It just occurred to me that with the design of those arms (and having no elbow) I don't think he can actually reach those buttons at the top of his body, and yet he somehow does. Model looks flawless so far though.
Indeed like you say, he can't actually reach those buttons, but not only that, in real life the tracks can never retract like that, the mounting brackets would intersect each other.
also when his head would retract the way it does it would also intersect other components like the tracks (among other parts) but I call it artistic freedom on Pixars part
I'm pretty sure he can reach the buttons because the "shoulder" parts can move forward giving the arms a lot more freedom of movement than is first apparent. Besides, the movie was so good that anyone who holds that that sort of thing against it should be just plain shot!
Indeed like you say, he can't actually reach those buttons, but not only that, in real life the tracks can never retract like that, the mounting brackets would intersect each other.
also when his head would retract the way it does it would also intersect other components like the tracks (among other parts) but I call it artistic freedom on Pixars part
Cheers, Curt.
I agree on the artistic freedom. But my nephew has a WallE with every part can retract like the "real" one. And there is no scale problem about the tracks or the arms. The only problem is the hole at the bottom where the tracks goes to that is not cover up by any part in the toy and the movie version. So how does he keep evrything in his chest drawer from falling????
Funny how the intersection problem came up. I just read an article on how they had to write a script so that the pieces, when animated, wouldn't intersect and cause problems with the software. The pieces do not actually work.
I'm pretty sure he can reach the buttons because the "shoulder" parts can move forward giving the arms a lot more freedom of movement than is first apparent. Besides, the movie was so good that anyone who holds that that sort of thing against it should be just plain shot!
One year ago I stopped working on Wall-E, due to some private circumstances, but now I'm back, this time rendered directly via SolidWorks 2010 using the Maxwell plug-in.
Time to pick it up and finally finish this baby and give him some intestines and a face (soon to come )
Posts
Here is just another view:
Sweet work.
Hi Ozy,
Indeed like you say, he can't actually reach those buttons, but not only that, in real life the tracks can never retract like that, the mounting brackets would intersect each other.
also when his head would retract the way it does it would also intersect other components like the tracks (among other parts) but I call it artistic freedom on Pixars part
Cheers, Curt.
I agree on the artistic freedom. But my nephew has a WallE with every part can retract like the "real" one. And there is no scale problem about the tracks or the arms. The only problem is the hole at the bottom where the tracks goes to that is not cover up by any part in the toy and the movie version. So how does he keep evrything in his chest drawer from falling????
(sorry for the bad english)
Amazing work!!!
Funny how the intersection problem came up. I just read an article on how they had to write a script so that the pieces, when animated, wouldn't intersect and cause problems with the software. The pieces do not actually work.
Hey Dallidas, I would love to see that article, do you have a link? very interesting!
Found it http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=4581&page=2
Shooting them would be to nice.
Time to pick it up and finally finish this baby and give him some intestines and a face (soon to come )
Don't know if you have seen the real Wall-E or if anyone has posted anything about it but in case not here you go (pretty cool) -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRZ5Lj1InBQ&feature=related
Here is another one, just a few changes:
For now it's only for static rendering, but all parts work as they should.
Thus far the model is physically correct.
Chris
Chris