Someone posted a funny pic from the trailer in another thread, so I'll re-use that (too lazy to screen cap my own)...

Soooo....yeah. No real chance of perspective issues, here, as you have a catwalk we are looking straight down to compare against. The TIE cockpit 'bubble' looks like it would easily fit between the rails of the catwalk. And you can see how large Jyn is compared to it, too.

And remember from the cast photos (as well as her real-life person)...she's already actually kinda on the small-ish side...

I mean, geez, could you even fit one of those X-Wing pilots into that TIE cockpit??

Just you.

There's a fair bit of perspective still in play, there... She's quite a distance to the end of the catwalk, as shown by the angles of the handrails... Also, you can't see how far off the end of the catwalk the TIE fighter actually is... The shadow provides no reference with no sun details to view.

Besides, in motion, it didn't look out of place... The still-frame seems to be the worst of the nitpick-enabling.

That's how movies work

There's a fair bit of perspective still in play, there... She's quite a distance to the end of the catwalk, as shown by the angles of the handrails... Also, you can't see how far off the end of the catwalk the TIE fighter actually is... The shadow provides no reference with no sun details to view.

I don't think there is much perspective, no - you can see the TIE Fighter's shadow on the catwalk easily enough, and the sun is obviously not DIRECTLY behind it. So to cast the shadow that far down...it'd have to be basically right against it.

That's how movies work

I blame the overuse of CGI.

Also: the kids these days! With all their skateboarding on the sidewalks (looking for Pokemons) and being on my lawn (looking for Pokemons) and all...

Why, back in my day...

The TIE/fo is only 6.69m long whereas the TIE/ln is 8.99m long. Quite a discrepancy. If the CGI team used the TIE/fo as the basis for Rogue One TIE/ln's, that might explain an apparently smaller size. Assuming, that is, that the same team are doing the computer work, even if there's a different director.

There's a fair bit of perspective still in play, there... She's quite a distance to the end of the catwalk, as shown by the angles of the handrails... Also, you can't see how far off the end of the catwalk the TIE fighter actually is... The shadow provides no reference with no sun details to view.

Besides, in motion, it didn't look out of place... The still-frame seems to be the worst of the nitpick-enabling.

You can see from the shadow of the handrails and their length that, assuming the shadow at the end is indeed from the TIE, the TIE must be close enough for its wings to be alongside the catwalk (with its cockpit being just past the end).

That being said, I don't really see an issue here. I always figured the cockpit of a TIE would be small and cramped, anyway. It was the spacious, two-seated TIE in "The Force Awakens" which seemed off, to me.

Just you.

The catwalk looks like it could fit three Jan Ors shoulder to shoulder, with the TIE cockpit being about as wide as the catwalk. That looks perfectly within specs.

oh dear, a ship that exists between movies or even SCENES in the same movie is ever so slightly a different size!

nevermind....yaknow...perspectives n all.

That's how movies work

I blame the overuse of CGI.

Also: the kids these days! With all their skateboarding on the sidewalks (looking for Pokemons) and being on my lawn (looking for Pokemons) and all...

Why, back in my day...

Go have a made up back problem someplace else, pops.

New MTV show 'Teen Lawn' stirs up controversy.

It's all about Perspective here.

Shoot something like that with a wide angle lens from right behind the person the person will look HUGE compared to what is a little further away because it is so much closer to the camera. If that lens were taken with a long telephoto (I assure you it was not!) then the relative sizes could mean more if you assume each was relatively the same distance from the camera.

With the right perspective you can make an AT-AT look a lot smaller compared to a human than it probably should be.

It's all about Perspective here.

Shoot something like that with a wide angle lens from right behind the person the person will look HUGE compared to what is a little further away because it is so much closer to the camera. If that lens were taken with a long telephoto (I assure you it was not!) then the relative sizes could mean more if you assume each was relatively the same distance from the camera.

With the right perspective you can make an AT-AT look a lot smaller compared to a human than it probably should be.

You mean with the proper camera techniques you can force a certain perspective and make things appear to be a different size than they really are? Someone should tell filmmakers about this! I mean, sure it's strictly a novelty and could never be used on large scale (such as half the shots of a big-budget, epic fantasy trilogy), but you may be able to get away with using it in a scene or two.

SPOILER ALERT:

The Empire deployed Oompa Loompas as pilots prior to ANH as all of their essential personnel were busy constructing the Death Star.

Is this catwalk canon? It's waaaay to wide and has handrails (!!!), I don't undertand how imperial health and safety inspectors could have let it slip...

SPOILER ALERT:

The Empire deployed Oompa Loompas as pilots prior to ANH as all of their essential personnel were busy constructing the Death Star.

So, "Rogue One" will be a musical comedy?

What do you get when you steal secret plans?

Your forces destroyed right down to the last man!

Why don't you believe the lies that we tell?

You will just end up in a cell!

Where you can rot for-e-ever!

it'd be a bit of a departure from the previous movies, but I think I can see it working...

Why, back in my day...

Yup - back in my day TIE fighters were smaller ... just big enough to fit one pilot. Back in my day model makers made each different spaceship model in a different scale.

This was before the dark times ... before Lucasfilm went back and measured all the models without regard for scale using the X-Wing as a baseline. Thus leaving us with truly massive TIEs, A-Wings, Slave One, etc.

So TBH this TIE, if smaller would be a win in my book!

Yup - back in my day TIE fighters were smaller ... just big enough to fit one pilot. Back in my day model makers made each different spaceship model in a different scale.

This was before the dark times ... before Lucasfilm went back and measured all the models without regard for scale using the X-Wing as a baseline. Thus leaving us with truly massive TIEs.

Where are you getting the idea that ANH TIEs and X-wings were in a different scale?

I recall seeing a movie prop TIE model showing the interior. TIEs seemed cramped due to the angle the pilots were filmed at. TIEs have a large open area for the pilot.

There's a fair bit of perspective still in play, there... She's quite a distance to the end of the catwalk, as shown by the angles of the handrails... Also, you can't see how far off the end of the catwalk the TIE fighter actually is... The shadow provides no reference with no sun details to view.

I don't think there is much perspective, no - you can see the TIE Fighter's shadow on the catwalk easily enough, and the sun is obviously not DIRECTLY behind it. So to cast the shadow that far down...it'd have to be basically right against it.

Look again. The shadow cast by the Tie is a small dark spot running from left to right. From the shadows cast by the hand railing, on the left, the light source appears to be between 8 and 10 O'clock. The dark black down the center is looking like a rubber mat.

* Best Alec Guinness voice

Use the suspension of disbelief, Luke....

If you look at the end of the catwalk, it's a circular section wider than the rest of the catwalk.

First things first.... when was the last time you had your prescription lenses updated?

I think the scale is probably correct but when we actually see this scene in the movie- we all may view it a bit differently.