AT-AT Height Discussion

Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Tsukiyumi »

Well, then, there you go.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Deepcrush »

Databank states the AT-AT at 15.5m.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Mark
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 17671
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Mark »

Whats the meter to feet coversion ratio again?
They say that in the Army,
the women are mighty fine.
They look like Phyllis Diller,
and walk like Frankenstein.
Tyyr
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10654
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Tyyr »

For rough estimation call a meter a yard. For an exact, it's about 3.28 feet per meter.
Mark
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 17671
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Mark »

Ok, so almost a 3.3 feet per meter......so an AT AT is over 45 feet tall? That begs the question, how much cable length did Lukes little grapple gun carry?
They say that in the Army,
the women are mighty fine.
They look like Phyllis Diller,
and walk like Frankenstein.
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Deepcrush »

Well, since he to travel over half the height. I'd say a 30' cable isn't hard to believe.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
stitch626
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9585
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 10:57 pm
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by stitch626 »

Its been a while since I saw the movie... but that graple gun looked a bit small to carrry that much cable.
No trees were killed in transmission of this message. However, some electrons were mildly inconvenienced.
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Deepcrush »

I have a coil of 120lb fishing line. If we can make that with our tech base, I don't think its an unsafe bet that SW tech couldn't improve on it.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
stitch626
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9585
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 10:57 pm
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by stitch626 »

Ah, fair point.
No trees were killed in transmission of this message. However, some electrons were mildly inconvenienced.
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Deepcrush »

Where's seafort? He's supposed to be a part of this thing.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
stitch626
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9585
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 10:57 pm
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by stitch626 »

Maybe he's watching the movie again to analyze screenshots to come back with another point on its size.

Personally, I don't caare what size it is... if it steps on me, I'm dead.
No trees were killed in transmission of this message. However, some electrons were mildly inconvenienced.
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Deepcrush »

Both are good points!
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Captain Seafort »

Deepcrush wrote:Close up shot plus live action is always a good thing.
The close up makes the distortion worse, as only a small movement on Luke's part means a large change in the ratio between him and the camera and the AT-AT and the camera
Not even close... In the pic you showed. Luke with his arm at full stretch is shorter then the foot. In the live action shot, Luke is the same height as the whole foot mount!
Nope - in that image the foot is 14 pixels tall, while Luke is 15 pixels tall. That's for Luke with his arm raised, but you'll notice that the foot compresses when it hit the ground, which accounts for that. You can also see that the foot, which has a height about 3/4 of its diameter, almost completely covers the 5m+ long snowspeeder, making it at least a couple of metres tall.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Deepcrush »

Captain Seafort wrote:The close up makes the distortion worse, as only a small movement on Luke's part means a large change in the ratio between him and the camera and the AT-AT and the camera
So your FX error is better then a live action shot why? How is there a distortion if he's next to it? In the same shot, you see him, the AT-AT and the snowspeeder.
Captain Seafort wrote:Nope - in that image the foot is 14 pixels tall, while Luke is 15 pixels tall. That's for Luke with his arm raised, but you'll notice that the foot compresses when it hit the ground, which accounts for that. You can also see that the foot, which has a height about 3/4 of its diameter, almost completely covers the 5m+ long snowspeeder, making it at least a couple of metres tall.
So the whole foot which covered between 2/3 and 3/4 of the snowspeeder. Well thats a good starting point. So then the foot may be say 3m wide? 4m if we count the toes? The problem is that the toes in the pic you posted are almost 2m. That would mean the foot is about 10m. So it would just ALMOST cover the snowspeeder but it would have covered it and still have reached Luke who was only a few feet away. That would also put the AT-AT closer to 50m in height, not just 30.

In the end, that makes your pic even less usable. Which leaves us the live action shot and the Databank. By scale the live action shot doesn't really tell us exactly how tall the AT-AT is but it clearly shows that 30m let alone your new 50m isn't possible.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: AT-AT Height Discussion

Post by Captain Seafort »

Deepcrush wrote:So your FX error is better then a live action shot why? How is there a distortion if he's next to it? In the same shot, you see him, the AT-AT and the snowspeeder.
Are you taking the piss or something? Since Luke is much closer to the camera than the AT-AT he will appear much larger relative to it. In the screencap he and the AT-AT are the same distance from the camera, removing this problem.
So the whole foot which covered between 2/3 and 3/4 of the snowspeeder. Well thats a good starting point. So then the foot may be say 3m wide? 4m if we count the toes?
Give or take a bit, yes.
The problem is that the toes in the pic you posted are almost 2m.
Wrong - they're closer to 1m
That would mean the foot is about 10m.
Wrong again. The main part of the foot is 30 pixels wide in the screencap, making it four or five metres wide. Very close to the size derived from the clip, despite the inaccuracy inherent in guestimating from a moving image.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Post Reply