Is it possible to get rifle scope cross hairs in camera?

Status
Not open for further replies.
There's a bunch of scope POV shots in this compilation of movie sniper scenes. They mostly look pretty similar and were probably all added in post. If you can't tell which look you want to emulate, nobody else will be able to make the decision for you.
https://youtu.be/K6O9Nd3G-pQ

Screenshot_20200716-041340_YouTube.jpg
Screenshot_20200716-041650_YouTube.jpg
Screenshot_20200716-041431_YouTube.jpg
Screenshot_20200716-041816_YouTube.jpg
 
Oh okay thanks. Well I've been doing some playing around and the problem with doing it in post is the repositioning of the video. After I put the cross hair/sniper scope overlay on, I then have to reposition the layer of the person who will be shot, underneath the overlay. But you can see the layer go beyond the composition though, when it moves, and that's the problem with trying to move the video in post, if that makes sense. So therefore, I thought it was best maybe to get it right in camera, rather than rely on post effects.
 
Last edited:
youre overcomplicating this. Just shoot it right in camera then you wont have to reposition anything in post. enable your crosshair or center mark in viewfinder/lcd and use that to make sure youre framed correctly the whole time when you shoot. You could even make a circle cutout to put over your lcd to aid with framing. Then you apply the effect in post and dont have to move anything around.
 
I dont know what you mean - see the video go beyond its aspect ratio - do you mean you shift the video so far that you can see the edge of frame?

If I understand correctly, you need to plan your shot better for the post effect. That's all. If you know the framing of the final effect and you know the scope will be centered on the target, and you shoot accordingly, then making the effect in post is easy
 
Yes, sorry that's what I mean. Well I can just to frame it better. When you say put enable the crosshair of the view finder of the camera, I don't think mine has that option but I can check. Thanks.

Does this one look better than the last one I posted?

sniper scope test 3.jpg
 
This one looks the same but the circle is enlarged. They both look fine to me. You'll notice that most of the movie examples crop off the top and bottom of the scope circle by enlarging it. I think they do that so that less of the frame will be black. But it's a matter of taste.

Paul F's point was about how scopes look in real life to a person looking through them. However, none of the big budget movies featured in that compilation look like the real thing. And they all basically look like what you've got going. I think what you have is fine unless for some reason you're dying to make it look exactly like it does to a person's eye in real life
 
Josh Bass said:
youre overcomplicating this. Just shoot it right in camera then you wont have to reposition anything in post. enable your crosshair or center mark in viewfinder/lcd and use that to make sure youre framed correctly the whole time when you shoot. You could even make a circle cutout to put over your lcd to aid with framing. Then you apply the effect in post and dont have to move anything around.
Click to expand...

Where've you been? :)
 
Oh okay thanks. The difference in the latest example is, I was told the circle was too sharp around the edges before so I tried blurring it this time. I could crop off the top and bottom, I just didn't think it made logical sense, because if you were looking through a scope, I didn't think the top and bottom would be cropped off course. But maybe it looks better to do that, rather than logic.

As for the more realistic one, in the training video before, with the camera put right up to it, I suppose that that would be more original, as I have never seen that done in a movie before, and it's always black around the edges. So I suppose it would be more original, but I could do the black on the edges, if perhaps, the more realistic way, just looks too weird...
 
It's not real Ryan, it's a movie cliche. When the hero looks through the keyhole, it's not what you really see through a keyhole - which is NEVER aligned with the action - it's a mockup, and often a caricature of real life. It's like Foley, where we expect certain sounds that in real life just don't exist, so we all have an imagination. How many movies ever show what an oxygen less explosion looks like. A realistic one would be short, flameless and silent, but we put in real flames, great sound effects and then Captain Kirk/Picard and the crew all get thrown about - which they wouldn't in real life. Crosshairs are no different.
 
JimS2 said:
Oh okay. Well it's a scene where a police sharpshooter is going to try to take down a dangerous perpetrator. So what type of scope would that be? I was just thinking I would zoom in from far away to the lenses fullest zoom, if it goes up to 300mm, if I were to use that lens.
Click to expand...

Do you want this to be realistic?
Law enforcement agencies have guidelines on how long a shot they can take and still be safe.
Most have a 100 yard limit, while having a under 50 yard limit in hostage situations.
Since their working distance is limited, they don't require a scope with high magnification.
So a 4 - 6X scope is more in line with what they would use in this scenario.
While this is usually the case in shooter situations,
many law enforcement snipers have something along the lines of a Nightforce Optics 5.5-22×56 NXS,
which allows them to zoom in, being eyes on providing intel.
 
Oh okay thanks, I will keep that in mind then! Thanks!

I was going for a something like in this scene at 3:02 into the scene:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idSvmDNLrdk

In that scene though, they don't show it through the sniper scope though, but I thought I would still get the shot, as an option for editing at least.
 
Josh Bass said:
EVer lurking, ever watching, in the shadowy alleys between threads, in my trenchcoat, waiting for the right time to strike. This, THIS thread, THAT post, was my moment? When shall be the next? Only time will tell.
Click to expand...
Seeing his threads is like stepping into a time machine and watching the same thing play out all over again. If only they knew what we knew.
 
People love to dump on ryan ironypony Jim but the truth is that people flock to his threads because he wants to discuss style and technique and not just the latest gear releases
 
I suspect it's also a showcase for new people to see how wrong it can go trying to use the Internet to give accurate and decisive results. It's frustrating but educational to see how badly advice can be understood. It's shows how careful we need to be in selecting language and meaning. In life nowadays we are all guilty of assuming we communicate well. Obviously from these topics we don't! Do it well. How many times does Ryan say " so what you're saying is ......" And it's 100% wrong!

All that concerns me is the number of projects he seems to work on, but then instead of dumping the terrible ones, he returns to them and tries to fix them. I have never in my life ever seen an author/scriptwriter asking about plot, characterisation and outcomes on the net. These are the set in stone things authors know from early on. Used to write the story. Then later they hate changing them. Ryan is very close to the point where co-credits are required.
 
ahalpert said:
People love to dump on ryan ironypony Jim but the truth is that people flock to his threads because he wants to discuss style and technique and not just the latest gear releases
Click to expand...

I think it makes perfect sense wanting to mount an actual scope to a camera body instead of creating the effect in post because it's too difficult and time consuming. I was told that discussing such ideas on message boards is better than doing my own research and coming to my own conclusions. I did find the suggestion to use a sharpie to create cross hairs on the sensor very entertaining, so maybe you are right, there is value in these threads. Ok thanks.
 
Last edited:
I'm not trying to criticize you. And I agree that Ryan ironypony Jim could get more out of trial and error and discovering his own taste than polling the crowd.

But if you find the endless questions annoying - just don't follow the thread

Personally, I think it's fun to reconsider fundamentals and practice honing my instructional skills
 
ahalpert said:
I'm not trying to criticize you. And I agree that Ryan ironypony Jim could get more out of trial and error and discovering his own taste than polling the crowd.

But if you find the endless questions annoying - just don't follow the thread

Personally, I think it's fun to reconsider fundamentals and practice honing my instructional skills
Click to expand...
I am partly to blame because I have more time on my hands due to the pandemic, I get bored and would like to engage in thought provoking discussion on topics other than gear review. I just wonder how many people know the full story of the person they spending their time trying to dispense earnest advice to. I think it's only fair to know, and if they still want to spend their time then that's ok.
 
I'm getting an inkling, but it's true, I've only been an addictive dvxuser since the pandemic so I missed ryan ironypony Jim's first act :)
 
He has created hundreds of such threads on another forum. They all revolve around one thing, the making of his own feature film. From what I understand this movie has been in the planning stage for a better part of a decade. His process is to get ideas from watching feature films and running thought experiments on shortcut ideas he comes up with. He discussing them with his friends and people on forums, trying to reconcile all the different advice he receives. His threads are an exercise in futility as people explain the obvious, trying to talk him out of his bad ideas, he proceeds to misinterprets their advice and the whole exercise is repeated with a new topic. So imagine someone without sound judgement that relies on advice from others for every conceivable question under the sun about making a movie that never gets made.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top