Brer Oswald
Well-Known Member
That’s because they never explicitly set the ride in Georgia. They didn’t explicitly set the animated parts of the film there either. It was just “rural America”.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Tiana's Bayou Adventure - latest details and construction progress
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
You could technically see Mickey Mouse drawn by Walt on a mural or somewhere, that is how off the time period is to Frontierland.
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
Everyone knows. That doesn't mean they have to have Rivers of America-facing elements that give that away, and so far, that's mostly been true.
Brer Panther
Well-Known Member
It still doesn't look like something from in The Princess and the Frog. @BrerFoxesBayouAdventure's Tei Fiti joke was spot-on.
Only the part that borders the piney woods of east texas.
Remember how the new sheriff would ride into town and have a shootout with a crocodile!
Isn't the water tower supposed to light up? That sure seems to break that as a facing element.
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
As far as I've seen in the concepts, not in any way that everything else in Frontierland isn't already lit up, unless multicolored stage lighting is true-to-form for abandoned 1890s mines.
The visible lighting on the water tower is what I was referencing. Not the non diegetic attempted to be hidden ones that enhance the mood or supernatural elements.
Those lights in concept art appear to be electric to me, and would not be around until the 1925-1930s. So that seems to break what you stated facing River's of America.
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
First, this 3-D rendering has proven to be less accurate than the model, which did not include any visible light fixtures. Second, signs all throughout the land are illuminated in ways that would be improbable with the lighting technology of the time. Third, the Liberty Belle already rolls by at night with very, very clearly modern lighting along the railing.
First, the 3-D rendering for night time is all we can go by so far as that tower area and attraction are not complete. Second, I would point out that all signs throughout the land does not change your qualifier that nothing being built on the attraction breaks that. It doing what some place may already is irrelevant. Certainly none of them are so visible on prominent features like an icon of the attraction. Thirdly, not only does that not improve, but the Liberty Belle example is a situation of safety. Safety already comes before show. A sign being lit by an out of Rivers of America(your permater) are not a safety situation.
So, are we now first in the phase of "It is not going to likely be as bad as the concept art" for awhile longer or are we then going to go into the "wait until it is finished?" because then all we have to look forward to is "It does not look that bad in person, people that are not liking this are only going by photos/video"
Nothing at you personally, but this is the cycle. Things rarely get better from concept art. That is with the situation's best foot forward.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
For the sake of comparison:
For the sake of comparison:
Yep, nothing can be hidden perfectly. Some of that is for safety. But the bulbs lighting Tiana's logo on a water tower...does not quite seem genuinely comparable now does it?
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
You're being ridiculous. How does it not matter that signs are already illuminated throughout the land? Either your immersion is already broken or it's not. If it's not an exception to the rule, then why would you expect it to be treated differently? Disney doesn't do "immersive" realistic lighting at night. They do fantasy lighting, safety lighting, and accessibility lighting.
A marquee of an attraction should never have the modern lighting on it without an attempt to hide it or disguise it. The perspective of the guest's naked eye, and the concept art shows very clearly floodlight fixtures aiming at Tiana's signage, where your eyes are supposed to go to.
Safety breaks immersion because it has to. There is nothing ridiculous about that. The other lighting sources as in where they emit from, are typically hidden as best as they can be or themed to something of an appropriate time period/in theme light source.
It is ridiculous, but it is also Imagineering.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
I don't think they're trying to hide anything. The ride is gorgeously lit up in reds, pinks, blues, and greens. It's supposed to look fantastical, and it does.
The lighting sources are visible on the tower which is the marquee. It was brought up that nothing facing River's of America depicts 1920s-30s. And this is false. That is why it was brought up.
It is not about the color, but the lighting fixtures.
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
Again, you are complaining about an out-of-scale 3-D rendering with an out-of-date, unfinished design for the tower from a viewing angle guests can't actually experience. It is pointless to discuss until lighting is installed because we can clearly see that the rendering does not match reality. If the tower hadn't been installed yet and there were questions about which design they were going with, there might be some shred of a relevant conversation to be had.
Ah, right , almost going into the second part of the cycle mentioned earlier! When it is finished, you will be able to go to the third.
It is totally ok to talk about concept art becuase the project has not been finished. But if you would like to tactfully insult discussion, sure. Have fun.
Disgruntled Walt
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
This debate is pointless because this is a ridiculous attraction anyway. I mean, seriously, don't waste your time.
They've got a modern mural painted on the barn for Pete's sake. I don't think they're going to care if they have floodlights visible. None of this matters to them anymore. They might even put a spaceship in the finale. It wouldn't matter.