2015 Photoshop/Rendering Thread
10/15/13, 07:11 PM
#4201
Legacy TMS Member
Exactly the point. Why are you trying to nitpick details of ride height, based on a render, whose accuracy has absolutely no credibility? Have you ever seen CAD renderings of cars before? They are generally pretty rough, and proportions usually look off.
10/15/13, 07:13 PM
#4203
10/15/13, 07:52 PM
#4204
GT Member
Join Date: February 8, 2010
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do you know the front end of that spy picture didn't get modified before or after the alleged CAD images? Sure doesn't look like a finished product to me. It's already been suggested the final product could have made slight changes to this front clip so the fact that it doesn't match up only proves that it's not exactly the same as the one shown in the spy photo. Doesn't prove anything else.
BTW, you might want to take a good look at that comparison because someone photoshopped the pony in the grille that didn't exist previously.... you know, since we're all so hell bent on accuracy here.
BTW, you might want to take a good look at that comparison because someone photoshopped the pony in the grille that didn't exist previously.... you know, since we're all so hell bent on accuracy here.
Not trying to prove anything, just my train of thought. If the final model ends up with a front fascia with those thinly pinched edges and contours... I'll certainly order up for myself a dish of crow to wolf down.
10/15/13, 08:10 PM
#4206
V6 Member
Join Date: May 21, 2010
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If this is indeed what it looks like (or close to it), it does look pretty conservative in styling but I do like that it doesn't look like the squat brick with gun slits for windows that is seen all too often in amateur renderings. This rendering looks open, airy and light on its feet. It almost looks like a modern interpretation of a basic '65 coupe, unadorned and unpretentious.
That said, I'm not so sure how accurate this rendering is though. I think way too many people will say it's too "bland", "boring" and not boy racer enough and I agree that it doesn't quite look like the stunner that people who've seen it say it is.
That said, I'm not so sure how accurate this rendering is though. I think way too many people will say it's too "bland", "boring" and not boy racer enough and I agree that it doesn't quite look like the stunner that people who've seen it say it is.
10/15/13, 08:15 PM
#4207
V6 Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...that's kind of my point. The way 6G wants people to read into it, is that these new renders are the final exact design, claiming they have CAD data to back it up. Yet these renders are described as being a blend. The way it's presented and worded, in my opinion, is just misleading.
Not trying to prove anything, just my train of thought. If the final model ends up with a front fascia with those thinly pinched edges and contours... I'll certainly order up for myself a dish of crow to wolf down.
Not trying to prove anything, just my train of thought. If the final model ends up with a front fascia with those thinly pinched edges and contours... I'll certainly order up for myself a dish of crow to wolf down.
Everyone wants to read something into this like these guys are trying to deceive everyone when we have multiple credible people saying these are fairly accurate. I personally have no doubt the real thing will be even better, as any real life design should be when compared to computer renders, but I think chaz has probably come as close as anyone has so far.
10/15/13, 09:31 PM
#4210
Bullitt Member
Join Date: August 3, 2012
Location: Cali
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10/15/13, 09:32 PM
#4211
Bullitt Member
Join Date: August 3, 2012
Location: Cali
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10/16/13, 12:53 AM
#4212
If anyone's pissing in the wind here, it's you. .....and apparently it landed in your Wheaties this morning.
For anyone else paying attention to details (you know, folks hell bent on accuracy), there are two glaring details (in my eyes anyway) that can be seen in the spy shots that are not addressed in the so-called "CAD-based renderings."
1) Take a closer look at the headlights in the spy shots. There's a small extension in the upper outer corner that is left unaddressed in Chaz's rendering.
2) The CAD-based rendering has a completely normal looking roof. Then why are the mules still running around with camo/padding on the roof? Obviously there's something there... something that any true CAD files would show.
Again, not knocking Chaz's work. His skillset is a great many levels above any of the rest of the amatuers out there attempting to preview the next Mustang.
But this "OMG Breaking News: here's the real thing!!!" BS still feels like a trolling gimmick by the 6G crew. Either that, or someone is confusing the fact that Chaz based his S197 design off of leaked CAD files and making that same association with this S550 design.
10/16/13, 01:14 AM
#4213
FR500 Member
Join Date: December 9, 2011
Location: Corpus Christi, TX
Posts: 3,513
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
5 Posts
Anyone else thinkin maybe double bubble roof similar to the brz and camaro to add a lil aggressiveness? Or maybe theyre bringin a sunroof back?? Or shiny new glass roof???
camaro to add a lil aggressiveness? Or maybe theyre bringin a sunroof back?? Or shiny new glass roof???
10/16/13, 01:53 AM
#4214
With the new Vette and Viper both sporting the double bubble roof, the argument could be made that it's becoming the new trend for sports cars. Unless Ford has a WRC-style roof scoop hidden under there (pause for sarcasm), I don't see how it could be anything else.
10/16/13, 01:59 AM
#4215
FR500 Member
Join Date: December 9, 2011
Location: Corpus Christi, TX
Posts: 3,513
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
5 Posts
With the new Vette and Viper both sporting the double bubble roof, the argument could be made that it's becoming the new trend for sports cars. Unless Ford has a WRC-style roof scoop hidden under there (pause for sarcasm), I don't see how it could be anything else.
10/16/13, 05:30 AM
#4216
V6 Member
Join Date: October 13, 2013
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But regardless, any German will tell you that an Audi is just a glorified VW, in the same way an Alfa is just a glorified Fiat or a Pontiac was just a glorified Chevy. A Mercury was a gloried Ford etc.
The A5 is nothing more than the coupe 2 door version of the A4 sedan. The A4 sedan has always shared the same platform with the VW Passat and also Skoda and Seat cars (all VW owned). Some parts are actually exchangeable.
In Europe, most car-wise people know Audi is a "luxury" VW. It's only in the U.S that Audi has this aura (probably because of Iron Man. I guess product placement does work.). Similarly to how in Europe, brand new Mercedes and BMWs are taxi cabs but in the U.S. they are the holy grail of luxury. Audi is a VW. Trust me.
By the way, does this look familiar? If you blink you would think it's an A5:
What I don't like about the supposed new mustang design is how european it is trying to look. The mustang is one of the few true american cars left, specially for Ford. Besides it's trucks, pretty much the whole line is from Europe now. Fiesta, Focus, Fusion etc. We don't need an euro stang.
Last edited by Mustango; 10/16/13 at 05:32 AM.
10/16/13, 05:39 AM
#4217
And your point?
VW has long been known for platform sharing . . . although they don't seem to attract as much attention as when FMC does it. I continually look at S5s (and S4 Avants) as a possible replacement for my Mach, but most likely won't ever proceed with the switch. Although an S4 Avant to replace my daily is a better option . . . perhaps.
VW has long been known for platform sharing . . . although they don't seem to attract as much attention as when FMC does it. I continually look at S5s (and S4 Avants) as a possible replacement for my Mach, but most likely won't ever proceed with the switch. Although an S4 Avant to replace my daily is a better option . . . perhaps.
10/16/13, 06:48 AM
#4218
V6 Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking of being hell bent on accuracy, maybe you could explain how you interpretted "I'm inclined to believe" as "I know"....
If anyone's pissing in the wind here, it's you. .....and apparently it landed in your Wheaties this morning.
For anyone else paying attention to details (you know, folks hell bent on accuracy), there are two glaring details (in my eyes anyway) that can be seen in the spy shots that are not addressed in the so-called "CAD-based renderings."
1) Take a closer look at the headlights in the spy shots. There's a small extension in the upper outer corner that is left unaddressed in Chaz's rendering.
2) The CAD-based rendering has a completely normal looking roof. Then why are the mules still running around with camo/padding on the roof? Obviously there's something there... something that any true CAD files would show.
Again, not knocking Chaz's work. His skillset is a great many levels above any of the rest of the amatuers out there attempting to preview the next Mustang.
But this "OMG Breaking News: here's the real thing!!!" BS still feels like a trolling gimmick by the 6G crew. Either that, or someone is confusing the fact that Chaz based his S197 design off of leaked CAD files and making that same association with this S550 design.
If anyone's pissing in the wind here, it's you. .....and apparently it landed in your Wheaties this morning.
For anyone else paying attention to details (you know, folks hell bent on accuracy), there are two glaring details (in my eyes anyway) that can be seen in the spy shots that are not addressed in the so-called "CAD-based renderings."
1) Take a closer look at the headlights in the spy shots. There's a small extension in the upper outer corner that is left unaddressed in Chaz's rendering.
2) The CAD-based rendering has a completely normal looking roof. Then why are the mules still running around with camo/padding on the roof? Obviously there's something there... something that any true CAD files would show.
Again, not knocking Chaz's work. His skillset is a great many levels above any of the rest of the amatuers out there attempting to preview the next Mustang.
But this "OMG Breaking News: here's the real thing!!!" BS still feels like a trolling gimmick by the 6G crew. Either that, or someone is confusing the fact that Chaz based his S197 design off of leaked CAD files and making that same association with this S550 design.
How you get from "the pics and renders don't match up to me" to --> therefore, chaz did not work off a CAD image, is a pretty big leap. As I said earlier, it has been said the front end of the spy pics could have changed in the production version. Why is this so hard to believe?
And accusing a site of trolling (essentially lying about the fact that these are anything more than from chaz's own imagination) is quite a bold thing to say without anything but your "inclination" to back it up. I've had brief conversations with chaz through email and he seems about as stand up of a guy as I have "met" online. He actively participates at 6G and has done nothing to disclaim or dispute their post claiming that it was based on CAD. That's good enough proof for me based on chaz's reputation alone, IMO. It just seems like you are "hell-bent" on finding a reason to believe otherwise due to your own biases, but hey to each his own.
Overboost here has already said 80-90% accuracy and there are multiple people on 6G that have said it is pretty close. I imagine there are inevitably somethings that will be lost in translation when interpreting the CAD. How you think anyone can come even 50% close with the almost completely covered spy photos of the S550 that are out there without help from sketches, CADs, or other inside info, is beyond me. But good luck making that theory stick.
10/16/13, 07:16 AM
#4220
For someone who is "inclined to believe" you sure do have some very strong opinions and making a lot claims without any evidence whatsoever.
How you get from "the pics and renders don't match up to me" to --> therefore, chaz did not work off a CAD image, is a pretty big leap. As I said earlier, it has been said the front end of the spy pics could have changed in the production version. Why is this so hard to believe?
And accusing a site of trolling (essentially lying about the fact that these are anything more than from chaz's own imagination) is quite a bold thing to say without anything but your "inclination" to back it up. I've had brief conversations with chaz through email and he seems about as stand up of a guy as I have "met" online. He actively participates at 6G and has done nothing to disclaim or dispute their post claiming that it was based on CAD. That's good enough proof for me based on chaz's reputation alone, IMO. It just seems like you are "hell-bent" on finding a reason to believe otherwise due to your own biases, but hey to each his own.
Overboost here has already said 80-90% accuracy and there are multiple people on 6G that have said it is pretty close. I imagine there are inevitably somethings that will be lost in translation when interpreting the CAD. How you think anyone can come even 50% close with the almost completely covered spy photos of the S550 that are out there without help from sketches, CADs, or other inside info, is beyond me. But good luck making that theory stick.
How you get from "the pics and renders don't match up to me" to --> therefore, chaz did not work off a CAD image, is a pretty big leap. As I said earlier, it has been said the front end of the spy pics could have changed in the production version. Why is this so hard to believe?
And accusing a site of trolling (essentially lying about the fact that these are anything more than from chaz's own imagination) is quite a bold thing to say without anything but your "inclination" to back it up. I've had brief conversations with chaz through email and he seems about as stand up of a guy as I have "met" online. He actively participates at 6G and has done nothing to disclaim or dispute their post claiming that it was based on CAD. That's good enough proof for me based on chaz's reputation alone, IMO. It just seems like you are "hell-bent" on finding a reason to believe otherwise due to your own biases, but hey to each his own.
Overboost here has already said 80-90% accuracy and there are multiple people on 6G that have said it is pretty close. I imagine there are inevitably somethings that will be lost in translation when interpreting the CAD. How you think anyone can come even 50% close with the almost completely covered spy photos of the S550 that are out there without help from sketches, CADs, or other inside info, is beyond me. But good luck making that theory stick.