Hey gang,
Hope this thread goes better than the other :rollseyes

I've been pritning these since about July, and the run as gone befond perfect. I jsut wapped it up on the RPF, did a few on eBay, and am beyond pleased that it went nearly perfect.

We started with a great shot of Vigo, now hanging in the entrance way at ILM's new Presidio offices in San Franciso. Two RPFers manitpulated it digitally and got a fantastic image that we worked and reworked at the printers.
The printer just happened to be in the shop that I worked at, buying something with another salesmen, and I outload asked if anyone knew who in town might print on canvas at 5 foot across. They all shrugged, but the guy quietly said ‘I can do that.’
So we printed off a test, and away we went. It s been a fun run, and I've actually lost count of how many shipped out.
The run went so well, it attracted some attention, and I was able to score a full shot of the 4 Muses Painting from the end of the film. This was the first time it had been seen in it's entirety, and it was pretty cool to see it in all it's glory. The image was shot at its new home, the Sony Archives (the other half of the GB2 Firehouse sign is next to it, while the other half is still at Hook & Ladder 8), and had some major issues (chipped off paint, shine, fold lines, the works) to get worked out during its digital bath (done by the same two guys on the RPF).
The run for this painting was considerably less than the Vigo, but I shipped few here and there none the less.
I was even able to get two for myself!
These are mounted on a nice frame, and tacked down to the frame in the same manner as the real deals, furniture tacks . . . :lol

What realy made the images ‘pop’ was a coating of Mog Podge, a thick, gloss overcoat that dries thick or thin, and really makes these look real.

While the images are pretty lean and nice, the digital artists decided to change a few things here or there, to make the finals different from the real thigs, and to also make them ‘ours.’ Any image your seeing on eBay right now was yanked from the loose posting of our image. Oh well, hazards of the trade . . .

Enjoy the pics, and if you want one, have no fear, I'll be doing a 2.5 x 5 footer run of these two here this weekend.
You can also contact me about a full size if you've got the space. These are printed at cost, so copyright/trademark is not an issue.





Also, stay tuned, I'm in contact with the artist who painted these, and may be getting some neat behind the scenes/preproduction stuff from him. Fingers crossed!

I wanted to publicly post up the facts about the process, people, and origins on this prop, since there's nothing but absolute bull floating around.

All this fuss reminds me of a great sating I once heard: “The less you know, the more you believe.”

Vigo's outsourced prop origins started in the art studio of SoCal artist D. Rhymar. His assitant, L. Baucman helped on the painting, mostly in the backround area. The journey was an intersting one, as the costume went through a few chages, and an actor wasn't even picked uptil the last minute. (I've left their full names out as they don't want to be bothered about this stuff, as they only did the paintings as a job).
What you see in their painting, is a complex collage, with the backround classically painted, with some of the foreground elements also painted in, and what you basically get as you approch Vigo's head, are retouched photographs. Watch closely as Vigo is wheeled into the museum at the opening of the film, as the light crosses the surface, you'll be able to see how the face of the painting is flat,flat,flat. The rest has the standard look of a painting. This can be seen REALLY well in HD.
Here's a shot of the prop as it hangs in ILM. This is the photo we sourced the prints from!!!


Little did I know all this time . . .there were actually TWO more Vigo paintings.

One was the close up painting, that was a simple, retouched photo (we saw this anytime Vigo wanted to starrrre at us). Noone knows where this one is . . .for now.
The other, was a backround painting/prop/actor composite design.
This was an outsourced job to Glen Eytchison, who's a member on GBProps, so I'm told. His offical credit on GB2 was “Painting/Vigo wrangler.”
They're most famous work(and coolest by far) is the Hunter and Hounddog Painting that the guy walks out of an tries to kill Will Smith in Wild, Wild West.
Here's a few shots of what they created, and we get a suggestion of the effect that never appeared in GB2. Not much is known about why we don't see it, but I'm betting had they pulled it off, we would have had alot cooler Vigo entrance than that silly fade in/phase out thing he did.
Note the man standing in the 3rd photo, is Dennis Muren, the man, the myth, the legend.




The Four Muses history is less known, but was painted full on by Rhymar. What's interesting to note, is at the top of the Muses image, are sharper leaved Palms, which show up often in his beach/tropical life works. The painting was quickly executed, and is very simple in it's design. I don't have much on this peice yet, but am expectng some info soon.
Here's the original pic that we got to use, and you can see how bad of shape th paintings in.


Both paintings are coated in a clear varnish, with a crackle coat over top. The Four Muses was also coated in the pink slime. You can see where the varnish has cracked of and taken some of the painting with it . . .this was a bear to fix for the guys who did the digital work. Vigo seems to be in perect shape, most likely having been at ILM indoors all the years. The Muses have travelled a bit, and are stored in SOny's archives, next to one half of teh GB2 Firehouse sign (the other half as we all know, is till in H&L 8)

As I receive more info on how the paintings were done from Rhymar, I'll update. I though you guys would appreciate the info.

Those are some AMAZING shots… thanks for sharing.

It would've been so much cooler to see Vigo actually walk out of the painting like that. That's a shame that didn't make it into the final cut.

I like his expression in that first “behind-the-scenes” photo. He's all like, “I try to think, but nothing happens…”

Very cool! I love when fellow fans are willing to go all out on a labor of love like this. Those smaller prints sound cool–please keep us posted

I would like some clarification, before I move on to a longer part of the post I plan to make, as there appears to be a contradicting bit of info you've posted about the lineage of your Vigo prints.

Where was the image source?

I ask because in this very topic, you state that the prints were sourced from the watermarked image you posted (which, by the by, was taken by khunter of flickr, which can be seen HERE).

Yet, this contradicts a post you made (LINK), in rebuttal to an accusation I'd made, where you claimed that the Vigo print was developed from a photo taken by a RPF member.

So which is it? A image sourced from flickr, or a photo from a RPF member?

I'm curious because if you did use a flickr image for the whole production, then I am deeply concerned at the lack of credit khunter has been given for the use of his photograph, especially with you displaying it with your ‘NOT YOURS’ watermarks pasted over it.

I'm also concerned at the fact that if the production was the latter, from the photograph of a RPF member, why he hasn't been credited either.

I'm further concerned by the fact that even the two people who cleaned it up in Photoshop have not been credited… they've been referenced, but none of the names of the parties involved have been supplied, and I seriously question the reasoning of this when they deserve praise for taking the photograph (if the RPF member did take one) and for cleaning the shot up.

As you're the only name associated with the prints, it seems you're getting an undue amount of praise for the realtively low effort of simply having found a guy to print them, and laying down the cash to do it.

There's also another bit of interest, concerning the prints. The images I've seen of your Vigo prints exhibit two ‘dark cloud’ like spots either side of Vigo, above the burning ruins.

Now, this is not a element from the original ‘painting’, because I'm looking at a digital scan Sony made for the game, as well as the photographs of the photoshoot.

I've produced a comparison, the digital scan from Ghostbusters.com, and the photo Chad posted when he got the one he bought:



Now, due to the quality of Chad's shot, the clouds aren't easily visible.

But GBSuff's photo, is much more clear in presenting these ‘clouds’:



Which makes me wonder, as I work with Photoshop religiously. The conclusion I'm given, is that these dark spots are the result of the use of either a black paintbush with the layer set to something like ‘Darken’, or ‘Multiply’… or someone has used the ‘Burn’ tool.

Why would someone use this? Presumably to correct a glare on the Vigo ‘painting’ caused by the light reflecting off of the texture added to make it look like the prop was painted.

And where have we seen two spots, either side of Vigo showing glare? the Khunter photo:



Which once again raises the question, what was the source for the Vigo prints? And please be careful with your answer, because in one topic, you've said:

Hot Shot
The original image was taken by an RPF member at the new ILM Presidio ofices, and was Photoshopped by another two RPF members. I've been printing them at cost, and the memebers tha contirbuted all have gotten some form of compensation.

-LINK

But you've also said:

Hot Shot
Here's a shot of the prop as it hangs in ILM. This is the photo we sourced the prints from!!!

-Which was posted above.

So, what was it? Flickr photo, or RPF member? If it's the latter, you should be able to post that photo.


Now, the other reason why I'm making this post, Glen Eytchison took the liberty of writing up the production history of the original prop, which I'm posting here:

AJ Quick
The original supervising artist from Ghostbusters 2 recently contacted me with information about the painting from Ghostbusters 2. It seems there is someone out there who is profiting from the sale of Vigo paintings and is spreading false information to make it seem like it is all okay.

Glen Eytchison
In 1989 I produced the character Vigo the Carpathian for the film Ghostbusters 2. As you’ve mentioned, there seems to be some confusion out there as to how Vigo was created, and who was involved. Hopefully, this note will answer some of those questions.

First some background…
From 1979 through 1995 I was the Director of a production called the Pageant of the Masters. The Pageant is a theatrical production based on “Tableaux Vivant”, or living pictures, which has been performed every summer since 1933 in a 2662 seat amphitheater in Laguna Beach California. The production combines recreations of notable artworks with a live symphony orchestra and live narration. Since becoming affiliated with the Pageant, I’ve produced “living picture” effects for a number of feature films (such as GB2, The Devils Advocate and The Wild Wild West), Broadway shows (such as Hairspray and The Will Rogers Follies), and numerous television shows, commercials and live special events. Most of the personnel involved in the
production of the set for Vigo came from my Pageant crew.

The Composition
I was asked to attend a meeting at ILM with the films Visual Effects Supervisor Ned Gorman, and Chief Visual Effects Coordinator Dennis Muren. In that meeting we discussed the various techniques used by the Pageant for creating living pictures and it was decided that I would produce the “practical” elements of the Vigo set. I was also asked to work with the ILM crew on the design of the source painting that would be our reference for building the effect.

I was given a file containing copies of 30 or so paintings produced by the ILM team that had been rejected by Director Ivan Reitman, mostly for being “to Conan…”. Back in Southern California, I assembled a team to start researching what a real Carpathian warlord from the period would wear into battle. ILM sent an animator to work with us, and we began developing a composition with each key element painted onto a separate layer of acetate. We took the layered composition, and all of our research, to a meeting with the ILM team, director Reitman and Executive Producer Michael Gross. We discussed our approach, the director made some subtle adjustments, and we had approval of phase 1.

Next, I took the layered acetate, all of the reference material and photos of Wilhelm von Homburg to an artist named Lou Police. Lou created the oil painting that would be the final reference for Vigo the Carpathian. Photos of the painting were sent to all involved, and the piece was immediately approved.

Continued…

AJ

Glen Eytchison
Production
My primary responsibility was to ensure that the Vigo that came to life and interacted with the cast, looked exactly like the Vigo in the oil painting. Originally, a scaled up version of Lou’s oil painting was to be used in the early scenes, and our 3D recreation would be used later, but we soon realized this was not going to work. Ultimately, we decided to use the painting as reference, create our 3D set with Wilhelm, use Pageant techniques to light the set so it would appear flat, and then photograph the set. The photograph was then scaled, and aged using traditional techniques. This scaled photograph is the “painting” that is used for the first part of the film. When it came time to shoot the live action sequences, we simply placed Wilhelm back into the set and replicated the lighting used for the photo.

The set and costume were created in our shops in Laguna Beach. Wilhelm was not available so ILM sent us a full body cast, which served as a stand in while creating the costume. The entire package was shipped to ILM for the one week shoot.

The Crew
The crew was assembled from my staff at the Pageant of the Masters. The set was designed by Richard Hill, and constructed by Richard, with John Clancy. Costume design and construction was by Skipper Skeoch and Marci O’malley. All sculptural elements in the set, such as the skull foreground, were carved by Judy Parker. The set and costume were painted by David Rymar and Leslie Turnbull. Diane Challis Davy provided additional supervision of physical production. Make up and prosthetics were designed by Tim Lawwrence and Michael Smithson from ILM. Michael was the make up artist for the shoot. Producer Michael Gross, Production Designer Bo Welch, and ILM’s Ned Gorman were with us constantly, providing direction and support.

Summary
It’s come to my attention that there are individuals on the web selling prints of Vigo. These individuals are also saying that they have the blessing of the artist that created the work. This is not true. I have never given anyone permission to sell copies of Vigo, for any reason. Further, as I’ve noted above, there were at least a hundred people involved in the creation of Vigo, from the production, from ILM, and from my team. No one person can claim to be “the artist” who created it.

The “painting” used in the film is owned by ILM and is hanging in their lobby. The original oil by Lou Police is hanging in Ivan Reitman’s home. All of the research, preliminary sketches, the acetate comps, photographic reference and production documentation are in my possesion. There are no other legitimate copies of Vigo in circulation.

Hopefully this will clear up some of the confusion. The painting was done by Glen Eytchison's team and was the only one used in the film. It is the one that is hanging up in ILM's office. The smaller oil painting was done by Lou Police and was only used as reference to how the final product would look. Glen oversaw all the work, and was perhaps the only person credited in the final credits for the production of the painting.
I have included a copy of the memo below.

I've uploaded a copy of the memo to Megaupload:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=BCTF81KS

Here's how it started
http://www.therpf.com/showthread.php?t=62698&highlight=vigo

The first thing I can conclude from re-reading the old topic, was that I was right about the source image. You're using a image from Flickr taken almost certainly without the permission of the original photographer (something I can easily confirm by dropping him a message), and lied about when I accused you of taking the image, claiming that you got it from a member of the RPF.

As I read, I also found another contradiction in your account of the creation of the prints:

Hotshot at the RPF
What's really funny, is as I was typing away in this thread today, one of our printer buddies from next door was in picking something up.
I asked if they print on canvas, he said no.
After witnessing my child-like ‘awwman’ face, he mentioned someone he knew in town, and called back over 5 minutes later with the number.

Hotshot at GBN
The printer just happened to be in the shop that I worked at, buying something with another salesmen, and I outload asked if anyone knew who in town might print on canvas at 5 foot across. They all shrugged, but the guy quietly said ‘I can do that.’
So we printed off a test, and away we went. It s been a fun run, and I've actually lost count of how many shipped out.

So which is it? Some guy in the shop who shrugged and quietly said ‘I can do it’, or someone your printer buddy knew who he contacted over the phone?


Now, I'd like to go on and mention the names of the people who contributed towards the project, that you neglected to mention, it seems, in most if not all the posts you've made.


khunter: Original photographer of the high-res, uncleaned shot which would be used to create the final product. Non RPF.

JmTwo & PheonixVader Two posters who, from reading the article did some of the earliest ‘cleanup’. I can't tell which one did the most work, as Vader's file no longer shows up… but by this point, the glare on the left side of the portrait has been covered up with one of the two ‘dark clouds’.

rollerboi Who posted a revised version with the other glare obscurred with the second ‘cloud’.

AZspidey Performed some of the final cleanup, and with rollerboi is credited for producing the final digital image.


I also find it interesting that you haven't felt the need to defend yourself, surely an accusation such as image theft, and lying about a product would warrent you to say you didn't do what you were accused of?

I've thought long and hard about this and can't think of any other way to take all these posts other than negatively.
What do you want from me dude?
What exactly am I being accused of here?
Because your info seems less about correction/explanation and more about general harrassment.
I see no reason to defend myself, and while it's clear that some of my info is correct and some isn't, I can only stand by what I've been told. This IS the internet after all. You can only arm yourself with the best info at hand.
I would love to see som photogrpahy backing up the history of the painting, as I'm more than ready to take anything I hear with a grain of salt.

The one thing I will take issue with is the continued statment that I'm selling these at a profit. I am not. I ask that that be corrected immediatly.