ronroyster
New member
I cringe on the idea that it's going to come off hokey. Any tips or ideas on how to pull this off?
Shooting a spontaneous combustion scene on a low budget.
- Thread starter ronroyster
- Start date
kevinottawa
Well-known member
Well gas is cheap, you wouldn't need more than 2 gallons, just remember to make them sign a waver first.
But being serious, there isn't a good cheap way to do it, but there are some tricks.
In post, use flame footage and some masks to start to show the fire starting on your actor, and then you can cut away to a flickering wall or window while screams are heard.
A bit more dangerous and yet still cheesy, you can get a rubber arm and put lighter fluid on it, go outside and burn it on the ground and mask out parts of it and put it on your actor.
Classic Soap opera way, have a flame a few feet in front of your camera and use juxtaposition to make it look like the fire is engulfing your actor
Just be safe with any real fire you use.
But being serious, there isn't a good cheap way to do it, but there are some tricks.
In post, use flame footage and some masks to start to show the fire starting on your actor, and then you can cut away to a flickering wall or window while screams are heard.
A bit more dangerous and yet still cheesy, you can get a rubber arm and put lighter fluid on it, go outside and burn it on the ground and mask out parts of it and put it on your actor.
Classic Soap opera way, have a flame a few feet in front of your camera and use juxtaposition to make it look like the fire is engulfing your actor
Just be safe with any real fire you use.
Doc Bernard
Indie Arms Member
One thing you will want to do is light the scene to reflect the light from the VFX "flames". No real fire, unless you are a pyrotechnician or you hire one. Real fire has a mind of it's own, despite what you do, it may want to do something else, like burn someone.
clang
Veteran
Agreed, shoot the actor with just some reflected light to represent the light from the flames, but do the flames as VFX (composited real flames or CGI flames) - far too dangerous otherwise. Although you may be able to have a later shot showing the burning unrecognisable corpse (actually a dummy) burning for real - but then of course you have to be careful you don't accidentally set fire to your set 
Fire may look cool, but it's always difficult and dangerous to shoot, especially on a low budget.
Fire may look cool, but it's always difficult and dangerous to shoot, especially on a low budget.
this is poor combustion effect.
A real effect would include almost no fire. If the heat comes from the inside, then you could start to put some steam (water leaving body) then adding some trace of burn on skin (blisters) , then skin is craking up, revealing red/yellow glowing light, and then only heated gas start to burn.
A real effect would include almost no fire. If the heat comes from the inside, then you could start to put some steam (water leaving body) then adding some trace of burn on skin (blisters) , then skin is craking up, revealing red/yellow glowing light, and then only heated gas start to burn.
David W. Richardson
Chapelgrove Films
Exactly. In 'true' spontaneous combustion cases, only the body turns to ash -- clothes, furniture, etc. are left fairly unscathed. So I don't think there would be any actual flames.