I can't believe no one mentioned this: https://twitter.com/pablohidalgo/status/786951594667409408?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
I think the scene in ESB where Luke is hoisting up to the underside pretty well sets the scale of the AT-AT regardless of any other desciptions.
R/ Robert
I think the scene in ESB where Luke is hoisting up to the underside pretty well sets the scale of the AT-AT regardless of any other desciptions.
R/ Robert
In case anyone was wondering...
View attachment 687599
View attachment 687600
View attachment 687601
View attachment 687602
And remember, Revell says they used ILM's original digital assets to sculpt their kit, so you know their accuracy is dead on. Who are you going to believe, them or your own lying eyes?
I don;t think its fair that you are comparing it with a later finalized version. Much like with the TFA, the models were started well ahead of the movie effects being finalized. If you compare the Revell AT-AT to this early model Disney was displaying at least as far back as July you will see it actually is much more accurate to that model. They probably used the same asset that was used to create that model, or may have even directly used that model itself.
I think someone did a comparison and supposedly the Bandai is actually less accurate (at least in regards to panel line placement etc...) but who knows for sure at this pointIt will be interesting to compare Bandai's U-wing to Revell's once Bandai's is finally released since one would assume they had roughly the same production lead time. I'd bet money that Bandai's somehow ends up being more accurate.
Here's a comparison with the prototype.
View attachment 687611
I agree. It's certainly closer, but...
I think someone did a comparison and supposedly the Bandai is actually less accurate (at least in regards to panel line placement etc...) but who knows for sure at this point