It's a Bird, It's a Plane, It's the Superman Costume Thread! - Part 1

[Lencho01]

Originally Posted by Krumm

Well, I think the hard lighting should be noted in this picture. Give him more even lighting and you won't be getting those details.

Maybe, but you can still see it here...

[Krumm]

Originally Posted by Lencho01

Maybe, but you can still see it here...

Yes, but it's not as impressive as it was in the previous pictures and still not as impressive as what Cavill has with the body suit.

[Lencho01]

Originally Posted by Krumm

Yes, but it's not as impressive as it was in the previous pictures and still not as impressive as what Cavill has with the body suit.

I'm not sure how you can gauge impressiveness in either case.

[Kryptonian Warrior]

Good grief we need some more news. This current conversation is getting really old and going nowhere really fast.

[hulk24]

Originally Posted by ArmsHeldOut

I was referring to the combined shoulder and delts area, which to me, looks pretty big. His trapezius muscle (located in the neck and shoulder region) looks especially massive, as exemplified in the image I posted earlier.

Hmm. The abs on the suit actually do look somewhat better in that lighting. Interesting.

that's because the abs here are airbrushed and on a dummy no muscle suit needed. I'm not trying to troll I am a professional fx artist I've made my fair share of muscle suits for talent. I always use the talents anatomy and enhance, it not make my own because it looks unnatural. It probably bugs me more than you guys cause it's like a Carptenter that sees a flaw in a table. The owner loves it the carpenter will go nuts cause it's the one little thing that stands out.

[Alien Anal]

I think this costume is one of the best costumes i have seen yet but i dont know why people insist of giving superman such a toy looking belt. It stops it from looking like something an adult could wear. Heck even SR had a stupid plasitc belt

[TDK elbowstrike]

Originally Posted by Lencho01

Maybe, but you can still see it here...

That suit actually looks pretty impressive to me. It wouldn't be right for this movie, but its a good Superman. He looks tough enough to pummel both Dean Cains and Brandon Rouths Superman at the same time. Couldn't beat up Cavils Superman though, his cape isn't nearly long enough.

[Lencho01]

Originally Posted by Alien Anal

I think this costume is one of the best costumes i have seen yet but i dont know why people insist of giving superman such a toy looking belt. It stops it from looking like something an adult could wear. Heck even SR had a stupid plasitc belt

Maybe giving him a belt that looks like it's being used would help?

Originally Posted by TDK elbowstrike

That suit actually looks pretty impressive to me. It wouldn't be right for this movie, but its a good Superman. He looks tough enough to pummel both Dean Cains and Brandon Rouths Superman at the same time. Couldn't beat up Cavils Superman though, his cape isn't nearly long enough.

[sf2]

Originally Posted by Llama_Shepherd

Meh, his delts aren't that big, they're just well defined. But he's definitely still big, and the suit does accurately represent his definition, even on the abs, it's just not always lit well:




I'd say the "muscle enhancing" is generally correct using a silicon body cast of Henry as an undersuit with padding in strategic areas, for example, there definitely seems to be some in his arms.

A regular guy wearing this suit will look exactly like the muscular Henry Cavill wearing this suit. Am I correct?

[sf2]

u still can see abs... just saying.

[dabilee01]

Originally Posted by sf2

u still can see abs... just saying.

Yes, but it looks horrid (my opinion, of course). Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Spandex was acceptable in its day. Now, it's just laughable. We need, no, demand, something better!

[sf2]

Originally Posted by dabilee01

Yes, but it looks horrid (my opinion, of course). Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Spandex was acceptable in its day. Now, it's just laughable. We need, no, demand, something better!

Indeed we do. Spandex is so common now among cosplayers. They spent a Ferrari to make a superman suit. (quote fr SR’s Singer) What do u think! Of course they can and should afford better suit than a poor cosplayer.

[Dr.]

Originally Posted by Krumm

Well, I think the hard lighting should be noted in this picture. Give him more even lighting and you won't be getting those details.

Yes. Here’s my theory.

Purists consult the comics as ultimate authority. They note the bright blue and red in the costume (not to mention the fine smoothness of the “fabric”) and conclude that this must be the model for a live-action recreation. Yet when this is done, there’s something distinctly unimpressive about the result - between media, something is lost in translation (just review the examples posted in the last couple of pages). What happened?

Well… look again at a typical comic book image of Supes. There’s actually a fair amount of “black” augmenting the blue and red. Of course, we don’t read this as the color black - we correctly interpret the dark ink as the shadows and shading that define muscle contours, fabric folds, etc. But I maintain that this “black” has a cumulative perceptual effect. It tends to subdue the blue and red (which would be overwhelmingly bright/gaudy otherwise) and it adds valuable “texture” and “visual interest/realism” to the image. So far, so good.

Except… when a costume designer tries for a reasonable facsimile, there isn’t (obviously) any “black” on the fabrics chosen; they’re pure blue and red - because that’s what the comics seem to specify. And the unsatisfactory result is a bright, flat, washed-out effect - even when the actor has a Mr. Universe physique. (As you note, you can partially address this by lighting Supes in a harsh, shadowy “film noir” style. But Superman isn’t Batman; he often appears in broad daylight.)

The solution, imo, is “interpretation” and not “imitation.” This would include darkening the colors (to compensate for the lack of “black”). It also makes sense, I think, to add “fabric texture” to (re)create the aforementioned “visual interest” (which is non-existent with a plain/smooth leotard).

And note that MOS has done these very things.

[Krumm]

Originally Posted by Dr.

Yes. Here’s my theory.

Purists consult the comics as ultimate authority. They note the bright blue and red in the costume (not to mention the fine smoothness of the “fabric”) and conclude that this must be the model for a live-action recreation. Yet when this is done, there’s something distinctly unimpressive about the result - between media, something is lost in translation (just review the examples posted in the last couple of pages). What happened?

Well… look again at a typical comic book image of Supes. There’s actually a fair amount of “black” augmenting the blue and red. Of course, we don’t read this as the color black - we correctly interpret the dark ink as the shadows and shading that define muscle contours, fabric folds, etc. But I maintain that this “black” has a cumulative perceptual effect. It tends to subdue the blue and red (which would be overwhelmingly bright/gaudy otherwise) and it adds valuable “texture” and “visual interest/realism” to the image. So far, so good.

Except… when a costume designer tries for a reasonable facsimile, there isn’t (obviously) any “black” on the fabrics chosen; they’re pure blue and red - because that’s what the comics seem to specify. And the unsatisfactory result is a bright, flat, washed-out effect - even when the actor has a Mr. Universe physique. (As you note, you can partially address this by lighting Supes in a harsh, shadowy “film noir” style. But Superman isn’t Batman; he often appears in broad daylight.)

The solution, imo, is “interpretation” and not “imitation.” This would include darkening the colors (to compensate for the lack of “black”). It also makes sense, I think, to add “fabric texture” to (re)create the aforementioned “visual interest” (which is non-existent with a plain/smooth leotard).

And note that MOS has done these very things.

And again, another extremely well thought out and comprehensive post. You found the hidden theory buried beneath my simple post. Bravo.

[Lead Cenobite]

Originally Posted by hulk24

that's because the abs here are airbrushed and on a dummy no muscle suit needed. I'm not trying to troll I am a professional fx artist I've made my fair share of muscle suits for talent. I always use the talents anatomy and enhance, it not make my own because it looks unnatural. It probably bugs me more than you guys cause it's like a Carptenter that sees a flaw in a table. The owner loves it the carpenter will go nuts cause it's the one little thing that stands out.

If you're going to try and make a point about whether the suit has padding or not, you should use a real picture and not a photoshop of a photoshop.

[The Shield]

[QUOTE=sf2;24910107]u still can see abs... just saying.[QUOTE]

I haven't read this whole debate but just to make sure I following... Did you want spandex for MOS or am I off?

[Llama_Shepherd]

Originally Posted by sf2

A regular guy wearing this suit will look exactly like the muscular Henry Cavill wearing this suit. Am I correct?

Not exactly, they'd need to be roughly the same size as Henry, as it is tailored specifically for him.

[Sun_Down]

Thanks to all the people that posted spandex suits. It really makes me appreciate the actual MOS suit

Originally Posted by sf2

A regular guy wearing this suit will look exactly like the muscular Henry Cavill wearing this suit. Am I correct?

Not really, unless you had his exact same body. If you put a 140 lb. dude in there he'd look ridiculous. Same if you put somebody overweight in there.

[ArmsHeldOut]

Originally Posted by Sun_Down

Thanks to all the people that posted spandex suits. It really makes me appreciate the actual MOS suit



Not really, unless you had his exact same body. If you put a 140 lb. dude in there he'd look ridiculous. Same if you put somebody overweight in there.

LOL Imagine someone with a really big gut trying to put the suit on.

[spidermanJLA!~]

I actually prefer the padding to spandex. The new texture looks a bit rubbery, but it works for a movie.

[sf2]

So material is this?

[SuperMike335!!]

Originally Posted by Lead Cenobite

If you're going to try and make a point about whether the suit has padding or not, you should use a real picture and not a photoshop of a photoshop.

This is correct, we need to actually see it in the movie, while he is moving around.

This is important as in many movies a behind the set shot will look odd, it does not have the benefit of proper lighting or digital effects.

[storyteller]

Padding the suit allows them to allows them to film the actor looking built at every point. Those pictures of that model are pictures of the guy in a posed position. It's not going to show when he running around and what not.

As to being able to put on the MOS suit and look built. Well if your similar in size to Cavil sorta.

Maguire Spider-man figured this out. They used a muscle suit and and airbrushing. Routh's suit had padding but it wasn't really built around his muscles. nor did it enhance it. It's kinda odd seeing as the BTS played around with padding that really came through.

[Jaxon]

In practical terms wouldn't it be slightly padded to keep him warm if that was the regular clothes on Krypton intended for him to wear

[not_a_victim]

Originally Posted by ArmsHeldOut

I was referring to the combined shoulder and delts area, which to me, looks pretty big. His trapezius muscle (located in the neck and shoulder region) looks especially massive, as exemplified in the image I posted earlier.

Hmm. The abs on the suit actually do look somewhat better in that lighting. Interesting.

What in the world are you talking about?

The muscles of the SHOULDERS are the DELTS (deltoids).