Cinematography

Home Forums Brickfilming Forums Animation and Effects Cinematography

This topic contains 81 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by Profile photo of Aerandir Aerandir 11 years, 9 months ago.

Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 82 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1973 Reply
    Profile photo of Buxton
    Buxton
    Member

    Dammit, I’ve only just discovered this thread. Great idea, cometgreen.

    Part of the problem with composing shots containing more than one minifig is that they’re quite a lot wider than real people, so you can end up with a lot of dead space above and below them. I got round this in OOT by moving the characters closer together for the tight shots and further apart for the wider shots. Something similar could have been done here, but with a quickie short you wouldn’t really expect a great deal of time to be spent on setting up variations on each shot.

    Other than that, the symmetry of the shot suggests the orderliness and formality of the empire, and also serves to set up the gag where this idea is undermined as the guards start talking and we realise they’re just regular guys.

    There’s some nice depth to the shot as well – it’s not really apparent here, but when we see the characters wandering about in the background, you get more than just 2 guys standing by a wall.

    #1977 Reply
    Profile photo of Cometgreen
    Cometgreen
    Member

    Thanks Buxton. I was hoping someone like you would notice this thread and participate.

    My impressions:

    Not much to say that hasn’t all ready been said. I love the symmetry. I think the lighting is perfect, as this is a regular Bluntman comedy. I do like how the red goes against the bright colors of the rest of the set; you immediately focus on the two characters.

    I have to disagree with Lowweek about the camera positioning though. In context, I think the angle and framing is fine, as they are not supposed to look menacing or evil. I think they’re supposed to look small and unimportant. But I see your point.

    I think this is a good example that Bluntman does indeed labor over the position of the camera and the frame of the shot.

    Shot for April 30, 2003:

    Submitted by Yolegoman. Not what I was looking for from GC, but I guess a good shot nonetheless. You better have a good excuse for suggesting this pic, Yolego, or else…

    Quite a cliche, if you ask me ;)

    Cometgreen

    #1985 Reply
    Profile photo of jay
    jay
    Member

    Compositionally, it’s got a nice strong diagonal and a good mix of light and dark areas that push toward the characters. Marlow gets a bit lost in the side of the car, but it’s a short shot. I’m not sure why the high angle here, though – at first I thought it might be a camera height but Nick’s got lots of eye level stuff around it. Perhaps he felt a wide shot was needed to reinforce the space, or maybe to suggest that they are being watched.

    I like the day-for-night technique used here. It’s very foreboding and spooky – I always find highway driving at night is very isolating, like being on an island in the middle of nowhere. My only complaint would be the relatively light background/horizon. I think almost a pitch black would be no less convincing and add to the already substantial atmosphere.

    I thought this set felt a bit ‘forced’ – the bushes and rocks are quite close to the road and then nothing but flat plain beyond. It’s oddly claustrophobic and immediately gives a ‘set’ feeling. The seam in the road is unfortunate.

    The vechicle design is good. Basic, but straight away you’ve got the sense of a utilitarian desert vehicle. I would have put the centre of the wheels on different angles, though. It looks like it was placed rather than driven to a stop.

    A nice little bit but not one of the more powerful images from GC (or GCR).

    -j

    #1989 Reply
    Profile photo of Yolegoman
    Yolegoman
    Member

    “Cometgreen” wrote:

    Shot for April 30, 2003:

    Submitted by Yolegoman. Not what I was looking for from GC, but I guess a good shot nonetheless. You better have a good excuse for suggesting this pic, Yolego, or else…

    Cometgreen

    Uh yeah, I did…
    (what was it? *thinks*) Lol.

    The reason I like this shot is the lighting, for one, and, if you look really closely, its not even apperent at first glance, you see the set goes past the lego’s… that is, theres the nightime blue and sandy dirt in the background. Makes the two guys in the foreground, the manager and Marlo, feel, well, isolated I guess, and that adds to the scariness.

    I agree with Zirk, though, the rest of the set is too close to the road…

    I disagree with his idea of Black backdrop,I feel like this shot is supposed to be near dawn, once you think about it, and the blue makes it like that, but maybe a darker blue would help. (Gosh, this is so unfair, nitpicking these guys work to pieces) :)

    Another, last thing I notice is Marlow looks really excited about finding the car, yet The Manager is hanging back in the background, much more cautious, it seems. Contrarywise, it’s the Cautious Mananger that gets shot. :roll

    Lol, sorry if nobody else likes this pic. The idea of filming in normal light to darken it later in post prod is just facinating to me.

    Yolegoman, awaiting the death blow from Cometgreen.

    #1994 Reply

    I like the blue colour of the picture. It makes a nice effect. I also like the way the two persons are placed in the picture. The space between them is just perfect. Making no deadspace. What I dont like is the angel of the picture. I think that it should have been taken completely from the side.

    Another thing is that you see reflections from the lighting at the man with the blue shirt. That is pretty sad since it ruins the whole nightfeeling kind of thing.

    #1997 Reply
    Profile photo of Buxton
    Buxton
    Member

    It’s not a great shot for critiquing, really. If I remember rightly, this is an establishing shot to show that the boys have found the car/truck. As such, it does its job. There are definitely better shots in the film. (cg – if you want to pm me with your choice, I’ll see if I can get a screen grab)

    The framing is a little awkward. The guys are in the centre of the frame, but there’s some dead space to the right. I’m not sure what you’d do to improve it though.

    The high angle might suggest surveillance, but I think it may just have been a way of closing off the set so it doesn’t look too much like a road with a line of rocks and bushes by it with nothing beyond.

    #2032 Reply
    Profile photo of The Janitor
    The Janitor
    Member

    First of all, I’d like to say that I very much enjoy reading this thread. It was a very good idea. But, if it is going to continue on for a while, it might be wise to create a seperate “cinematography” forum, where a new thread is created every day or week or whatever. Then people wouldn’t have to sort through pages and pages of posts on one thread.

    #2034 Reply
    Profile photo of Yolegoman
    Yolegoman
    Member

    I agree with Janitor, and it wouldn’t be that hard, really. One click of the mouse for Jason. :wink

    #2040 Reply
    Profile photo of Cometgreen
    Cometgreen
    Member

    Though that would be cool, I think the thread will start to slow after a while. A picture a day is quite a lot, and soon we’ll be saying the same things about similar pictures. I’m all for organization, but still, it may or may not use up more bandwith. It’s Jason’s call, however.

    And thanks. I was hoping people would enjoy this thread. It can very informative on a sometimes overlooked aspect of filming.

    Cometgreen

    #2047 Reply
    Profile photo of IndyA
    IndyA
    Member

    The landscape is very drawn out far back and you can still tell that even know it is night. How the figs are standing refers…without sound that it looks like they just found the vehicle…
    IndyA

Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 82 total)
Reply To: Cinematography
Your information: