AT-AT Height Discussion

[Deepcrush]

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.

A, not the same distance if you're going to be picky about it. He's in the middle of a machine that is 10m wide by your stance. So in my clip you see him less then a meter away. In your clip we have to account for as much as 5m. Which of those is the smaller distance and thus better to judge with... (you don't have to answer that, its just there for the point).

We also have in the shot where the snowspeeder is stepped on, an over head view. The ATAT foot and mount, the speeder and Luke. We see there the foot, again, isn't 5m as it doesn't cover the whole of the speeder.

Give or take a bit, yes.

This is important for the next part. So keep the figures in your head.

Wrong - they're closer to 1m

This is my fault as we see the toes at two different angles and I didn't state which I was talking about. The toes are about 1m wide by 2m long in your pic. I take this because we see that Luke fully stretched out is the same height as the toe. Again, this is important for later.

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.

The problem is that you've got a lot of "maybe" in what you're putting up. Maybe the effects were off because of movement, maybe Luke is moving (we know he is, just a point here), maybe the FX was off, maybe the model scale was off. This all means that there is a lot of guessing.

However, in the live action shot. We get both a side view and over head view. No FX, no distortion from being a hundred meters away for the cut scene. Just a straight shot. From that shot, we can tell that the FX shot was off. That the scaling was off. AND, most importantly that the FX is there by not a reliable source and not really needed since we have a live action shot in place of it.

The FX shot was wrong. By the model, the ATAT is not 30m tall. I don't think its 15.5m either to be honest with you. But its a lot closer to what we see live then by a single FX view that we can look at and tell isn't right either. Both shots leave us guessing, but the live action shot is closer to the canon statement there for thats what we go by.

[Captain Seafort]

A, not the same distance if you're going to be picky about it. He's in the middle of a machine that is 10m wide by your stance. So in my clip you see him less then a meter away. In your clip we have to account for as much as 5m. Which of those is the smaller distance and thus better to judge with... (you don't have to answer that, its just there for the point).

Relative to the distance from the camera, mine. In the video, Luke probably halves the distance between himself and the camera when he jumps, whereas in the screencap the camera is at least several tens of metres away (it has to be, since it's obviously far further from the AT-AT than the machine's height. Therefore the relative variation is much less.

We also have in the shot where the snowspeeder is stepped on, an over head view. The ATAT foot and mount, the speeder and Luke. We see there the foot, again, isn't 5m as it doesn't cover the whole of the speeder.

Not quite, but it's certainly greater than 3/4 of the speeder's length, and so it must be 4m+ (a snowspeeder is 5.3 metres long, per the Databank, which jibes with what we see in the film).

This is my fault as we see the toes at two different angles and I didn't state which I was talking about. The toes are about 1m wide by 2m long in your pic. I take this because we see that Luke fully stretched out is the same height as the toe. Again, this is important for later.

He's about twice the length. The rearmost toe of the front left foot is parallel to the ground, which makes measuring easy - it's 8 pixels long, half Luke's height.

The problem is that you've got a lot of "maybe" in what you're putting up. Maybe the effects were off because of movement, maybe Luke is moving (we know he is, just a point here), maybe the FX was off, maybe the model scale was off. This all means that there is a lot of guessing.

There's a lot less guessing involved in the screencap, where exact measurements can be taken in MSPaint, than in your video, which is very much eyeballing events which occur in a few seconds.

From that shot, we can tell that the FX shot was off. That the scaling was off.

Under SOD there's no such thing as "bad FX" - there's only documentary footage.

[Deepcrush]

Wow, you really such a pathetic pussy aren't you... You've been called on this by how many people and by a canon source and you're still just lying to try and carry on. In another thread you're bashing someone for doing the same thing. Just do your angry brit thing and stomp off already.

Whatever, I'll count your BS answers as the closest you can bring yourself to conceding.

[stitch626]

Actually, for this part:

Relative to the distance from the camera, mine. In the video, Luke probably halves the distance between himself and the camera when he jumps, whereas in the screencap the camera is at least several tens of metres away (it has to be, since it's obviously far further from the AT-AT than the machine's height. Therefore the relative variation is much less.

he's absolutely correct.

I can't speak to the other parts, because I haven't read much of them.

[Deepcrush]

But you can't judge an entire machine on having one piece of your source work and all the rest of it being made up nonsense.