Graham Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 Toys or models should be compared to Kawamori's lineart for accuracy, not against the actual animated art.
Macross73 Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) I can live with it. maybe larger intakes would have negativley affected the transformation or the look of it in fighter mode either way i think its minor. do you have another animated pic? this particular pic has a distorted view of the front. edit: I didn't realize all the releases coming out in the near future not only are we getting the YF-19 , VF-0A , but also the VF-1A MAX & seperate Stealth Fast Packs and the Angel Bird Edited July 25, 2006 by Macross73
Phren Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 That is the sexiest plane I've ever seen - the wings could use a size-up though, like everyone says. BTW is the 19 supposed to sit level on the ground, or it is supposed to angle forward a bit? seperate Stealth Fast Packs 419109[/snapback] Are you serious?! These releases have me about as excited as I was when the 1/48 came out, if possible! It's like heaven - with admission fees
Macross73 Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 That is the sexiest plane I've ever seen - the wings could use a size-up though, like everyone says.BTW is the 19 supposed to sit level on the ground, or it is supposed to angle forward a bit? seperate Stealth Fast Packs 419109[/snapback] Are you serious?! These releases have me about as excited as I was when the 1/48 came out, if possible! It's like heaven - with admission fees 419114[/snapback] I'd like to get a discount on the admission
Vermillion21 Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 These releases have me about as excited as I was when the 1/48 came out, if possible! It's like heaven - with admission fees Very, very expensive admission fees!!!
Briareos Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 Beautiful! I can't wait for more pictures. But I did notice that the shield and arms are somewhat drooping towards the rear. As I recall the shield is parallel to the leg line art. I hope this is because what we're seeing is a resin mockup. I'm really curious as to how it transforms. It doesn't seem to transform like the 1/72. The upper neck behind the canard wings seems to split in the middle.
AlphaOne Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) I found a pic of art for the YF-19. It seems to me that the wings in this piece of art doesn't look any larger proportionally than the prototype 1:60. But you can also see the shoulder intake looks differently than the prototype too. Edited July 25, 2006 by AlphaOne
Macross73 Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 I found a pic of art for the YF-19. It seems to me that the wings in this piece of art doesn't look that dramatically larger than the prototype 1:60. But you can also see the shoulder intake looks differently than the prototype too. 419132[/snapback] yeah thats a notable difference in size of the intakes. perhaps its just a temporary condition before actual production takes place
vlenhoff Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 Wow, that is nice indeed. I do agree with a slight wing enlargement. I thing it does need a wing job Also that grey neck area throws me off big time. I really hope the head/shield gap is minimal when it is released. I've been waiting for this pretty face for a long time now. I think it would be ideally cool to have Yang in the backseat, but it seems they did not want to get into that. There is no room anyway. Hey, maybe the pilot's seat tilts, or rotates like the VF-0's. That would also be neat. I can't wait to see the Valks head, and the intake covers. I love this design. I'm drooling over the idea of VF-11B, and Omega one. Yeap, I'm drowning in drool.
Nani?! Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 I found a pic of art for the YF-19. It seems to me that the wings in this piece of art doesn't look any larger proportionally than the prototype 1:60. But you can also see the shoulder intake looks differently than the prototype too. 419132[/snapback] yeah, which is why I ultimately thought the wing size was debatable... As far as the shoulder intake... look at the prototype and imagine a big black hole there... meh... I rather take what yamato has rendered.
Nani?! Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 I'm surprised nobody noticed these two holes to plug in the fast packs 419048[/snapback] There's also a cm-long slot by the rear of the ankle... Looks like we'll definitely see fast packs for this baby...
GutsAndCasca Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 No problem with size , just don't like to shell out $160+ for a fighter that looks slightly less likely to get airborne than a 1/55... 419081[/snapback] Well *ahem* I think the wings actually look pretty derned accurate, if you're comparing that cartoon pic up above here, for instance. As for getting airborne, look at the gigantic jet engines on the back of that monster propelling that thing. Those would probably get a dump-truck airborne. My wife just caught me looking at that gigantic "air intake" pic of the Yamato. Dam-! She's giving me the evil eye.
vlenhoff Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 I preffer the shoulders the way they are. A huge "black" opening in fighter mode would not be attractive IMO. And it is a fact about 2d animation proportions being deformed or exagerated. Only 3d would provade accurate proportions all the time as shown in M Zero. BTW, I'm so glad the 1/60 Zero never got the fugly 1/100 treatment. Yesterday I played with the Zero, 1A Hik, CF, and the old SDF-1. I love 1/48s, but the 1/60's details are just to cool.
isamu_dyson Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 compared to the 1/72 .. this is a real masterpiece
cyde01 Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) how about making the panel in front of the shoulder intake flat black or dark grey to simulate the larger intake opening? edit: oops never mind, the hole of the intake is just a flat black square anyway. Edited July 25, 2006 by cyde01
Nani?! Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 compared to the 1/72 .. this is a real masterpiece 419145[/snapback] wow. That, gentlemen, is a reminder that we should all be thankful~
kensei Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 I'd like to see it on a yamato stand without the landing gear down. The increased height might make it look a little fatter and require a wingspan boost, like the rest of you I would like more perspectives.
kensei Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) EDIT: I swear I only hit the reply button once...I swear on my collection. Edited July 25, 2006 by kensei
ghostryder Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 compared to the 1/72 .. this is a real masterpiece 419145[/snapback] Big Bertha should always bring her uglier 1/72 sister along. She's lookin' good in this comparison shot
AlphaOne Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) compared to the 1/72 .. this is a real masterpiece 419145[/snapback] Big Bertha should always bring her uglier 1/72 sister along. She's lookin' good in this comparison shot 419330[/snapback] When comparing the two, you can see that the wings on the 1:60 sit further back (which is more accurate to Kawamori-san's idea) than the 1:72 version. Maybe this creates an optical illusion which makes it look like the wings are smaller? Edited July 25, 2006 by AlphaOne
ghostryder Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) Yes to that.. I also noticed that the wing roots (the part that the main wings fold into) are smaller on the 1/60 compared to lineart and the 1/72. I think it's becasue the sweep angle is too steep. Even if they made these wider and kept the main wings the same size, the illusion would be a larger wing span. Of course, it would be an easier re-tool to just make the main wings longer. Edited July 25, 2006 by ghostryder
Nani?! Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) Yes to that.. I also noticed that the wing roots (the part that the main wings fold into) are smaller on the 1/60 compared to lineart and the 1/72. I think it's becasue the sweep angle is too steep. Even if they made these wider and kept the main wings the same size, the illusion would be a larger wing span. Of course, it would be an easier re-tool to just make the main wings longer. 419397[/snapback] The wing "roots" are indeed wider in kawamori's lineart but the fighter itself is a tad longer as well. Simply making the "roots" wider would make the valk bulker and that'd be the last thing I'd want. I think the wings are fine... The vertical stabilizers is where I'm iffy.... especially when the 19 has it's shoulder fast packs mounted in fighter mode.... the stabilizers will look TINY... *refer to picture below: now imagine those on yamato's 19. Edited July 25, 2006 by Nani?!
Roy's Blues Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 I bet the leg FP pieces will be magnetic like the VF-0S/A
do not disturb Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 is the phrase "the wings are too small" like the new "hands are too small"?
Gatillero PR Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 is the phrase "the wings are too small" like the new "hands are too small"? 419446[/snapback] Only when we get the Battroid pics...
1/1 LowViz Lurker Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) I think it would be good if yamato made detailed non-posable hands to go with it. (includes the PT hands) Do what they did with gbp. Blocky, panel lined, robotic and detailed non posable hands) but just make them smaller. (not gigantic like gbp ones). Ahh that would be good. Then the gunpod could be massive and the wrist won't shake. Imagine if all vf1 release from now on, had the GBP side parts included and had smaller versions of those robotic non-posable hands along with being panel lined (like the 1/72 macross plus toys, low vis 1) and tampo printed.(vf0) Come on yamato these are expensive! I think at the least, the DYRL valks should have robotic non-posable hands where the tv valks get thier bubble hands. What do you think graham? Small robotic non-posable hands? We finally managed to get them to panel line vf0 so now the next step is them making better hands/wrists and/or including good robotic non-posables. When I look at the lineart, I'm actually ok with the wings now. I think it is just model people who got used to the big wings that demand bigger ones. If like the vf0 there was a cg equivalent to go by as a guide that would be much more helpful than some 2d drawing. (no worry about deforming parts and the problem of perspective making things look bigger and longer than they actually are) Edited July 25, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker
Nani?! Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 Yes to that.. I also noticed that the wing roots (the part that the main wings fold into) are smaller on the 1/60 compared to lineart and the 1/72. I think it's becasue the sweep angle is too steep. Even if they made these wider and kept the main wings the same size, the illusion would be a larger wing span. Of course, it would be an easier re-tool to just make the main wings longer. 419397[/snapback] The wing "roots" are indeed wider in kawamori's lineart but the fighter itself is a tad longer as well. Simply making the "roots" wider would make the valk bulker and that'd be the last thing I'd want. I think the wings are fine... The vertical stabilizers is where I'm iffy.... especially when the 19 has it's shoulder fast packs mounted in fighter mode.... the stabilizers will look TINY... *refer to picture below: now imagine those on yamato's 19. 419427[/snapback] I always wished yamato would include non-poseable mecha hands with each valk... I'd forgive the size of the PT if it WORKED properly, but they sometimes drove me nuts... I end up just mounting the gunpod on the forearms. It's one thing that I wish they'd change. They dont work and they dont look good.
Batou Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 Toys or models should be compared to Kawamori's lineart for accuracy, not against the actual animated art. 419107[/snapback] Oh hell ... no more VF-1'R' incidents ...
Gatillero PR Posted July 25, 2006 Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) Is this what people is refering to about the small wings? I've outlined what I think is too small, not the wing itself. If this part is bigger, the wings will extend a bit more. Edit: If this get bigger, it will affect the position of the arms in gerwalk mode. Edited July 26, 2006 by Gatillero PR
eugimon Posted July 26, 2006 Posted July 26, 2006 Is this what people is refering to about the small wings? I've outlined what I think is too small, not the wing itself. If this part is bigger, the wings will extend a bit more. Edit: If this get bigger, it will affect the position of the arms in gerwalk mode. 419493[/snapback] it will also extend the chest in battroid since in the line drawing, the shoulders sit much farther back than on the 1/60. There's serious anime magic involved in the yf-19 design...
1/1 LowViz Lurker Posted July 26, 2006 Posted July 26, 2006 (edited) Is this what people is refering to about the small wings? I've outlined what I think is too small, not the wing itself. If this part is bigger, the wings will extend a bit more That seems like a good compromise. Less risk of scrapage on the ground for robot mode. (note for people who are fans of long wings: when the robot bends its knee the wing WILL touch the ground just going by how I have my 1/72 posed. One long straight left leg, and one bent knee for the right leg, leaning against a wall with its gunpod-holding arm bent and raising the gunpod in the air in a relaxed position. Although pushing the 'hip armor' at an angle on the bent knee side will solve that. I also think that, given these are supposed to be hip lasers and all, that smaller wings would actually make it more practical. Imagine all the shaking and instability you'd get from massive long wings when trying to aim at something?) Edited July 26, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker
cyde01 Posted July 26, 2006 Posted July 26, 2006 (edited) Yes to that.. I also noticed that the wing roots (the part that the main wings fold into) are smaller on the 1/60 compared to lineart and the 1/72. I think it's becasue the sweep angle is too steep. Even if they made these wider and kept the main wings the same size, the illusion would be a larger wing span. Of course, it would be an easier re-tool to just make the main wings longer. 419397[/snapback] I agree with ghostryder and gatillero that the wing roots are too small/narrow with a sweep angle that is too steep. I actually mentioned that when I first saw the CAD drawing, but I called them lerx instead of wing roots. Looking at that lineart, it looks like the wings angle forward a lot more than both toys. I think making the wing roots less swept back and the wings longer would improve the look of the fighter, but I still think it looks dang good as-is. I just hope the nose arches upward before it goes down into the "waddle." Edited July 26, 2006 by cyde01
Shaggydog Posted July 26, 2006 Posted July 26, 2006 The old 1/72 actually looks good to me in those pix, although the 1/60 is more 'accurate' I guess (and the construction of the 1/72 left something to be desired). I like the new 1/60 toy. I think it does look a bit fat in the rear, but I don't think that has to do with the wings, it's just that the rear is a little fat. Maybe battroid mode requires it. I suppose the wings could stand to be a bit skinnier, but I don't really think the wings are a problem. And if it transforms as nicely as the vf-0s, I'll be one happy mf.
Golden Arms Posted July 26, 2006 Posted July 26, 2006 I think the vertical fins are fine. If the were any larger I think it wouldn't look right in battriod mode. Does Yamato have licensing rights to make mac 7 valks? It would be cool to see a basara fire valk.
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted July 26, 2006 Posted July 26, 2006 The old 1/72 actually looks good to me in those pix, although the 1/60 is more 'accurate' I guess (and the construction of the 1/72 left something to be desired).I like the new 1/60 toy. I think it does look a bit fat in the rear, but I don't think that has to do with the wings, it's just that the rear is a little fat. Maybe battroid mode requires it. I suppose the wings could stand to be a bit skinnier, but I don't really think the wings are a problem. And if it transforms as nicely as the vf-0s, I'll be one happy mf. 419529[/snapback] Thats because your not seeing the 1/72 from the sides in those pics...once you do that...HOLY MOTHER! TZhe old 1/72 looked like a fatty from the side, whereas the side profile of the new 1/60 is much better, and man that landing gear makes a world of difference!
Recommended Posts