Rocket Surgeon said:
Really Stoo, the emotions are heart warming, but are hardly a good substitute for an actual reference.
??? The abundance of Go-Motion in "Doom" is a well-documented fact. (Do you really need reference for that?)
Rocket Surgeon said:
Wow, it's amazing how you can marginalize a "bona-fide" hard cover volume, whose entire reason for being is to showcase the special effects depatment in question approved by god Lucas himself, then scrap it in favor of some ramblings in a magazine...StarLog at that! Your fandom seems to blind your reason! God knows you couldn't confuse a publication with the esteemed moniker "Starlog" as kiddie-fied! And since you like to pointout the "real point(s)" of the thread, it's not what you've re-defined...it's what you've unequivically stated! Your "foolish" submission of Go-Motion as a rebuttal cannot be simply redefined now! There are many effects they employed in film over the years only to tweek them, give them fancy ILM names and brand them for themselves. Induced blur is NOT Go-Motion. It's a technique unto itself, which, like the use of miniatures was continually tweeked, (no matter how many times you say Go-Motion, close your eyes, cover your ears and stamp your feet! Doesn't make it so, no matter how good your Herman Munster impression!).
Don't blow things out of proportion, Rocket. I am not "marginalizing" the ENTIRE book. (I even said it was "great" and USED 2 PASSAGES to support what I'm saying.) The quotes from the ILM employees are bona-fide but SOME of the explanatory text is simplified, generalizing and omits certain details. That is a fact. Remember, you asked me to "interpret" the statements on those 2 pages and that's precisely what I did.
Re: Rocket Surgeon, "Your fandom seems to blind your reason"
---
Fandom of Starlog? The issue had quotes from an animator and is not the only source of info regarding pre-"Dragonslayer" Go-Motion. (It's just the only one I can remember clearly and can pinpoint.) You're really skewing things here (and doing a great Herman Munster impersonation.
)
Re: Rocket Surgeon, "Induced blur is NOT Go-Motion. It's a technique unto itself,"
---
I never claimed that it was. Please read again:
Stoo said:
You don't need the device to create a blur as it can be simulated in other ways, albeit, not as precise.
Induced blur is not a "technique" (as you called it). It's an "effect" and there are various "techniques" that can be used to achieve it. (Honestly, Rocket, if you're trying to educate me about animation then you can save your breath.)
Rocket Surgeon said:
You'll notice they didn't say Go-Motion WAS used for the tasks you insist yet they DO say Dragonslayer.
And...so...what? This is extremely weak. There are other "tasks" missing from the list, too (which is another example of simplification in the text of the ILM book). So according to you, if the "task" is not in that short paragraph, then it was never done? The brief list on this page is NOT complete so it can't be treated as gospel. Doing so only limits your view of the larger picture.
Rocket Surgeon said:
Yeah ignoring Starlog! You knew about Go-Motion a year before it hit theaters! Woo Hoo! They thought of a clever name for it while they were shooting it! Wow! And the put out a press release which bumped the x-ray specs and Charles Atlas ads to the back of the issue! YEAH! Starlog, next you'll be quoting that lump of s#!t Indiana Jones: Off the Beaten Path! I read many a Starlog...don't be silly. Because of this "conversation" I'm joyfully shredding them and tossing them in the air as confetti dancing on the blood stained grin of Christoher Lee! Please! You've done the right thing by your Starlogs, by default or design, and turned them into fly catchers and homes for underprivleged arachnids, Sally Strothers would be proud! What a fitting end to your life's pursuits! Who knows in a 1000 years...
I was hoping this would be a sane and rational conversation but instead you type this garbage? (FYI, I don't even own "Off the Beaten Path".) Be real and not Herman Munster!
Rocket Surgeon said:
So what does this prove? That like all artists, while creating they DISCOVERED a technique? They were too lazy to keep cleaning the vaseline off the lenses! Laziness did I ever offend thee!
??? It proves that Go-Motion started with "Empire". Your reply proves that you'll spin anything to discredit the evidence and suit yourself .
The invention of Go-Mo was not an accidental "discovery" by ILM. The process was an intentional solution for creating blur with the latest technology (hence, "modern trick"). To repeat, the method was already ESTABLISHED and had THE NAME, "go-motion", BEFORE the device for "Dragonslayer" was even built . The DEVICE was built in order to perfect the process and use it in a more controlled manner. Why is this so hard for someone of your intelligence to understand? It's not rocket science, Rocket Surgeon.
Rocket Surgeon said:
With this resoning you can include smearing the lens with vaseline, bumping the puppet, and/or shaking the table the model is standing on while the film is being exposed to create realistic blur and call it Go-Motion.
Wow. Rocket did some googling and gave himself a crash-course on animation blur. Nice try but you've excluded some other methods (which I guess DON'T EXIST because, according to your logic, they weren't mentioned in your internet search.) If you're feeling so Google Happy, why not do a search for Go-Motion in "Empire"?
Rocket Surgeon said:
But no matter how you slice it or revise it, it's not Go-Motion.
Now you've completely lost scope.
Creating a blur effect with the use of a motion-control system (designed by ILM) is the VERY BASIS of Go-Motion! If you're going to dismiss the relevant quotes from your own ILM book with cheap shots about my ability to "walk before running", then it's quite clear you still have a lot to learn.
Rocket Surgeon said:
You have to walk before you can run, but that doesn't make walking the same as running sweetheart!
You have to learn to walk before you can run, that doesn't make walking running Stoo.
I run quite well, thanks, but you're either still crawling or your legs have failed and you've nothing left to stand on. There's no "redefining" going on. The problem here is your misunderstanding & definition of what Go-Motion actually is. (Have you reviewed the jeep shot with an objective eye, as suggested?)
Rocket Surgeon said:
Congratulations, I conceede victory on this point, Pyrrhic as it is. Thanks for the clarification, as you're so fond of recalling lost issues of Starlog, I mentioned earlier I didn't remember that...
Re: Remote controlled periscope Indy
---
Erm...You said "I've NEVER read that before. Where did you get that one?" but now it has become "I didn't remember that..." Talk about revisionist...
Your whole post doesn't provide anything other than disparaging comments and a completely pointless "lesson" on known, motion-blur techniques of the past. It's a mystery as to why you choose to ignore & disrespect what I've presented, all the while displaying unabashed belligerence. You want to "fight" but you have nothing to "fight" with other than 2 skimpy sentences from the ILM book and a repetative barrage of condescending insults. Way to go, Rocket...
Until you realize/acknowledge that Go-Motion began with "Empire", continuing this conversation about the "Raiders" shot is futile. I can't believe you're actually arguing about this.
As for the "Starlog" quotes, I can't provide them because they're sitting in a box in storage very far away. (However, I did point out the exact issue, #37, so go buy it off ebay and read it.)
