May 2, 2003 at 6:51 pm #2086
The day for night techinique always looks fake (imho). I guess I’ve just seen too many bad horror and godzilla movies where they use this (the worst offender was this one scene which was at a beach with birds flying around but still tinted to look like night
It would have been better to make the models out of light colored lego (white, grey, yellow) and then light the scene with blue filtered lamps, enough light so that the webcam could pick up the scene, but not ‘overly bright’ like in a daytime shot. Also, the gamma curve and contrast could be played with a bit in post production to give it a proper nighttime look.
As it stands, the night scenes in Good Company look too washed out.
You can also convey ‘nighttime’ by adding crickets to the soundtrack. Let’s not forget that sound is 60% of a film: Watch the first scene in Saving Private Ryan, or the Pod Race in starwars 1 to see two examples of really amazing sound work.May 3, 2003 at 8:46 am #2135
Shot for May 2, 2003:
Well, thanks to Jared, I’m at least able to take pics of movies played in Windows Media Player. I’m hoping to get Tinra to work, so that I can get shots from all those great RM encoded brickfilms.
Here’s todays. This was the only avi file I have on my HDD that had a lot of effort put into it. And it should be fresh in most people’s minds.
CometgreenMay 3, 2003 at 11:19 am #2136
That’s a great pic!
Review will come later, It’s six oclock in the morning here… wth am I doing up at 6 oclock? YOu tell me… :sleep
YolegomanMay 3, 2003 at 8:57 pm #2177
Composition of this shot is cool, although in this scene, it was a bit unclear to me if the beam hit the figures or missed it.
Viewpoint: it’s what I was once taught is called Frog’s Perspective, giving the light a menacing context. Somehow, the scene radiates a lot of energy, you can almost see the figures moving on the still!
Sorry, I’m not quite used to thinking about films in this way. I guess I should try to put some more effort in my setups (up to now, I just tried to have everything ‘in view’, and slightly balanced).
Stefan.May 4, 2003 at 11:24 pm #2264
“LowweeK” wrote: BTW, I did not congratulate you for the foley work on R.vs R. EP2. It’s really…
“Foley” eh? hehe, you learn a new word every day 😉
Ok some of my own nitpicks about that clip:
The upper left corner of the frame was supposed to have a ‘night lit’ version of the terragen terrain, which I never got around to.
The window in the upper lookout deck should have been lit up, just to preserve continuity with the next scene
hmm… maybe in the director’s cut 😉
The lesson to be learnt from this scene is: Only use lens flares when you can justify them. 8) 😀June 14, 2003 at 11:42 am #5204
Shows what you can miss with a leave of absence.
No comments, as yet. Just reading. Have to say, the shot from GC:R was pretty much an establishing shot and is a bit too crowded for my liking. But I am very happy with the lighting, intention was to harp back to old horror films using the night in day technique.
oh and 4096, you’ll notice that the characters discuss the absence of nighttime insects in one scene of the film… i intentionally had no foley in those scenes…
ok some comments:
ROTE Pic one (the steps)
This was the single most impressive shot of ROTE for me for a couple of reasons.
1) Depth of field. Close to the camera is the single out of focus column, then the stairs, columns behind that, and then the wonderful city in the background. What contributes is the careful focus and lighting here. The emphasis is on anakin, but we get the feel of a living, breathing world.
2)Balance. Not only is the depth of field good, but the balance to the shot is wonderful. The city scape draws the viewers eye to the left side of the shot, where ‘most’ of the action happens. The angle across the strairs (at the top and where they meet the ground) leads naturally in the direction the minifigs are walking. This is good use of visual logic, where the look re-inforces the action.
3)Framing. The column in the foreground and the background columns and city add a nice frame to the action. Another way to gently manipulate the viewers focus.
ROTE pic two (anakin still front on)
Once again jay hits the nail on the head with pure shot construction. Huge depth of field (and the movement in the backgournd outside is great) and simple ‘rule of thirds’ elements balances this shot.
The arch on the left extends outside the frame, once again, this world is bigger than just a set. This really helps with the immersion.
Bluntman’s 7/7 pic
Great use of symmetry. This does two things: a) it reinforces the artificial/futuristic nature of the setting, and also b) reinforces the empire’s whole ‘control’ attitude to everything, including architecture.
The depth is great too, as we can see through to a corridor further back in the set through the doorway. I do agree the foreground is wasted space, especially when the back corridor seems so cramped.
Excellent ‘worm’s eye view’ of the action. Really brings the viewer right into the scene. It is particularly effective as it allows us to see just how high the rockface extends into the sky. The light’s look very cool, but as there seems to be no fog, dust or anything I don’t understand how a beam like that can actually exist! (Just me being picky!)
HaliJune 14, 2003 at 7:51 pm #5234
Ah, perfect time to respond Hali. :wink Hali’s gonna send me the pic of GC:R I was talking about, and we can finally revive this thread. I was thinking about this thread a few weeks ago, but decided to wait until Revmen got the forums back to normal. Plus, Hali’s back again, so we should have another great contributor.
CometgreenJune 15, 2003 at 2:48 am #5296
OK, well, here we go. I shall delay this no further!
Shot for June 14, 2003:
This is the shot I wanted from GC:R. I’ll probably find some more later tonight, but this one should generate some discussion.
Marlow has some good company.
CometgreenJune 15, 2003 at 3:15 am #5300
wow just found this, i’ll go ahead and review this one…
This shot has a good angle to it but there is too much glare on the lego hair and the shot seems to blurred and a tad out of focus, it seems to be focusing mainly on the table, though the picture is very convincingly realistic, the only other problem is thatthe minifig whereing the white suit’s hand seems to be square from the angle it is it (not camera angle, hand angle)June 15, 2003 at 5:58 am #5311
This is from the very first dialogue sequence I shot for GC:R. It was done in another state while I was on holiday at the coast. Lighting isn’t exactly how I would have liked it, but I needed a level of brightness so as to wash out any gaps between the bricks in the white of the rear wall.
I specifically built the set so that the grey line of bricks in the wall of the set would split the wall horizontally. It was tricky to use minimal elements to make this look like an office (I did have a laptop on the table, but it was too tricky to get the angle correct so that it didn’t look stupid, so I removed it).
The desk partially obscures the company executive on the left so that it looks like it his his desk, thus his office. Back right corner harps back to the literary roots of the story, thus the pith helmet and native mask. Also, both characters do not sit equidistant from the edges of the frame, it is close, but not exact. Visually I did not want them to have the same screen presence. Who is more important than whom?
I really wanted to capture both characters and the office, without having too much dead space. I think I managed to do that ok.
(As for the focus, it is out a little, PLUS, the jpg compression of this shot does not help one bit… )
Still, I don’t like this shot as much as the close-ups that follow in the rest of the conversation.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.