How it's done?

N

naavt

Well-known member
I'll appreciate if you guys could take a look at this commercial:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13EUx_LA37s

And share some thoughts about how they have acquire all the reflections in the shots that doesn't include the sun in front.

I've heard that some guys here are doing this kind of stuff with many sorts of acrylic glasses in front of the lenses?!...

Thanks
 
Nice - I was in Lisbon just a few weeks ago - I'd say all done in Post as an effect.

A mask with blur. (easier written than done).
 
Nope, detached lens.
It´s a new trend these days.

You hold the lens with your hand without locking it.
Then you focus by slightly moving it back and forth, thereby sometimes light hits the sensor.

Frank
 
Postmaster said:
Nope, detached lens.
It´s a new trend these days.

You hold the lens with your hand without locking it.
Then you focus by slightly moving it back and forth, thereby sometimes light hits the sensor.

Frank
Click to expand...

Perhaps some shots COULD have been done that way, but that wasn't just focus... there were totally different designs/ textures being introduced into the image and specular light sources appearing and disappearing. Most definitely optical glass reflections from something additional from the lens. I'll refrain from saying it was post work, because it seems the reflected light, if bright enough, was effectively bringing down the original images contrast. Which is a direct effect of flares and etc. This could have been done in post, but I doubt it, considering you just need a talented cinematographer and a piece of glass. :P Saves way more money.
 
Postmaster, you are speaking of lensbaby effect. Not what we have here (unless i missed something by scrabing through that spot).
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
Perhaps some shots COULD have been done that way, but that wasn't just focus... there were totally different designs/ textures being introduced into the image and specular light sources appearing and disappearing. Most definitely optical glass reflections from something additional from the lens. I'll refrain from saying it was post work, because it seems the reflected light, if bright enough, was effectively bringing down the original images contrast. Which is a direct effect of flares and etc. This could have been done in post, but I doubt it, considering you just need a talented cinematographer and a piece of glass. :P Saves way more money.
Click to expand...


I'm also under the impression that this is achieved trough something in front of the lens, just don't know what and how. I think I'm going to try a bit with different materials and see the results.
 
In either case that effect is 100% possible to create in post using simple programs like After effects. In camera effects (or destructive effects) decreased in popularity since digital manipulation started becoming more and more affordable.

I personally very rarely do destructive effects, I prefer for my Flame or AE guys to handle it.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
But it's easier and cheaper. How can you argue that?
Click to expand...

I'll say yes and no. Yes it is easier but you are locked into what you have. I myself as an AE user can create those effects fairly fast and low cost (calculating from my billing hours).

But if you dont have access to an FX guy it will cost too much and there is no absolute way of doing things for every type of project.

I guess I am thinking back to a Star Trek Voyager episode from 90's where they created a rotating parabolic mirror effect in camera (which was the climatic end of the episode) and in the interviews they said they were keeping their fingers crossed that it worked as they had shot it and struck the set. Re-shoot would have meant disaster if the fx didn't work.

Again no absolutes here, project based decisions will probably dictate the process.
 
Good thing we have just as talented cameramen, huh?! :P

haha. I know what you are saying, and it is on project basis... but for this effect, if you hired a talented cinematographer, you have nothing to worry about. That goes for 80% of all camera tricks that can be done in camera.
 
I'm with Ryan on this one and less so as a DP but more so as a director. If you know what you want (and if you are already on the set then you should!) then there is no reason not to do it in camera.
 
Especially in this day and age when you (director and DP) can watch and/or play back the digital footage and see if it's successful. (unlike star-trek)
 
naavt said:
I'll appreciate if you guys could take a look at this commercial:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13EUx_LA37s

And share some thoughts about how they have acquire all the reflections in the shots that doesn't include the sun in front.

I've heard that some guys here are doing this kind of stuff with many sorts of acrylic glasses in front of the lenses?!...

Thanks
Click to expand...

It looks like a cheap "film clutter type" effect added to make the HDSLR jellocam footage look like film. Some just had an object very close to a long lens, like a leaf or other, some look organic with no mattebox or len-shade.
 
DJDecay said:
It looks like a cheap "film clutter type" effect added to make the HDSLR jellocam footage look like film. Some just had an object very close to a long lens, like a leaf or other, some look organic with no mattebox or len-shade.
Click to expand...


Sorry about my English, but what do you mean with "film clutter type"?

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top