Nemo14
Well-Known Member
Here's a link to addresses:
http://www.allears.net/pl/contact.htm
http://www.allears.net/pl/contact.htm
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
NEW Smoking Settler's Cabin (Formerly Burning) as Seen from Liberty Belle Riverboat
- Thread starter WDWLover#1
- Start date
jdmdisney99
Well-Known Member
Apparently they tried that in the '70s at Disneyland and it looked pretty bad.
PolynesianPrincess
Well-Known Member
Totally random but the burning cabin was one of my favorite things as a child at WDW and I would ALWAYS take a picture of the house whenever we took a trip there and EVERY TIME I got my pictures back from being developed, the picture of the house wasn't there. I'd say this happened maybe 6 or 7 times. It was really weird. My mom and I still discuss the missing burning house pics from time to time.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I don't know why they stopped the actual flames**, or I might have known but it was so long ago that I have forgotten. At any rate, now is when you will get the response the the useless burning of gas all day and half the night just to give it an effect would be wasteful and environmentally criminal. Sometimes the times work in WDW's favor.
**Seems like it was shortly after the oil shortage in the late 70's and/or about the same time that the cost of fossil fuels were going up like a rocket. They still use a lot for Night shows, a couple of attractions, LMA, CC, Indiana Jones and TGMR, but those are not constantly being used, just for short time periods. I'm not defending it, but, I have mixed emotions about it now that I didn't back then. It seems to be a tremendous waste of resources just so we can all see what fire looks like for about 10 seconds. I do wish they had done it a little better and had smoke escape areas in the building that were already there and could have been used. I thought I did see a very brief orange flash when they first approached the cabin, but that might have been my imagination or maybe Yeti rented them his strobe for a few minutes.
**Seems like it was shortly after the oil shortage in the late 70's and/or about the same time that the cost of fossil fuels were going up like a rocket. They still use a lot for Night shows, a couple of attractions, LMA, CC, Indiana Jones and TGMR, but those are not constantly being used, just for short time periods. I'm not defending it, but, I have mixed emotions about it now that I didn't back then. It seems to be a tremendous waste of resources just so we can all see what fire looks like for about 10 seconds. I do wish they had done it a little better and had smoke escape areas in the building that were already there and could have been used. I thought I did see a very brief orange flash when they first approached the cabin, but that might have been my imagination or maybe Yeti rented them his strobe for a few minutes.
MyMagicSmoke+It's magic smoke!
Horizons1
Well-Known Member
AndyS2992
Well-Known Member
Huh? My parents went in July 1990 and have video footage of the cabin on fire with real flames so I would assume they stopped using real fire in the late 90's. But I agree, it is a waste of gas to keep the place on fire and the new smoke machine is much more Eco friendly and still alludes to it being on fire so I don't see the problem. Yes the smoke effect needs more work to look more realistic but real fire is not necessary even though it did look more interesting. With today's technology they could easily put some screens in the windows showing flames or use a newer version of the PotC fire effect.
I don't even know why the cabin is on fire to begin with
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Indian raid, back in the old days of non-PC. Now it is probably because they left a frying pan on the stove. Or the kids were playing with matches. Or they are steam cleaning the carpets.Huh? My parents went in July 1990 and have video footage of the cabin on fire with real flames so I would assume they stopped using real fire in the late 90's. But I agree, it is a waste of gas to keep the place on fire and the new smoke machine is much more Eco friendly and still alludes to it being on fire so I don't see the problem. Yes the smoke effect needs more work to look more realistic but real fire is not necessary even though it did look more interesting. With today's technology they could easily put some screens in the windows showing flames or use a newer version of the PotC fire effect.
I don't even know why the cabin is on fire to begin with
Last time I was there, it wasn't doing anything.....
cw1982
Well-Known Member
Honestly, I think I'd rather see it not doing anything than that hot mess of random smoke coming out. At least then it's not quite so laughable.
If not fire... smoke coming from the chimney would be an ideal fix to the static cabin. Maybe they didn't know where to position the fog machine!?
doctornick
Well-Known Member
I dob't mind them using smoke instead of fire (though I'd prefer fire) but why ca't they set up more fog machines and hav it coming out of the roof and chimney as well?
cw1982
Well-Known Member
Personally, I would have rather them done nothing. The smoke in that video just looks silly. I know high school students who could put together better special effects for a one-act play than this.
incorrigible
Member
I agree that this smoke effect is just pathetic. If gas use is such an issue, why not have an effect that triggers as the Liberty Belle comes around the turn. You see smoke start pouring out of the house as you approach and then it suddenly bursts into flames. Once the boat passes, the flames die down and the smoke stops until the next boat comes by. I haven't been on the Liberty Belle in a long time, but it's not like boats are constantly passing; there's fairly long breaks in between as I recall. It may not be great for those watching from land, but I think it could be done to appear as if the fire worsened and then burnt itself out.
