If anyone's interested, they're shooting a nifty Kashyyyk miniature on the web cam. Looks just like the concept art.

I don't know if anyone else gets off on the miniatures, but I do.

Holy moley - that tree's one giant "miniature"

Miniatures? Isn't everything in the prequels CG?


Miniatures rock. They are building these things larger and larger. I read ILM had to start building them bigger and with more detail so that they would look right when shot with the digital cameras.

One day they'll build them so big, we'll no longer call them "miniatures," but refer to them as "sets."

Riggityrock.

The LOTR crew called them "bigatures."

If you think a full-scale version of a Wookiee tree-city would be cost-effective, maybe you should give Rick McCallum a call.

On the set of Titanic, they decided to use real Oak on the grand staircase because it was cheaper than immitation wood...go figure.

Hmm I wonder when this minature finaly gets shown in the cinema how many people will say 'Oh man what crap CG!'

Jesus Christ.....that canyon city miniature is fucking huge!

Yeah but the point made is that dorks will think they're shit because they're CGI...which some won't be.

If anyone's interested they're shooting a bunch of extras, small groups yesterday and big crowds today. It's on Naboo, almost certainly the funeral.

Honestly, some of you on this thread need to "chill out."

If a person sees something that looks fake and shitty, and then unknowingly calls it "CG" when it was a minature.... that still doesn't take away the fact that something looks FAKE AND SHITTY.

So to people screaming about "the minature looks good" or cheering it's "cost effectiveness"?!?

Listen to Tony:

My favourite time this issue was brought up was in the introduction to the VHS ESB SE and the confusion was by none other than Lucas himself. He was talking about the added Wampa scene and said that with the new digital technology they could add a better shot (I don't think he actually said CG). It's a guy in a suit. I wonder sometimes if he's even seen his films...

But, yeah, I totally agree with Mr.Montana whether the final shots are CG or minature. Similarly if they look great, how shots are achieved is not an issue for me.

Dogg.

I assume he meant digitally inserting the new Wampa into the old footage. There's a tendency to use the word "digital" for both digital compositing and CGI, which leads to a lot of confused discussions.

There was no compositing there either. They were completely seperate shots. There was not one thing in the insertion of the Wampa that they couldn't have done from the very first day ESB was made.

There was no digital work needed.

Dogg.

In that case, that's pretty funny.

The Wampa was definitely one of the better improvements in the SE. The original was way lame.