Fair warning to all: This is going to
get really nerdy REALLY QUICKLY.
I've been researching a lot of Star
Wars art lately and an interesting question came to mind: from an
artistic standpoint, should lightsabers be considered light
sources?
You might
automatically think, as I did, “Well of course they should! Light
sabers are made of light, and therefore that light should radiate
outward and affect the surrounding environment. DUH!” However,
after years of watching all the movies and looking through mounds of
artwork, I think the answer begins to get a little less obvious.
If you watch any
of the Star Wars films, you should notice that in most cases the
lightsabers DO NOT emit any sort of light onto surrounding objects.
The reason for this is that the lightsaber effect from the movies is
created by means of rotoscoping over the prop lightsaber rods used
during filming – which emit no actual light.
 |
| Notice the lack of any red or green ambient light on the actors despite how dark the setting is. |
In fact, there are
only a few instances in the entire series where a lightsaber actually
casts any real light onto its wielder:
In Episode II,
when Anakin and Dooku get their close-ups in the dark...
...And in Episodes II and
III, when Yoda wields a lightsaber.
 |
| (Notice that digital Yoda is the ONLY character that is ever consistently affected by the light of his weapon.) |
SO, taking these
examples into account as an artist, how should a lightsaber be
depicted in a painted work? Should it be a lightsource or not? Take a look at
some of these examples of Star Wars art. Which of them seems the most
“realistically Star Wars” to you?
Personally, I
prefer the work where the lightsaber light does not interact with its
surroundings. It doesn't make logical sense, but as a Star Wars fan
I've become so subconsciously used to seeing it that way in the
movies that the other way just looks wrong to me. Even in the
prequels, I think digital Yoda might have actually blended better
with the actors if they hadn't
made his lightsaber a light source.
But what
do you think?
Images used are ©Lucasfilm and their respective owners.
Posts
2 comments:
I'm assuming Yoda was just easier because he was digital to begin with, at the same time it seems lazy not to make it a light source. Anything that glows that bright in broad day light, should emit it's own light. But I guess like every fan I just stick to what I'm use to seeing on screen. Kinda how Batman can have all these gadgets in the films, but can't have a mask that allows him to turn his head with ease. Hmmm, just my opinion.
It would actually be determined by the color of the light being emitted. Red light would naturally effect the surrounding area much less than the blue since blue light travels faster and can reach greater distances. Considering that lasers do exist and lightsabers are based on that technology, I would look more at how laser technology works. Do lasers even emit their own light or are they lit so that a person can perceive them. And to that point if they are lit at the base then they would only emit a beam of light going in direction in which the light is pointed. Too nerdy? Did I cross a line?
Post a Comment