Blue sky vs. all else (but mostly constraints)

[mharrington]

There are plenty of threads regarding how to fix Epcot (realistically) or DHS (realistically) or other global parks like Disneyland Paris...

Okay, I'm going to put up a thread about this idea in more detail later on (an extension of another thread: http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/a-goofy-themed-dark-ride-with-no-place-for-it-to-go.856525/), but for right now, I have an idea about something that I don't think would fit in Epcot or the Studios or even Disneyland Paris. It will be part of a land I'm working on. It's based on an abandoned concept: "Goofy About Road Trips". Here's a concept art piece:

The description reads thus:

The basic ride concept for this would be loosely based on "A Goofy Movie" and be about a cross-country road trip by the anthropomorphic friend of Mickey's. The attraction took riders on a journey with the absentminded Goofy where things went awry and mayhem ensued.

Now, certainly, this would never fit in Epcot, even if it were tacked on to, say, Test Track, which seems just forced to me. And at the Studios, I'd be picturing it as a working movie set concept and making the road trip just a movie, and thus it would be a cop-out. It would only be adding to the fact that the Studios park is so messy right now. As for Disneyland Paris, it might work in a Toontown concept (at Disneyland Paris, not at the Studios park), but I don't know if the French are as real big on road trips as Americans are.

Anyway, I'll put up this idea of mine later on in another thread.

 

[lazyboy97o]

So basically what you are saying then is, "None of this stuff will actually happen, so what's the point of pretending that it will?" Did I get that right?

I would say that is right, even if the original poster disagrees. The only way to actually know the real constraints is to do it in the real world. Even at the university level you're going to find students allowed freedom beyond what would be more plausible.

 

[Rpearson]

I thought the beauty of discussion board imagineering was the ability for it to be all blue sky. Sure we can have competitions now and then in which we must apply real-world logic to these ideas, but in my opinion, when criticism comes along attacking those who don't utilize real world concepts outside of competition based threads, it just rubs me the wrong way.
Is blue sky a part of the process? Yes. Will the real world manage to hit us in the face every step of the way, absolutely! I am currently in College working for a BFA in Filmmaking and boy am I slapped by reality every day. But when we have an opportunity on something like a discussion board where we aren't constrained by land ownership, or cost of building, why not let our imaginations run like hell? It's the perfect time and place, and frankly I welcome more of it.
Sure some ideas are outlandish and would never ever be built in a disney park in the real world, but isnt that what makes this kind of blue sky thinking and conceptualization beautiful? You don't need to pay for a ticket to take a ride in your imagination. All it takes is a click of the mouse, a few lines of well-written descriptions, and my mind goes racing. I say, continue to Blue-Sky! Even if you have to force yourself to specify at the beginning that this exists in a parallel universe, keep up the practice! You never what kind of wonderful adventures you're capable of taking us on till you do!

Keep on imagineering, everyone!

 

[Figments Friend]

A interesting thread.

At WDI, part of the 'blue sky' aspect to a potential projects' beginnings is to not let any 'real world' restrictions get in the way of the flow of ideas.
All the 'realities' that will have to be dealt with later on such as land space, budget restrictions, needs and/or requests from other Company departments and the like are not focused on at this early stage in the process.
At this point, it's all about free thinking and lofty ponderings.
'The sky is the limit' at this stage...thus why it is called 'blue sky', and it is considered the ONLY limit during this limitless mentality state.
You don't want those 'realities' or eventual restrictions of actually building the project to skew the free-wheeling thought process at this stage.

After a idea takes flight, and shows some real promise or 'fits' the need of a particular project, it can then be developed and molded to meet those other 'realities' and the restrictions they bring.
That is when you will see truly fantastical ideas plucked from the sky and then brought back down to Earth in a way that can be developed into something that will fit into the particular 'box of restrictions/limitations' that is set by the needs or wants of the various departments within the Company ( marketing, legal, etc.)

Thus why 'blue sky' is such a appealing area for getting something started.
Anything goes...as there is nothing to hold you back....yet!

'The sky is the limit' !

 

[ArtificialArtist]

Can't speak for anyone else, but i, for my part, always keep technical-, space-, material- and budget-constraints in mind whenever i work out a concept (even maintenance and number of ride operators). But i try to allow myself to add some fiction especially earlier in the process. That's my approach usually. Never fully accurate, of course, unless i have sufficient data and information on the subject.

 

[mharrington]

As for fireworks, yes, it'd be tricky finding a new spot for them, but it could work. Backstage rerouting has been done before and it'll certainly be done again.

When has backstage ever been rerouted?

 

[mharrington]

Everyone here all said that real-world constraints are taken more into account on competition threads. Incidentally, I've created a thread on my consideration of doing a competition series of my own: http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/how-does-one-start-a-competition-thread.885344/. However, I received some criticism for my approach, most notably too many rules and regulations to the detriment of creativity, which would result in creativity being stifled and creating a stale atmosphere.

I've been trying to reconsider doing the competitions and trying to keep some wiggle room in there, but even so, there's still another competition going on right now, The Sole Imagineer. That means if I were to do a competition thread right now, there would be two competitions going on. I don't think anyone would want that.

 

[mharrington]

Sorry to bump up an old thread, but I have to ask a question:

That thread isn't actually talking about areas beyond the train tracks, but to answer your concerns, we have to use a little creativity. For instance, why not make it an indoor land with a fireproof roof (which is completely feasible)?

How can the building containing the indoor land be fireproof?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Sorry to bump up an old thread, but I have to ask a question:

How can the building containing the indoor land be fireproof?

Nothing is fire proof but different materials and assemblies are tested and rated for how they perform in a fire. These ratings are categorized by hours. Based on use and structure type, the building code will prescribe the minimum performance standards. Fireworks fallout is likely specifically addressed in the EPCOT Fire Code since it is a normal situation inside the Reedy Creek Improvement District. Methods would likely include very high rating requirements for materials and assemblies as well as things like the sprinkler system that is activated on the Fantasyland roofs.

 

[mharrington]

Nothing is fire proof but different materials and assemblies are tested and rated for how they perform in a fire. These ratings are categorized by hours. Based on use and structure type, the building code will prescribe the minimum performance standards. Fireworks fallout is likely specifically addressed in the EPCOT Fire Code since it is a normal situation inside the Reedy Creek Improvement District. Methods would likely include very high rating requirements for materials and assemblies as well as things like the sprinkler system that is activated on the Fantasyland roofs.

What kinds of materials and assemblies, anyway? And how does the sprinkler system on the roofs of Fantasyland work?

 

[lazyboy97o]

What kinds of materials and assemblies, anyway? And how does the sprinkler system on the roofs of Fantasyland work?

The materials and assemblies are something that cannot be easily answered. There are many products and methods available depending on the specific situation.

 

[mharrington]

But none of us here really know all of the details of the importance of certain backstage structures or spaces, or other requirements. The thing is, we aren't real Imagineers, so we can't truly be as realistic as you hope. But I do feel as though a lot of the time we try to do the best with what we can.

Here is an example of a backstage structure that we can't just remove, no matter how much we want to: an overpass behind the Magic Kingdom. Passport 2 Dreams weighs in; although it's primarily about the WDW Railroad (over which the overpass crosses), it's also a reason why there hasn't been any major expansions back there all these years; hence why I reduced the article to show you what I mean:

[T]he back third [of the WDW Railroad] - what's always been called the back stretch - has never been fine. Since 1971 it's been an unsimultated ride through a swamp, unsimultated because it really is a swamp. In the earliest years the spiel on the Railroad attempted to present this as a view of what this area looked like before Walt Disney World was built, which is just about the best spin you can put on it. This most disappointing stretch of the ride climaxes with the ultimate disappointment: a ride underneath a concrete overpass!

[...]

It isn't hard to guess why it's gone nearly fifty years looking the way it does. The concrete overpass is the main way into the Magic Kingdom for employees and service vehicles, so it falls under the umbrella of facilities, not guest show, and as a piece of infrastructure, it's super duper important. The bridge can't be closed to be rebuilt into something better themed without massive complications, complications which understandably are best to avoid. It's one of those problems that falls between poles and thus doesn't get addressed.

So while it may look like that the Magic Kingdom has an expansion pad behind Fantasyland, the fact that there's a vital piece of infrastructure back there kind of takes that potential expansion pad away.

 

[mharrington]

For some, most of our work takes place in a completely fictional world where parks are built in Australia, or Canada, or Greece, or Germany, or wherever. Paying heed to real world constraints is important, yes. But on an online armchair Imagineering forum where a bunch of people who love theme parks and Disney gather together to have fun? I'd say not as much. True, when doing some blue sky work for pre-existing parks, you should take into consideration sizing, space limitations, funding, etc., but when it boils down to it, none of this stuff is ACTUALLY going to happen. This is all for purely fictional fun.

Can't speak for anyone else, but i, for my part, always keep technical-, space-, material- and budget-constraints in mind whenever i work out a concept (even maintenance and number of ride operators). But i try to allow myself to add some fiction especially earlier in the process. That's my approach usually. Never fully accurate, of course, unless i have sufficient data and information on the subject.

Okay, no offense to anyone...

Granted, they will probably never happen, but on the rare occasions I do work on fictitious parks, I do try and figure out if their locations could potentially work. I had tried to join in on, say, Australia or Germany, but for various reasons, they seemed to not work, mainly for reasons of finance in those countries (or especially in the case of Germany, its proximity to Disneyland Paris). And a lot of times, I'm not even the one who first brings up these real-life issues.

Now, again, this is just me, but I actually try to work backwards (or maybe sideways, if that's even possible) from the traditional setup. For me, blue sky and constraints, mostly physical space if nothing else (at least in preexisting parks), go hand-in-hand, if that seems possible. As I had said before, I am an Aspie, and as such, in this case, I tend to think in a very step-by-step process, where I try and take into account as much as possible when I do anything. And now, with Shanghai (and to a lesser extent, Hong Kong), some possibilities may have opened up for new ideas elsewhere.