Model Boat Mayhem - Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9   Go Down

Author Topic: Building models for filming  (Read 28262 times)

bfgstew

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 498
  • Comfortably Numb
  • Location: Retford (Robin Hood Country)
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #100 on: January 16, 2017, 11:21:25 AM »

I must applaud you and your teams efforts and look forward to seeing the end product.
The mighty Hood has, and always will be my favourite, so to be able to see her in all her glory (albeit short lived) will be an absolute honour.
Logged
"Give me a ping Vasili. One ping only, please"

Capt Podge

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3,289
  • Location: Blyth, Northumberland
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #101 on: January 16, 2017, 11:58:28 AM »

I do hope the project reaches fruition and we get to see the finished product.


Perhaps, in a couple of years time, (post-production) some kind of "open day" could be arranged for a chance to see the models. Maybe even a tour of your facilities and a "meet the team" type of gathering.

Just thinking out loud - so to speak.

And as has already been said, this thread is a real eye-opener for us all. Thank you for all your efforts to date. :-)

Regards,

Ray.
Logged
Pop top campervan needed

John Stedman

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #102 on: January 16, 2017, 12:56:29 PM »

I must applaud you and your teams efforts and look forward to seeing the end product.
The mighty Hood has, and always will be my favourite, so to be able to see her in all her glory (albeit short lived) will be an absolute honour.


Thank you! Although I'm from an Army family, I remember my father (who served as an aide to Field Marshal Montgomery from El Alamein all the way to Paris) expressing very fond memories of 'The Mighty Hood', whose deck he trod on several occasions. Her sinking in the Denmark Strait occurred in the same week as all of the British Armed Forces were suffering heavy losses and casualties in the Battle of Crete, and added greatly to public feelings of grief in the UK. The need to turn the tables weighed heavily even on an accomplished warrior such as Winston Churchill. It is often said that before 1942 the Allies never won a battle, and after that they never lost one. There is some truth in that, and although she never landed a blow on KM Bismarck, HMS Hood played her part in 'turning the tide'. There was a chance that she could destroy the enemy if they met, and in war such chances have to be taken.


Almost 4,000 sailors gave their lives in the Bismarck chase. Some, perhaps many, of those deaths can be questioned from a moral standpoint. But, as US author Stephen Ambrose said in the epic TV series 'The World At War' in 1973, "The greatest moral error for the Allies would have been to lose the war" To win, Britain had to stomach the reality of survival: the brutal Battle of the Atlantic, the nightly carnage they inflicted on German civlians through RAF Bomber Command, one grim land battle after another, and the 60,000 killed in air raids on English cities. For six years, many families waited in fear, dreading that they would receive 'the Telegram' any day, any time.


Throughout most of her service, HMS Hood played a valuable role in promoting the British determination to display worldwide 'Power Projection'. It is a strategy that is still used today. If Britain had taken a more responsible path in preparing for conflict from 1933 onwards, Hood would probably have received a major refit which would have increased her chances on 24th May 1941. Perhaps she would have survived the war, and inevitably joined all her sisters on a sad final voyage to the dismantlers. Instead, she went down fighting. There is no finer end for any ship.
Logged

SailorGreg

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 814
  • Money talks - it says goodbye
  • Location: Hayling Island, Hants
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #103 on: January 16, 2017, 02:17:20 PM »

 :-))

John Stedman

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #104 on: January 16, 2017, 03:20:28 PM »

Perhaps, in a couple of years time, (post-production) some kind of "open day" could be arranged for a chance to see the models. Maybe even a tour of your facilities and a "meet the team" type of gathering.

I appreciate what you say. Yes, once the inevitably hectic filming phase is complete, and the post-production begins, you can rest assured that all the models will be carefully conserved and made available for private display (such as to Mayhemers) and perhaps as promotional aids for the marketing people. They would then probably be placed in a climate-controlled storage facility, to keep them in good shape for any future film projects. I have been asked whether they could be put on public display for a major exhibition, and that is certainly possible, but it would require significant expenditure in constructing display cases, providing suitable lighting, fitting out the exhibition space, transporting the models to the venue, and promoting, marketing and curating the event. That would likely require a sponsor, and careful logistical planning. It is certainly something we will actively consider when the time comes.
Logged

RAAArtyGunner

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,852
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #105 on: January 17, 2017, 12:35:21 AM »

John,

It seems that your Sig background training/experiences have held you in good stead.

Very good commentary/explanations. :-)) :-)) :-))

Mayhemer's are indeed privileged to have you on board.
Logged
Gunna build those other boats one day.

John Stedman

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #106 on: January 17, 2017, 10:10:09 AM »

John,

It seems that your Sig background training/experiences have held you in good stead.

Thank you for your compliments from warmer southern climes! In recent years I have been encouraged to see how many intelligent young people are choosing to regard the military as a worthwhile profession, perhaps as a springboard to a different career in later life. Many of the people I work with have previously 'worn the uniform', and it certainly gives them a perspective that benefits many aspects of their work in civilian life. This is increasingly true on the 21st century, where the Army, Navy and Air Force have been joined by Space and Cyber Commands, necessitating higher standards of education and technical skills in their ranks. From the point of view of 'character', I also find that those who have been in the Services tend to have a quiet humility that conceals a fierce determination to get things done, and to do the right thing. It's all about showing respect, and gaining respect.
Logged

John Stedman

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #107 on: January 17, 2017, 03:54:46 PM »

I expect that many Mayhemers are familiar with the 'SS Andrea Doria' - 'MV Stockholm' collision of 1956, and have seen the photos of Stockholm with her bow missing, taken as she was limping back to New York. So modelling that detail shouldn't be a problem: we'll make two alternative front ends for the ship, which can fit onto the main hull at the collision bulkhead, and switch them around during filming.

But replicating the damage to SS Andrea Doria is going to be trickier. The collision happened at night, and the Italian liner quickly adopted a severe list, with the damaged area submerged below the waves by daybreak. So there are no detailed photographs of that damage. We know that a massive hole was punched into the ship by Stockholm's reinforced bow (she had been designed for voyages in icy waters), but the question is, what happened to that bow?

There seem to be two main possibilities. Since the ships clashed at about ninety degrees to each other, both steaming at over 20 Knots, the bow of Stockholm may have been wrenched off by powerful shear forces, and stayed embedded in Andrea Doria's hull. Alternatively, the impact might have shattered the bow structure, with the fragments falling to the sea bed, leaving an empty hole. Since accidents tend to be untidy and messy events, the result could have been a combination of these possibilities. In the collision between 'RMS Olympic' and 'HMS Hawke' (which happened at a shallower angle) the liner was holed, and the warship's ram was torn off and fell to the sea floor, so did something similar happen in 1956?

We're trying to decide the most likely scenario, because when this event is filmed it's planned to show the whole sequence of the collision in detail. Obviously we'll have to 'cheat' the light levels, so that the audience can see what's going on, but there would have been plenty of lights on the decks of both vessels, and many of their scuttles would probably been illuminated, so that can be done. But when the viewers see the resulting damage to Andrea Doria, will it be an empty 'cave' or will it be filled with the broken-off bow of her nemesis?

All views are welcome!
Logged

Colin Bishop

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10,321
  • Location: SW Surrey, UK
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #108 on: January 17, 2017, 04:22:16 PM »

Given that the Andrea Doria was travelling at quite a high speed I would have thought that the most likely scenario is that the reinforced bow of Stockholm initially punched a V shaped hull into the side of the Doria and was then wrenched away in a tangle of wreckage by the momentum of the larger ship. I would imagine that most of the bow remained in the Doria but in a very distorted and fractured form. Some of it may have fallen out of the hole but the fact that the ships did not remain locked together suggests that it did break off almost immediately. All supposition of course!

I don't know how far the Doria was from the collision position when she sank but I have not read of any accounts of the Stockholm's bow being found.

Colin
Logged

John Stedman

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #109 on: January 17, 2017, 06:03:49 PM »

I would imagine that most of the bow remained in the Doria but in a very distorted and fractured form. Some of it may have fallen out of the hole but the fact that the ships did not remain locked together suggests that it did break off almost immediately. All supposition of course!

I don't know how far the Doria was from the collision position when she sank but I have not read of any accounts of the Stockholm's bow being found.

Colin
Andrea Doria was reported by the US Navy as having drifted approximately 1.58 nautical miles in the 11 hours between the collision and her sinking. The area beneath the point where the two ships collided has been searched with sophisticated sidescan sonar equipment and found to be cluttered with all manner of debris, which is not untypical of the sea floor in that part of the world. Divers in the summer of 2016 found that the entire superstructure of the Andrea Doria had crumbled away, with the uppermost (Port) side of the hull collapsing notably in the preceding year. It appears that the chemical composition and temperature of the water, strong currents and organic lifeforms in the vicinity are very aggressive, and the wreck may be reduced to fragments within decades. It is interesting that the forward half of 'RMS Titanic', which has been on the seabed 44 years longer than the Andrea Doria, is in rather better shape, primarily because she is at a far greater depth where less corrosive conditions exist, and possibly because she is sitting in an upright position, where stresses on the hull are distributed more in accordance with her structural design principles.
Logged

Colin Bishop

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10,321
  • Location: SW Surrey, UK
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #110 on: January 17, 2017, 06:14:17 PM »

Yes, you are right, wreck deterioration can vary surprisingly according to location. I have just been re reading the recent book on the Jutland wrecks and even in this relatively small area there is a wide variation in condition although a common factor seems to be that thinnish mild steel corrodes very quickly so the hulls readily collapse.

Colin
Logged

NFMike

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,062
  • Location: Hythe, Hants, UK
    • Plague Marine Services
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #111 on: January 17, 2017, 09:51:07 PM »

My feeling is that the broken off section would have fallen out sooner or later (eg. when the severe list developed). Reasoning? Reinforced and presumably thick metal outer plates - strong and heavy. It could possibly have punctured AD without getting seriously entangled in her, ie. without a lot holding it in place. Hence, with the weight involved it would be more likely to fall out.

Colin Bishop

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10,321
  • Location: SW Surrey, UK
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #112 on: January 17, 2017, 10:07:43 PM »

Given the position of the Doria wreck, lying on its side, nobody will ever know for sure unless the Stockholm's bow is discovered lying on the seabed. It was a sad end for a lovely ship but until re reading the circumstances I hadn't realised that she was inherently unstable. Not that instability was all that unusual among transatlantic liners, especially when bunkers were empty towards the end of the crossing.

Colin
Logged

furball

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 247
  • Location: Herne Bay, Kent
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #113 on: January 17, 2017, 11:11:25 PM »

Quote
It is interesting that the forward half of 'RMS Titanic', which has been on the seabed 44 years longer than the Andrea Doria, is in rather better shape, primarily because she is at a far greater depth where less corrosive conditions exist, and possibly because she is sitting in an upright position, where stresses on the hull are distributed more in accordance with her structural design principles.


Then again, Brittanic has been laying on her side for a century, and hasn't collapsed yet, so maybe the Olympic class were somewhat more strongly built.


Lance
Logged

John Stedman

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #114 on: January 18, 2017, 09:58:43 AM »

'HMHS Britannic' and her more famous sister are indeed ageing more slowly than the Andrea Doria. When Jacques Cousteau became the first to view the Aegean wreck in 1975, he remarked on her high state of preservation, as have subsequent visitors. In the judgement of microbiologist Dr Lori Johnson, who was there in 2003, a major factor is the beaviour of bacteria which are colonising the steel structure intensively, and in these particular conditions in 400 feet of water are tending to protect he metal and are turning the ship into a 'man made reef'. This is probably being promoted by the higher temperatures found in the Mediterranean compared with the North Atlantic, and by the fact that in the Aegean Sea the ecosystem is very stable, because there are virtually no tides.


Andrea Doria was a welded ship, whereas the Olympic Class were rivetted. This may also have a bearing on their longevity. Rivetting is a largely benign process, involving relatively small amounts of heat energy, whereas welding is more energy intensive and causes chemical changes in all the metals involved.  The weld beads are usually of higher-order material than the plates they join. and this eventually results in the hull plates becoming 'sacrificial' and breaking the bond. This is quite noticeable on the wrecks found in scrapyards of armoured land vehicles, whose weld beads may be almost as new while the adjacent steel is honeycombed with corrosion. It's clear that every wreck is unique, and for many reasons.
Logged

John Stedman

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #115 on: January 18, 2017, 02:52:47 PM »

Progress with the 12' 'prototype' of HMS Hood is ahead of schedule, and she's starting to look like the real battlecruiser in every respect. All the superstructure, armament and fittings are in place, including the masts, and only a few parts such as the ship's boats are still on the workbenches. Painting and weathering is fully complete on the starboard side, which is all we need for the next camera test.

We are going to be filming the model only from the starboard side, because that will clearly show the main 15" guns deployed as they were in the Denmark Strait. Shots of the port side will be created by 'flipping' the image horizontally, which is easy to do with film or video. Obviously you wouldn't do this in the finished movie since there would be anomalies, because HMS Hood wasn't fully symmetrical, for example in the number of hawse pipes on either side of her bow, but for our current purposes that isn't significant. The objective tomorrow will be to get the shots of the hull on the Model Mover to a standard that can be combined with our 'sea' archive film.

The only thing lacking from the main hull are the ridges where the plates joined. Hood was quite smooth in this regard, and it's easy to overdo such details. At the moment we've represented the joins by masking and using paint, but we'll probably add some thin Plasticard later so that subtle shadows will be cast. It always seems to me when judging at model shows that some builders get too 'creative' with this kind of detail, creating caricatures of the original. Ships and planes are usually much more sleek than many models depict them to be. Anyone who has built the Revell 1:72 Flower Class corvette (which is probably most of us on this Forum) will have marvelled at the hull plate detail when they opened the box, but then slowly realised that it was grossly overscale. Much sanding and filing was then the order of the day, accompanied with frequent cursing aimed at Matchbox, who made the original moulds. If you haven't made one, treat yourself. They're cheap as chips and can look great with a little TLC. Plus, they're big enough to fit a motor (Flowers had a single prop) and install RC.

Hood has taken a lot of work to bring to this stage, with 17 people involved. The key thing has been co-ordination, to make sure we're all working to a common purpose. We have a 'Production Manager' for each project, who plays a role similar to an NCO (a Petty Officer in the Navy, or a Sergeant in the Army) and is trusted to keep everything moving along effectively and efficiently. It's a demanding job. It requires a holistic attitude which doesn't just solve problems but anticipates them, then intelligently navigates around them. They have to focus on the end product, and have the passion to make it happen. Anyone can look at a movie scene and say "That doesn't look right". Fewer can say why it's not satisfactory. Even less would know how to fix the problem when it appears on screen. And a very, very small number have the ability to think 'ahead of the curve' and prevent the issue arising in the first place. We're fortunate to have people like that on our team.
Logged

BFSMP

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,108
  • Model Boat Mayhem is Great!
  • Location: Knott End on Sea
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #116 on: January 18, 2017, 08:30:24 PM »


I have just been reading over the introduction to this thread again and notice the list of ships, and realise that you have left out of that list, one of the most important ships that took part in the tidying up of the Bismarck affair.


That ship was the destroyer HMS Maori, the tribal class destroyer, which was ordered in to pick up survivors after the Bismarck had sunk.


I lived next door to a man who became a good buddy, called Stan Barnes, and he once showed me his memoires and discharge book, and his cap badge, HMS. and then told me the story of his small part in the rescue of survivors, and the care and compassion the enemy sailors received whilst on the trip back to home port. His ship was the Maori at the time of the incident, and he was a gunnery officer.


He used to go every 10 years to a Bismarck crew reunion and church service, in Germany and his last one was in 1985.Sadly he died before he could make the '95 reunion, but I could sit and listen to his stories for hours, and after that we'd realise that we had polished off a bottle of Gordons, lol.


I remember he had some incredible photos of the sad end to the ship, and also others in the fleet that were sent out to hunt her including his own ship. Sadly lost after his death as he had no relatives.


Jim.
Logged
life is like arranging deck chairs on the Titanic!

John Stedman

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #117 on: January 18, 2017, 09:09:45 PM »

The original list does include HMS Cossack, one of the 27 Tribal Class destroyers built and essentially identical to HMS Maori, which was one of the six Tribals that carried out the night action on 26th/27th May 1941 against Bismarck. This was a 'harassing' operation designed not only to reduce the fighting capability of the German battleship's crew on the following morning, but also to ensure that contact with the Bismarck was not lost during darkness. Originally Admiral Tovey had planned to send HMS Rodney and HMS King George V into attack on the evening of 26th May, but his capital ships would have been vulnerable because of the orientation of the setting sun, and there was not enough time to reposition them before the end of nautical twilight. Although the six Tribals involved in the melee scored no torpedo or shell hits on KM Bismarck, they sustained only minor damage themselves, and were undoubtedly successful in their risky mission. Tribals acquitted themselves with honour in all theatres of war, and 14 were lost in action. 12 were dismantled. One is preserved today, HMS Haida at Hamilton Harbour in Ontario, Canada.

Because of the way in which our film/TV production is being organised, there is only a need to make one model of each class of ship. If two or more are required to be on screen simultaneously, this will be achieved by compositing film of individual vessels into one combined image. The current screenplay for 'Giants' does indeed include the Destroyer flotilla attack on Bismarck, and scenes of the truncated rescue operation that followed Bismarck's sinking.
Logged

Stavros

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #118 on: January 18, 2017, 10:29:54 PM »

Ok you have my attention...so come on lets see proof of the pudding so to speak lets see some pics of this 12foot model thats been 3 D printed.This will do your film no harm at all...as we Mayhemers like to see pics




Dave
Logged

roycv

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,339
  • Location: S.W. Herts
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #119 on: January 19, 2017, 02:41:26 AM »

Hi John, some are still with you!
Roy
Logged

John Stedman

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #120 on: January 19, 2017, 08:43:19 AM »

In establishing the sea state and visibility levels that existed during the Battle of the Denmark Strait, we've been looking closely at the newsreel footage which was taken by a film crew aboard KM Prinz Eugen. Although there are whitecaps on the waves, it certainly seems that it was quite a clear day for that region of the North Atlantic, and the upperworks of the British vessels can be made out reasonably well. It's interesting how early in the approach phase the Germans were able to confirm that HMS Hood was the lead RN ship, although they misidentified HMS Prince of Wales as her sister ship HMS King George V, having been misled by faulty Intelligence information. In these circumstances one might have expected Jurgens to divide the fire of his ships, rather than concentrate on Hood, but doubtless the reputation of the 'Mighty Hood' extended beyond British shores and had something to do with his command decision. In their many pre-war exercises, Hood had often been viewed as the 'primary threat' by the KM, and while the senior officers on the German ships certainly knew of the old battlecruiser's weaknesses, to their crews the Hood inspired only fear.

From our point of view in filming the battle, the lack of mist or fog may reduce the 'atmosphere' of the scene, but it will help the audience to more readily comprehend the flow of the action. As in 'Sink the Bismarck', the British ships will at first be moving from left to right, the 'strong' direction. As she disengages at the end, damaged and alone, HMS Prince of Wales will turn across the screen and then be steaming right to left, psychologically 'weak'. The unwritten rule in movies is 'show, don't tell'.

By not shooting at HMS Prince of Wales for the first half of the Battle, the Bismarck probably helped to seal her own fate. Although affected by many gun malfunctions, PoW was able to correctly identify the KM battleship before Hood did, had superior rangefinding equipment, obviously some highly competent officers and, it must be said, an excellent Captain. Although both British ships were working under the handicap of having crews that were generally not fully battle-trained, it was Prince of Wales that scored the first two crucial blows on Bismarck, essentially causing the failure of the Kriegsmarine mission. Once Hood was gone and PoW came under accurate concentrated fire, she was hit seven times in just a few minutes. If the British battleship had come under such fierce attack from the start of the battle she could well have been sunk, or at least critically disabled, and been unable to cripple Bismarck. If... As Churchill said in another context, "The terrible ifs accumulate"
Logged

John Stedman

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #121 on: January 19, 2017, 12:35:41 PM »

A question. During the Battle of the Denmark Strait would HMS Hood's secondary armament and Anti-Aircraft weapons be manned? Their crews would have been very exposed to the concussion waves from the main armament, and the 4" HA/LA Mark XIX mountings and UP mountings offered minimal splinter protection to their crews. I find it very unlikely that the UP on the roof of Turret B would have been manned, for example. On the other hand, the ship was at Full Battle Stations so perhaps everyone was at their post, no matter what the risks. It matters because these weapons would probably have been moving if manned, seeking possible aerial targets, and we'd want to replicate that on screen. And as the ships closed, the 4" guns - whose extreme (if inaccurate) range was about 12 miles - could have begun to add their weight to the broadsides. So during HMS Hoods last hour, would these weapons be static or not? Any information would be welcome.
Logged

Colin Bishop

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10,321
  • Location: SW Surrey, UK
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #122 on: January 19, 2017, 04:15:03 PM »

I don't know for certain but I believe the action stations might have been different depending on what sort of action was involved. Crews in exposed positions would have been moved to more sheltered situations with less risk of being hit by flying splinters or injured by the extensive blast from the main armament. I believe that many members of Bismarck's crew were killed by a large calibre shell exploding in a compartment where they were sheltering from the chaos on deck during the final action.

I don't think it would have been the practice to use the secondary and tertiary armament together in 'normal' circumstances. The latter would have been outranged and the former a nuisance to the gunnery team spotting the fall of shot for the main armament. During the final action it is reported that HMS Rodney used her six inch guns but stopped doing so because they added to the splashes and caused confusion. Seems logical. The main armament was sometimes used by capital ships to put up a water splash barrage against torpedo bombers though.

Incidentally, while in Portsmouth Dockyard earlier today I had a look through this book https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00K1O434E/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1 which is a technical and statistical analysis of the Denmark Strait engagement by an Italian Rear Admiral. Much of the book looked quite interesting but there was also a large amount of mathematical probability analysis which appeared to be pretty hard going so I balked at the 20 price although might stretch to the Kindle edition or just wait until it is remaindered.

Colin
Logged

John Stedman

  • Guest
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #123 on: January 19, 2017, 06:55:19 PM »

That certainly seems the most likely scenario. I have also been wondering if HMS Hood was preparing to use her above-water torpedoes, once the opposing ships were running on parallel courses 8 miles apart or less. Kriegsmarine records show that Prinz Eugen was readying her torpedoes to target HMS Prince of Wales just before the latter broke off the Battle. Three days later HMS Rodney fired 12 'fish' at Bismarck, scoring one ineffectual hit. A number of torpedoes were also fired by the Tribals in the night action, but none struck home. It seems the remarkable 'Stringbag' (Swordfish) was the 'kipper' delivery system of choice in the Bismarck chase, unless of course you were stationed aboard HMS Sheffield...

The book by Marco Santarini is worth persevering with. It is an intelligent and objective take on the subject, if rather 'academic' in tone.
Logged

plastic

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 997
  • Bobbing Along!
  • Location: Watford
Re: Building models for filming
« Reply #124 on: January 19, 2017, 07:29:52 PM »

I too can't believe that we're up to 6 pages of very detailed coments yet not one single photo of something that has a million cameras pointing at it - not even a snippet, the studio, a movement rig, a water tank, a photo of the mechanical set-up, photos of historic things mentioned that are not in this project, any small fittings, an actual picture of the model (we all know what Hood looks like so it's no surprise/mystery) - on the shelf/trolley or otherwise - very strange.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9   Go Up