Clicky here!  

 

awesome job

 

That looks great! It's a shame the character designers for the movie didn't put as much effort into Optimus as you did.

 

Though I can't see the pic the OP made, I can call BS on this statement. It's almost and insult to think the designers for this movie didn't put LOADS of effort into the bots. And I don't think it'd be far off to say moreso then most fans ever could.

Not taking anything away from the OPs pic (damn work filters and all that), just saying the movie designers more then put in plenty of effort into their work too.

 

Here's a great idea: Let's turn this dude's thread about his awesome artwork into a debate about the capabilities of the designers.  

 

Here's another great idea: Report the post that started the debate, rather than having a go at the guy who replied to it.
Which I did.
Anyway.
VERY nice work, man. I am impressed.

 

You are right. That is also a good idea. Thank you for reporting that post!

Quintesson, that is one hell of an awesome design! I would have loved to see that on the big screen.

 

Wouldn't mind seeing that on the big screen, that's for sure!

 

Ditto! This is awesome work.

 

Very neat design. You have a similar "expanding inner mechanics" idea like the movie, but kept the basic shell more faithful. I like the movie design, but a take like this probably could have worked too. Very neat.

 

Cool idea. I personally prefer movie Prime the way he is, but this is a very well done version too. It reminds me a lot of MP Prime, lol.

 

well it certainly looks like G1 prime that's for sure. i dunno if this would work in a movie though...my main beef with the 'blocky' look is the mobility. even though your version has more of a mechanical look than the basic G1 design it still looks like he'd be unable to rotate and move everything the way we can.

it's still a great alternative to G1 Prime though. definitely more recognizable than movie Prime. i like the doors on his arms.

 

Dorkyfresh: Imagine a roman legionair's armour. Plates sliding over eachother. There will be a little bit of room between the plating, to allow for movement. You don't want it to be too much though, as you'd expose your interior too much.  

So yes, there'd be plenty of movement options, as long as the plating is well designed. Even knights can move pretty well and they often had very large plating bits. They were mostly restrained by the weight. Hence why you'd want to be designing lightweight, that means you won't want to have to armour each internal bit of mechanics, like would be essential with the current movie designs, which are extremely open.

 

Oohh. interesting. why does it look familiar though? Have you posted it before?

 

Perhaps it looks like Optimus Prime and you've seen images of him before? xD


And no hadn't posted it before.  

 

Well, they put in plenty of effort and manpower and they certainly know their CGI, I think what you mean to say is, that they worked with what we consider the wrong style in mind.

Which I agree with. Their bosses are the ones who decided upon that, they are the ones executing the ideas from 2D to 3D. Which they did pretty well with the given 2D concepts.

However, they could have done the same with something similar to my design, had the style been given a chance by the people in charge, rather than dismissed of hand. (Probably, having the idea of boxes in mind and not considering options that would replace the boxes, but have a similar appearance).

 

its a cool optimus design, but not something i could see on the big screen


you should definately draw the rest of him out though  
slacker XD

 

i understand what you're saying but i can still see how the design would prevent him from total movement...but the problems i see with your version are the same problems that most G1 designs anyway (blocky parts preventing full movement). all-in-all, it's still a very cool design.

oh...and please don't take this as an attack or insult. i was just offering some constructive criticism.

 

Great looking design. Definitely agree with Josh, draw the rest of him.  

 

I'm not taking it as an attack, I can handle critique. However, you should realise it's not a final design. I however, argue that you're exagerating the movement problems. It's likely they'd be in this (unfinished, unworked out (!) concept) design, but unlike you seem to argue, not with the actual 'blocky parts' (which is sheet metal covering up the internal skeleton and mechanics, do remember that, they're not blocks, as blocks can't work). The problem with this design would most likely lie with the white grid in the middle. But, that just depends on if you keep it in long bits, or cut it up through the middle, or, if you'd use another, modern flatnose truck, get a smaller grils altogether. If you'd just have the horizontal bits, you could seperate them all making the entire construction very flexible. The bars on the side of those are for keeping them in place afterall.

You can rotate these sheets over one another, as there'd be horizontal room between the layers, plus they'd be designed NOT in exact blocks, but more in hexagonial shapes, with panelling who's angle could be adjusted. Plus you can bend by having them slide over one another, in front of one another. They would not provide any movement problems as far as I can tell.

If you look at the shoulder, I cut that up in two, so you can rotate the closest to the main body bit up, when you'd want to stretch the arm to the side. For example. You can however also come up with other solutions where the objective is to keep a blocky appearance through use of sheet metal.

Stating in advance there is no solution to these problems in my opinion however means that you lack imagination about engineering solutions. Not holding that against you though, because many engineering solutions take a lot of thought and head aches, but it doesn't mean it's impossible just because you don't see how it'd work right of the bat. At the scale of these movie designs, you can work well beyond toy limitations, whose engineering solutions often obstruct articulation (which in some cases also means it wasn't the optimal design, but a compromise with say toy design cost, or related to simplifications of other parts, because there was no room for the required joints, without losing stiffness or something else, which in a toy is more problematic).



@ Josh: Pff. Says the guy who couldn't even finish colouring 7 pages in one day but needed another night and part of the next day.   Slacker.