a good illustration of IJN landing operations in Sunburst, page 69.



Local Yokel, thanks for the link, I agree Tochy’s work is more lively, dynamics are very realistic, he chooses a better angles and those real camera effects make the video looks like a real footage, Radical 3D videos are superb too, but when you watch them there is a feeling that this is PC simulator game, a great one though.

[mdiehl]

Seldom have I heard the product of a man's labours dismissed in so mean-spirited a fashion.

Nothing mean spirited about it in the least. It's bad art. It's the CGI equivalent of a velvet elvis paint by numbers. It's poorly rendered and as historical sequence (Sakai v Southerland) simply DOESN'T match much how that encounter played out.

It's not mean spirited either to say that the movie Pearl Harbor stank to high heaven for similar reasons and many others.

mdiehl, wouldn't you care to reconsider your opinion and offer a little credit where it's due? Or is it your case that he got '99%' of this depiction of Santa Cruz wrong, too?

Well, 99% of Santa Cruz wasn't covered. It's not clear to me which particular plane v plane encounters he tried to model in the Santa Cruz animation, and not reading Japanese I can't tell whether he's named the pilots in the subtitles. It's artistic quality is on par with the stuff in MS CFSII.

I also watched the 1945 clip. Again, not very good art. The people in that (and in all his vids) are very poorly rendered IMO. I'm not sure what the technical terms are, but when you animate people you make something that looks like a wire mockup, then you overlay body parts and colors, and then you fine tune. It doesn't look fine-tuned.

If you want me to phrase it differently, I could say that I wouldn't watch it twice and I wouldn't pay monery to see something new by the same fellow. Maybe he'll get better at it.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Subchaser

Stinks??? Isn’t that a bit harsh? I can understand that you don’t like the way this memorable duel was reproduced, but the guy has some skills, you cannot deny that.

Thx for the links SC. I enjoyed the Sakai/Sutherland fight as well. He did a decent job portraying how it went down after Sakai joined the fight.

[Local Yokel]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

Seldom have I heard the product of a man's labours dismissed in so mean-spirited a fashion.

Nothing mean spirited about it in the least. It's bad art. It's the CGI equivalent of a velvet elvis paint by numbers. It's poorly rendered and as historical sequence (Sakai v Southerland) simply DOESN'T match much how that encounter played out.

It's not mean spirited either to say that the movie Pearl Harbor stank to high heaven for similar reasons and many others.

mdiehl, wouldn't you care to reconsider your opinion and offer a little credit where it's due? Or is it your case that he got '99%' of this depiction of Santa Cruz wrong, too?

Well, 99% of Santa Cruz wasn't covered. It's not clear to me which particular plane v plane encounters he tried to model in the Santa Cruz animation, and not reading Japanese I can't tell whether he's named the pilots in the subtitles. It's artistic quality is on par with the stuff in MS CFSII.

I also watched the 1945 clip. Again, not very good art. The people in that (and in all his vids) are very poorly rendered IMO. I'm not sure what the technical terms are, but when you animate people you make something that looks like a wire mockup, then you overlay body parts and colors, and then you fine tune. It doesn't look fine-tuned.

If you want me to phrase it differently, I could say that I wouldn't watch it twice and I wouldn't pay monery to see something new by the same fellow. Maybe he'll get better at it.

I'm having some difficulty in understanding how you can justify such a blanket damnation of the man's work if you were unable to recognise the events portrayed in the Santa Cruz video. For my own part I had no great problem in squaring what I saw with the accounts of the battle that I have read. Nor indeed did I find a command of Japanese necessary in order to identify some of the aircrew involved.

You make it clear that you cannot bring yourself to find any merit whatsoever in the production. I don't aspire to the right to pass so Olympian a judgment. Sadly, however, I see no reason to revise my view that "That guy's work stinks" suggests a predisposition to find fault. I prefer to look for what people have done right rather than what they've done wrong.

[mdiehl]

I'm having some difficulty in understanding how you can justify such a blanket damnation of the man's work if you were unable to recognise the events portrayed in the Santa Cruz video.

I was sure that I was perfectly clear. I'll simplify:
1. I think the artwork/rendering is unimpressive.
2. The one specific engagement modeled in detail (Sakai v Southerland) is (very) inaccurate IMO.

For my on part I had no great problem in squaring what I saw with the accounts of the battle that I have read.

In a general way it was consistent with SC in the same way that in a general way the movie Pearl Harbor was consistent with PH.

Sadly, however, I see no reason to revise my view that "That guy's work stinks" suggests a predisposition to find fault. I prefer to look for what people have done right rather than what they've done wrong.

I think it's bad art. You claim based on the one comment that I have a "predisposition" to find fault. For a guy who claims not to find fault, you have a strange predisposition for fault-finding. You have an, hmmm, interesting opinion of yourself.

Where's that green button? A yes, there it is.

[Akos Gergely]

1. I think the artwork/rendering is unimpressive.

I think it's bad art.

The people in that (and in all his vids) are very poorly rendered

Jeeez, is this guy for real ? [:D] [8|] I guess you could do much-much better....but if not you, then please show me one 3D CGI movie that's better than this one.

[DuckofTindalos]

Giving Diehl all the disrespect that he so richly deserves, I'm unfortunately inclined to say that he's entitled to his opinion on this.

Having watched it myself, I'm kinda torn between respecting the fact that one guy on a home PC made this (a feat I certainly couldn't duplicate), and the fact that I don't really find it all the technically impressive or even very interesting. Sorry, guys...

[Akos Gergely]

I'm unfortunately inclined to say that he's entitled to his opinion on this.

As do we, the rest who like it.

I'm kinda torn between respecting the fact that one guy on a home PC made this (a feat I certainly couldn't duplicate)

You said it yourself: that's why I think the guy deserves some kudos. Nothing is perfect, probably the storyline etc. is not historically correct in his movie but it's still waaay better what usually history channel and the likes produce for quite a sum of money (and more dynamic and interesting as those usually rehash the same scene hundreds of times). I'm inclined to say the ship models are even better then what we can see in some real blockbuster movies.

So my opinion is that one can rarely see home made CGI that is even approaching the level of this.

[Nikademus]

just watched Santa Cruz. I thought it was very well done given the resources (if this was home made) I was impressed. I've seen worse CGI in a full budget movie. Didn't see anything majorly wrong with the history either. He got the gist of the major events. An enjoyable rendition to watch.

[mdiehl]

As do we, the rest who like it.

Agreed 100%. Appreciation for art is largely a matter of taste and tastes vary alot. I'm not into reality talent shows either and not terribly impressed by the product, but if some people like it then good on 'em. And I'm rather a fan of American private eye fiction, although many would suggest it's vulgar trashy and for the neanderthal-minded.

[Erik Rutins]

Thought this was quite well done, thanks for the link.