Closing of Tower of Terror (WDW)

MisterPenguin

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Bairstow said:
Wait, what?
Am I missing something here, because I don't see the screens doing that. What exactly are you talking about?
Click to expand...

Parallax shift is a way to trick your brain into seeing, i.e., modeling in your mind, a 3D environment by 'parallax shifting' images that are supposed to be at different distances. Like how looking out the side window of a car or train you'll see close items moving quickly and in front of items farther away.

In GotGMB, as your gantry goes up and down, the image presented will parallax shift closer images to move (in the up/down range of motion) faster and in front of images that are supposed to be farther away.

 
Last edited:
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Sped2424 said:
He is most likely referring to the epcot overlay to Ellen's energy adventure as permits have already been filed for site prep.
Click to expand...
The permit is not for site prep, which would be ground work like grading and digging for foundations. The filed permit will allow new construction but is not legally tied to a specific building.
 
Phil12

Phil12

Well-Known Member
LAKid53 said:
Just know that of the approximately 27,000 acres Walt purchased, 1/3 was set aside for conservation. But I agree with you - expand the footprint of the parks, rather than tear down/out and rebuild. The MK needs to be bigger, not just rejiggered. Been saying that for some time now.

Based upon the remaining acreage available for development, I'm thinking Disney has about 8,000 - 9,000 acres available for expansion. But that may be limited by roads and other existing infrastructure and land unsuitable for development, such as that parcel around the Lagoon.

Others more knowledgeable than l can provide more exact numbers. @marni1971, do you have more precise figures?
Click to expand...
They can develop every square inch of the property if they desire. The areas set aside for conservation can be developed as long as Disney offsets the development by setting aside other property within the state. And Disney owns (under assumed names) more than enough Florida conservation property (i.e. swamp land) outside of the WDW property. For example, they've already established the 11,500-acre Disney Wilderness Preserve back in 1992 in order to offset and mitigate the development of conservation areas within WDW. They really only have to maintain the waterways and reduce their pollution of air and water due to fireworks to keep in the good graces of the South Florida Water Management District which runs all the way from Orlando down to the Florida Keys.
 
Bairstow

Bairstow

Well-Known Member
MisterPenguin said:
Parallax shift is a way to trick your brain into seeing, i.e., modeling in your mind, a 3D environment by 'parallax shifting' images that are supposed to be at different distances. Like how looking out the side window of a car or train you'll see close items moving quickly and in front of items farther away.

In GotGMB, as your gantry goes up and down, the image presented will parallax shift closer images to move (in the up/down range of motion) faster and in front of images that are supposed to be farther away.

Click to expand...


Ah, gotcha. That wasn't apparent from the Rhode video.

Was Spiderman the first ride to employ this technique?
 
MisterPenguin

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Bairstow said:
Ah, gotcha. That wasn't apparent from the Rhode video.

Was Spiderman the first ride to employ this technique?
Click to expand...

Spider-man doesn't use parallax FX, it has straight up binocular 3D (by the use of glasses, each eye sees something different).

Of course, that's a bit of a misnomer since the binocular 3D uses parallax to force the eye to focus two images into one creating a false parallax. But usually, when people say 'parallax' for an ocular effect, they mean one image you can see with two eyes wherein there is planar shifting (closer things move faster and block the background based on your movement).

See here...

In this image below, there seems to be a 3 dimensional aspect to it, but without the use of 3D binocular glasses, because, it's just one image. The FX in GotGMB magnifies the FX by moving you in sync with the screen's parallax FX.

Parallax.gif
 
TP2000

TP2000

Well-Known Member
atighe42 said:
Again, the ride is fine and seems like fun. In an isolated circumstance. But it still comes down to "Why?". It was a lot better than I anticipated. But the queue before the Collector's office is straight garbage. Boxes with props you could find at a Marvel themed Planet Hollywood with a projection screen.
Click to expand...

I thought the queue and pre-show rooms look really clever and interesting. Here's Joe Rohde's explanation and personal tour of the queue.
 
Bairstow

Bairstow

Well-Known Member
MisterPenguin said:
Spider-man doesn't use parallax FX, it has straight up binocular 3D (by the use of glasses, each eye sees something different).

Of course, that's a bit of a misnomer since the binocular 3D uses parallax to force the eye to focus two images into one creating a false parallax. But usually, when people say 'parallax' for an ocular effect, they mean one image you can see with two eyes wherein there is planar shifting (closer things move faster and block the background based on your movement).

See here...

In this image below, there seems to be a 3 dimensional aspect to it, but without the use of 3D binocular glasses, because, it's just one image. The FX in GotGMB magnifies the FX by moving you in sync with the screen's parallax FX.

Parallax.gif
Click to expand...

I was referring more specifically to what the Universal designers refer to here as "squinching", that is, simulating false parralex to compensate for screen distortion caused by the viewer's change in angle with reference to a flat screen. The principle should be similar whether the or not the screen is in 3d



 
Kman101

Kman101

Well-Known Member
The outside is still ugly but I personally always thought the ride itself could be well done and fun. They did a nice job. The Rocket AA is great. I'll look forward to riding it some day. I still don't want it in Florida's ToT. Why wasn't this implemented at WDS in Paris?
 
Last edited:
marni1971

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
Phil12 said:
They can develop every square inch of the property if they desire. The areas set aside for conservation can be developed as long as Disney offsets the development by setting aside other property within the state. And Disney owns (under assumed names) more than enough Florida conservation property (i.e. swamp land) outside of the WDW property. For example, they've already established the 11,500-acre Disney Wilderness Preserve back in 1992 in order to offset and mitigate the development of conservation areas within WDW. They really only have to maintain the waterways and reduce their pollution of air and water due to fireworks to keep in the good graces of the South Florida Water Management District which runs all the way from Orlando down to the Florida Keys.
Click to expand...
Apart from the 1000s of acres that are deemed unsuitable for building on.
 
montyz81

montyz81

Well-Known Member
marni1971 said:
Apart from the 1000s of acres that are deemed unsuitable for building on.
Click to expand...
I always thought that was an interesting comment. I've heard that before. What makes land unsuitable for building? How much of the land built on in 1970 and 1981 would be deemed "unsuitable for building" today?
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom