It's a little odd that these ships - supposedly ISD-Is (Rebels Visual Dictionary) have octet instead of double-barrelled guns. We even got a close up of them firing in Secret Cargo. Still - may be a case of "canon trumps styling" - ignore what we see, and assume that "really" a double-barreled gun is firing.

3 hours ago, ceejlekabeejle said:

Hey, if a TV show primarily designed to keep kids quiet on a Saturday morning wants to artfully capture the 70s styling of some of Star Wars most iconic designs, evoking the great man himself, I'm on board.

Except it doesn't air on Saturday mornings

5 hours ago, Ironlord said:

McQuarrie Star Destroyer

Rebels Star Destroyer

Yes, they are based on McQuarrie concept art. However, the ISDs in the movies are different. Google 'star wars rebels isd'. (Will this: star wars rebels isd work?) Assuming you see the same results I do, you'll find several images (including the first from the left) from the front facing back that show how tall the 'neck' is. In the same page you should find 'normal' movie ISDs (2nd and 3rd from left). If not, Google them as well. . . anyway, you'll instantly see the difference.

46 minutes ago, Tirion said:

Except it doesn't air on Saturday mornings

Mate, I'm streaming it in the UK, I'm largely guessing. Point still is, it's a kids' show, yet has made a nod towards Star Wars' artistic history. I think that's great.

11 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

Yes, they are based on McQuarrie concept art. However, the ISDs in the movies are different. Google 'star wars rebels isd'. (Will this: star wars rebels isd work?) Assuming you see the same results I do, you'll find several images (including the first from the left) from the front facing back that show how tall the 'neck' is. In the same page you should find 'normal' movie ISDs (2nd and 3rd from left). If not, Google them as well. . . anyway, you'll instantly see the difference.

Ahem...

6 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

On the ISDs. Their 'neck', or the bit connecting the bridge to the main body of the vessel, is annoyingly long. . .

See, for example, this: Normal ISD

As compared to this: Rebels ISD
And this: Rebels ISD, again

1 minute ago, ceejlekabeejle said:

Ahem...

Yeah sorry. . . I thought if the poster couldn't see my links, and posted the original concept art and the rebels version, he might want a better comparison, or even have the same question you did.

This, of course, assumes he was referring to the links I posted. . .

The tall necks are pretty well known - I was making a point of where they originated, and providing another tall neck image.

2 minutes ago, Ironlord said:

The tall necks are pretty well known - I was making a point of where they originated, and providing another tall neck image.

Ah, I see. . . well thanks!

Also, could you open my links?

The ISD's necks on Rebels are far too elongated.

3 minutes ago, Forresto said:

The ISD's necks on Rebels are far too elongated.

You're totally entitled to that opinion.

Personally, I believe that its a fitting tribute to the Original Concept art, and in a way, makes the "Movie Status" ISDs too short in my mind.

But both of our opinions are just that - opinions - that do nothing to alter the fact that they are done that way for a reason, and no amount of cheering for, or booing, is going to make a lick of difference.

9 minutes ago, Forresto said:

The ISD's necks on Rebels are far too elongated.

I agree.

2 hours ago, Tirion said:

Except it doesn't air on Saturday mornings

OFF TOPIC COMMENT BELOW

I feel so old when I read an article about how saturday morning cartoons no longer exist... At least not here in the US. I remember getting up early on saturaday mornings to catch X Men and GI Joe and other wonderful cartoons from my childhood.

Oh how the world has changed

Relevent Edit

I'm a fan of the elongated necks. A little cosmetic variation allows a little creativity.

13 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

Also, could you open my links?

Only the 3rd one worked for me.

On 3/7/2017 at 11:54 AM, Undeadguy said:

This doesn't prove anything. In the OP pic, the Quasar is over twice the width of the MC80, and the Neb next to it is taller. So either the proportions are off or that's not an MC80. Here is an MC80, likely Home One from RotJ. It is massive compared to the Neb.

Now, even if the MC80 is placed further in the back ground, it should be much larger. We know that it is near the middle of the fleet because they show a side shot of it dropping in from hyperspace.

I'm pretty sure Disney just goofed all the sizes of the ships.

You are not considering depth. The mc80 is further away in both the side shot and the head on shot. This is creating the illusion that it is smaller. It was mention in another form that Disney said the mc80 was around 2000 meters.

Here is the post.

According to the Behind the Scenes Gallery, the ship we saw in the last episode WAS the Home One (not just any other Mon Calamari). Not only that but they state that it is larger than a ISD.

According to the scale comparison there, the Home One should be around 2000m, not 1200m

actually they show a length of 2000m.

3 hours ago, Rune Taq said:

It was mention in another form that Disney said the mc80 was around 2000 meters.

Here is the post.

According to the Behind the Scenes Gallery, the ship we saw in the last episode WAS the Home One (not just any other Mon Calamari). Not only that but they state that it is larger than a ISD.

According to the scale comparison there, the Home One should be around 2000m, not 1200m

The figure I saw given by people who'd scaled up the scale comparison and done pixel counts on it, was 1900m - a major size increase, even if shuttles will still be a little cramped in the shuttlebay seen.

On 3/8/2017 at 9:55 AM, Ironlord said:

It's a little odd that these ships - supposedly ISD-Is (Rebels Visual Dictionary) have octet instead of double-barrelled guns. We even got a close up of them firing in Secret Cargo. Still - may be a case of "canon trumps styling" - ignore what we see, and assume that "really" a double-barreled gun is firing.

ISD 1s were constantly upgraded or given different equipment as time went on and they rolled off of the assembly line. The later ISD 1s were closer to an ISD 2.

10 hours ago, Rune Taq said:

You are not considering depth. The mc80 is further away in both the side shot and the head on shot. This is creating the illusion that it is smaller. It was mention in another form that Disney said the mc80 was around 2000 meters.

Here is the post.

According to the Behind the Scenes Gallery, the ship we saw in the last episode WAS the Home One (not just any other Mon Calamari). Not only that but they state that it is larger than a ISD.

According to the scale comparison there, the Home One should be around 2000m, not 1200m

Well the side shot we get of Home One shows it in the middle of the fleet so I don't know what to say. At 2000m, it should dwarf any other ship in the fleet. Depth works well when things are the same size, but when you have a ship that is 300m, the Neb B, placed next to a 2000m ship, it really screws with the proportions of the ships.

Not to mention the clips of the ISDs, which are massive when they are on screen, and Home One is larger than that, and here we have a tiny ship to represent it.

Here is a clip of Home One. So either the head on shot it is placed way far back, or in the side shot it is far to the left. But it can't be both because there are 2 different angles which pinpoint it's location in the fleet.

12 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Well the side shot we get of Home One shows it in the middle of the fleet so I don't know what to say. At 2000m, it should dwarf any other ship in the fleet. Depth works well when things are the same size, but when you have a ship that is 300m, the Neb B, placed next to a 2000m ship, it really screws with the proportions of the ships.

Not to mention the clips of the ISDs, which are massive when they are on screen, and Home One is larger than that, and here we have a tiny ship to represent it.

Here is a clip of Home One. So either the head on shot it is placed way far back, or in the side shot it is far to the left. But it can't be both because there are 2 different angles which pinpoint it's location in the fleet.

You know, I had tried comparing the two scenes, trying to see if maybe the on-screen ships of the side shot were all to the MC80's left, and it seems to me that the ships shift position between the two, like the MC80 is far to the right of the fleet (from the fleet's perspective) in the side-on shot, and in the higher edges of it, but then it is in the middle and lower down in the front-view scene. . . a couple other ships (most notably a corvette) also seem to shift position

I have no idea if this is just my imaginings or something that actually occurs, but if the former perhaps the scale seems off because of the difficulties of depicting 3D space on a 2D screen from two different angles in a shot which is not continuous (i.e. the two shots, unlike a pan, are not direct continuations of the each other)?

1 minute ago, NobodyInParticular said:

You know, I had tried comparing the two scenes, trying to see if maybe the on-screen ships of the side shot were all to the MC80's left, and it seems to me that the ships shift position between the two, like the MC80 is far to the right of the fleet (from the fleet's perspective) in the side-on shot, and in the higher edges of it, but then it is in the middle and lower down in the front-view scene. . . a couple other ships (most notably a corvette) also seem to shift position

I have no idea if this is just my imaginings or something that actually occurs, but if the former perhaps the scale seems off because of the difficulties of depicting 3D space on a 2D screen from two different angles in a shot which is not continuous (i.e. the two shots, unlike a pan, are not direct continuations of the each other)?

I agree. My reference point was the Neb B that is next to in in the side shot and it definitely moves in the other angle. I don't want to **** all over the Rebels design team, but I feel like they messed it up, when they have concept art of a ship larger than an ISD and fail to represent it when it has screen time. Or maybe they really screwed up and put it in the background for both shots and didn't care if it looked weird or inconsistent.

6 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

I agree. My reference point was the Neb B that is next to in in the side shot and it definitely moves in the other angle. I don't want to **** all over the Rebels design team, but I feel like they messed it up, when they have concept art of a ship larger than an ISD and fail to represent it when it has screen time. Or maybe they really screwed up and put it in the background for both shots and didn't care if it looked weird or inconsistent.

Yeah, I saw that as well, and that was what got me thinking that perhaps even that is to the MC80's left, just above it and behind it, closer to the screen? Again, the difficulties of forcing 3D into 2D make it possible. . .

2 hours ago, awesomejlee said:

ISD 1s were constantly upgraded or given different equipment as time went on and they rolled off of the assembly line.

True. But the last ISD-I to roll off the assembly line (and probably the most upgraded, as Vader's personal ship) was the Devastator - and it's become the representative of the ISD-I class, with its double-barrelled guns.

All the ISD-Is seen in Rogue One have the same gun mounts.

2 hours ago, Undeadguy said:

I agree. My reference point was the Neb B that is next to in in the side shot and it definitely moves in the other angle. I don't want to **** all over the Rebels design team, but I feel like they messed it up, when they have concept art of a ship larger than an ISD and fail to represent it when it has screen time. Or maybe they really screwed up and put it in the background for both shots and didn't care if it looked weird or inconsistent.

Honestly, I think this is being pedantic. It's literally on screen for a matter of seconds, and amongst a cloud of other ships - I highly doubt proportions were at the top of their priority. If it's too big or small when if/when we see it next in the series, then maybe we can have more cause for complaint, but I feel it's unfair to be too critical based on ten seconds of background footage. The main reason it's there is a) to emphasise the bringing together of the Rebel fleet for the first time and b) to hint at the possibility of seeing familiar characters.

At the end of the day, this is essentially an artist's representation of what is already a fictional universe - does it really matter that much if it's a little shorter or longer than it's "supposed" to be? It's like saying that the Nimbus 2000 has too many twigs, or that the hobbits aren't quite short enough. The main thing I care about is that the producers turn out engaging stories, and a few feet too short or too long on an MC80 isn't going to make a difference to that.

38 minutes ago, ceejlekabeejle said:

Honestly, I think this is being pedantic. It's literally on screen for a matter of seconds, and amongst a cloud of other ships - I highly doubt proportions were at the top of their priority. If it's too big or small when if/when we see it next in the series, then maybe we can have more cause for complaint, but I feel it's unfair to be too critical based on ten seconds of background footage. The main reason it's there is a) to emphasise the bringing together of the Rebel fleet for the first time and b) to hint at the possibility of seeing familiar characters.

At the end of the day, this is essentially an artist's representation of what is already a fictional universe - does it really matter that much if it's a little shorter or longer than it's "supposed" to be? It's like saying that the Nimbus 2000 has too many twigs, or that the hobbits aren't quite short enough. The main thing I care about is that the producers turn out engaging stories, and a few feet too short or too long on an MC80 isn't going to make a difference to that.

Heh guess you shouldn't read my comments in the rules forum if this is too pedantic for you.

At the end of the day, the entire Star Wars universe is fictional and yet we still get heated discussions on concepts and ideas. Check the Rogue One thread about the physics of 2 ISDs slicing each other in half or a corvette pushing an ISD. Or check the 12 fighter per squad thread to see how many fighters belong in a squad. Even better, look at the SSD thread and how many different opinions there are on how it should be represented in Armada.

Trying to lecture me on how it doesn't matter isn't going to change my mind. The main thing I care about it fitting the stories to the lore, so making Home One 1/4 what it should be bothers me.

19 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Heh guess you shouldn't read my comments in the rules forum if this is too pedantic for you.

At the end of the day, the entire Star Wars universe is fictional and yet we still get heated discussions on concepts and ideas. Check the Rogue One thread about the physics of 2 ISDs slicing each other in half or a corvette pushing an ISD. Or check the 12 fighter per squad thread to see how many fighters belong in a squad. Even better, look at the SSD thread and how many different opinions there are on how it should be represented in Armada.

Trying to lecture me on how it doesn't matter isn't going to change my mind. The main thing I care about it fitting the stories to the lore, so making Home One 1/4 what it should be bothers me.

That's fine mate, but if you don't want me to lecture you on how it doesn't matter, how about you not lecture the rest of us who are just trying to enjoy the show? Bearing in mind we don't really have enough footage to judge whether it really is 1/4 size or not...