Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki

Welcome to Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki. You may wish to create or login to an account in order to have full editing access to this wiki.

READ MORE

Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki
Register
Advertisement

Re: Hot Rod in G1 and Wreckers, what's the dividing line between "two different character models" and "same character drawn by different artists 18 years apart"? He just looks like the G1 character drawn in Khanna's style, to me. --Thylacine 2000 02:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The stickers man, the stickers... Also Dan drew Hot Rod On-model in the Pax Cybertronia flashback, and gave him leg kibble he's never had before in the Beast Era. 193.200.150.23 02:22, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
To explain more clearly, in the pre-Maximal Upgrade flashbacks, Rodimus is drawn in his cartoon character model. In Wreckers' "present day," Rodimus suddenly has more vehicle detail and his toy stickers. It's explicitly a different body with a specific origin. --ItsWalky 03:19, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
I have the issue around somewhere- I'll make a side-by-side. -Derik 03:20, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Uh, yeah, I think this is a little beyond the actual issue of a "character model"... which is typically a series of drawings done so that the animation-monkeys earning five cents a day in Korea or wherever draw the same thing each cel and details hopefully stay consistent. Not "THIS IS HOW THE CHARACTER WILL LOOK IN EVERY INCARNATION". This is a generally badly-worded article. --M Sipher 02:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Then com up with a term for 'different characters based on the same toy have different character models and and understood to actually 'look different'.' -Derik 02:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Darik's right, we do need a word for how the character's fictional appearance, and Character Model often times refers to that as well as "official top-down company mandate of what a character is to look like in later media." As for Thylacine 2000's examples those were Artistic Freedom, but in the stories those comic panels were representing, the characters probobly matched their character models. 85.195.123.24 19:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
I thought that sounded weird, too. I don't see the Wreckers interpretation of Hot Rod to be a different model, its just a more 'toyetic' design by a different artist, as Thy said, some 18 years after the original cartoon/comic models. Dan's style didn't become a standard design that was used by other artists, was it? --FFN 03:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Except it is representign a different incarnation-- Dan draws hi using his Sunbow model in the opening sequence set at the end of the great war, Hot rod mentions he's about to undergo the maximization process. In the 'present' of the Wreckers, rodimus is now much physically smaller, and he loks different (he has kibble on his legs, etc.) When he was downsized he retained the same type of car as his altmode, but his transformation pattern is now different so his robot mode looks somewhat different.
When Rodimus Convoy became a Microtransformer in zone, his robot mode looked different too, the 'parts' were arranged differently even though his car-mode was the same.
This is what happened in Wreckers as well-- ecept in Wreckers there's the added layer of confusion in that both his pre-maximization and post-maximization forms are 'represented' by the same toy. -Derik 03:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I lean strongly towards removing the Hot Rod section from this page and putting it on his character page. Do I hear strong objections to that? These are one artist's cosmetic touches and don't belong here. Look at Wildman's interpretations of Cheetor and BWMegs in "Omega Point," far bigger differences than Wrecker Rodimus. Look at Target:2006 where Galvatron IS the toy. Or the Joe/TF crossover where everybody has wires everywhere.

A proper "character model" is an official top-down company mandate of what a character is to look like in later media. It's what Dery and, later, Studio OX made and what all licensees at the time are expected to base their stuff on (and sometimes do so slavishly, thus why the same poses reappear, as mentioned in the Ravage article). It's what's in the TF:Generations book. Khanna's new Hot Rod style is not "the" new Hot Rod style, and if we include it here we'll have to include every crazy creative difference from every artist ever. --Thylacine 2000 13:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC) .......and I see it's already noted on his character page. Okay, gone. --Thylacine 2000 14:00, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

A proper "character model" is an official top-down company mandate of what a character is to look like in later media.
It is? I thought it was just a piece of control art used by an artist. The guy who did the Japanese BW Manga did his own character model sheets to define how they look- we've seen a couple of them. It's where our only full-body image of Crow Convoy comes from.
I assume Dan did a piece of control art for Rodimus Major, which would thus be his character model. Do you have anything to back up your definition that character models are top-down? Because I know when Steve-o discusses the wierd designs of some of the 1984 Autobots that appear in several coloring books, he says "they created their own character model." -Derik 23:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
I really think we're talking about different things. That's the only way I can interpret the very existence of the animation control art. The whole point is that each guy to pick up the paintbrushes DOESN'T get to do his own--he has to copy what came before. Marvel/Dery's creativity, everyone else's mimicry. As long as this article is going to be devoted to the reason why Ironhide and Ratchet not only differ from their toys but also differ from each other and that those are consistent factors, I think that has to be its focus. Khanna's start image was his own choice and for his own use, it wasn't laid down as a style guide for those who came after him, and there's nothing to distinguish it from the self-made start images that no doubt preceded Don's Stormbringer Jetfire and de-jawed Bludgeon, those coloring books you mentioned, all the others I've listed so far, and, really, everything else. Stuff like that could, I guess, live on a new page called "Different Art Styles Through The Years" or something, but I fear it would grow uselessly bloated very quickly.--Thylacine 2000 13:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
*hefts the flat rock that worked so well on Kil*
Look at the picture below. In the first part of the story, Hot Rod is on-model for his Sunbow appearance. In the second half, 300 years later, his appearance has changed.
This change is not 'Different Art Styles Through The Years,' it's not a different artistic interpretation. This change represents Hot Rod actually looking different in the future. If Bumblebee walked up to him he'd say "Gee Hot Rod, your wheels are now mounted differerwnt and you have leg kibble," because he actually does look different. It's not an art choice. When Pat Lee nipples-up Optimus Prime the other Autobots don't notice because that is an art choice, internal to the universe he 'looks the same.' This is the opposite, internal to the universe Hot Rod's body has changed.
Stop acting like this is an artistic whim of Dan's, it's massively annoying. There's a side by side picture showing the change further down this art page. When someone changes bodies you don't get to call their new appearance a 'Different Art Styles,' which is what you're doing. -Derik 13:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Is this an art discussion or a story discussion? Are you now saying that if Pat Lee had SHOWN Starscream growing turbo-nipples then it would count as a new character model to be discussed here, but since he didn't and it's presumed to be how Starscream always looked, then it doesn't go here--even if it's the way Lee always drew the character? If Wreckers hadn't shown an "upgrade" and had just started with a stickered toy-accurate Hot Rod, it would still be a different body design Dan chose to make.--Thylacine 2000 15:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
To my understanding, a character model is a piece of artwork used as a guide by artists, including the model's creator, so they can consistently draw that character over and over again. The end. That applies both to "top-down" models that are imposed on an artist by management and to all-new models that an artist is given free reign to create for their own work, like EJ Su's IDW redesigns. The distinction you are making is... weird. Yes, there are interesting things to say specifically about models that are distributed to licensors, but to act like "character model" means only that is wrong. The article as currently written gives only a partial explanation of the idea and should be altered, or needs to be moved to a name which is more descriptive of what it is currently about. --Steve-o 13:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
As of about 3 days ago the article focused mostly on top-down animation models, with Floro Dery and IDW:The Ark an' all, with also Khanna's Hot Rod as an incongruous afterthought. As now edited, it's pretty much just the animation. If people want to either rename it "Animation Models" or make it the animation sub-section of a broader page on character models, that would certainly be fine.--Thylacine 2000 15:49, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
The appropriate response an incomplete article is not to truncate the botherome portions of it so that it appears complete.
The argument is specious anyway- you haven't been arguing neatness for the last 3000 words, you've been arguing the definition of the term Character Model. When your definition was challenged instead of sourcing it or building an argument for it, you dismissed the counter-example as "Longhair artist types drawing Starscream with nipple-fans because their wombs make them subject to monthly insanity" while continuing to maintains that only sheets of paper found in Fedex envelopes from Rhode Island are allowed to be called Character Models. When pointed out that that's not correct in any way and here's why with visual proof and explicit in-story statements to support it- you say "Well, if that proof didn't exist my point would stand unchallenged" and somehow declare victory while implying that Dan Khanna makes up new character designs on the fly and changes them mid-story because he has the visual continuity skills of Rob Liefield.
So. I agree, however, that this article requires a chart or something to make clear the relationship between character models and incarnations of a character that you ignored when it was inconvenient to your argument. -Derik 16:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Feel better now, do you? Good. Now hit the Edit button and re-compose that diarrhea into something legible. If I deferred more easily to Steve than to you, it was because he made a better argument ("Every artist's guide art really can be called a character model", as opposed to your "Khanna's guide art is MORE of a character model than Lee, Don F., and the other zillion examples already mentioned"). You still haven't coherently defended your original positions re: body changes needing in-story justifications to "matter" on this page, and showboating will not make up for that. --Thylacine 2000 17:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
dear thylacine 2000,
my mommy says that when an artist uses the sunbow character model in one part of a story, but draws him different in another part of the story, and it mentions he got a new body inbetween, the change probably shouldn't be called an 'artist's whim that doesn't mean anything.'
P.S.
you are a poopie head
That's the most talented thing you've ever put on this wiki, Derik. --Thylacine 2000 17:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
COMIC SANS! --ItsWalky 18:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
So? --FortMax 20:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Comic Sans killed the Jews. -Derik 02:28, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

No, that's a common misperception. Hitler just used Comic Sans to try to kill Hellboy, Captain America, and Reed Richards in the last days of the war, but he was foiled by Batman. Its evil, however, survives to this day.--Chiasaur11

Rodimus Maximal Upgrade[]

http://www.emopanda.com/tmp/rodimus_maximization.jpg
Rodimus before and after the Maximal Upgrade

His knee design has changed, the tires on his arms are oriented 90 degrees to where they used to be, he now has exhaust pipes on his legs as well, his pelvis is different an his head is somewhat more toyetic.

Also, his colors have shifted from the anime pink-and-orange to a toyetic red-and-orange, most noticeable on his hands which are now orange like the toy, not silver.

It's a different body, just one very similar to his old one... and maybe half as tall. Same artist, same story, same issue; different model.-Derik 03:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd say his new body is about the same size. He's twice the size of Mini-Bots and the same height as as Devcon, after all. The Maximal Upgrade, in his case, perhaps at that early stage, only streamlined his transformation for efficiency, what with the no longer dismissing his kibble into Subspace or whatever. --ItsWalky 05:11, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
The Mini-bots I may agree with you on- but Devcon's form at the end of #2 was a new 'maximized' body based on his hard-coded design schematics. So, like Rodimus, he's undergone the Maximal upgrade. -Derik 05:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Rodimus isn't smaller. There's no visual evidence for it. In the flashback, as Rodimus Prime, he's much bigger compared to Glyph than he is later as Rodimus (Major), but in that same flashback Rodimus Prime's also much bigger than Kup, who should be the same size as Hot Rod/Rodimus Major. In fact, comparing their sizes in the two eras, Rodimus Prime>Kup>Glyph and Rodimus>Glyph, I'd say there's plenty of visual evidence that he's the same size. He's certainly no bigger to Glyph than Glyph's non-Mini-Bot crew was. --ItsWalky 14:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

A few things, first of all Dan gets mad-mad-MAD Props for staying so on Model in the flashbacks. And secondly, how the hell do Hot Rod's arm doo-dads bend with his elbow? 85.195.123.25 18:48, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Characters who "don't have" character models[]

I reject the idea that the Pretender Monsters don't have character models. There's an animated commercial of them up on YouTube. Somewhere in the middle, here And I can think of a few panels from Rhythms of Darkness! where they look copied from character models, since they're Delbo. --ItsWalky 03:58, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I am also becoming increasingly confident that Carnivac has a character model, and Delbo uses it. The Pretender Beasts totally hop around in static poses which are drawn from character models. --ItsWalky 21:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Edit accordingly, then. I readily defer to your more thorough investigation of the matter. Come to think of it, that would explain the designs of the Pretender Monsters in US #67. -- Repowers 01:31, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
More evidence on the pile. Animation of Snarler matches his appearance in US #51. --ItsWalky 16:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Advertisement