Jump to content


Photo

Is this possible? need help.


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Adam j Kennedy

Adam j Kennedy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Student

Posted 27 August 2006 - 12:05 PM

hi, i am trying to achieve a certain shot that i dont know is possible... i am shooting a film noir setting of a detective in his office, he is hunched over his desk rolling a cigar. what i want is a side shot with the green screen behind him, and here's the tricky part... there is a window behind him, i want to have light pushing through the blinds of the wndow and onto his back, i want to be able to see the light through the thick air.

my problem is i dont know if lighting the subject in this maner will somehow jepordize the sucess of the green screen in the background.

i have at my disposal two 4 bank kinos that can be balenced to tungston or daylight, an arri kit with lights from 250's to 650's. an mole richardson set 2 1000K, some source 4's, and a lowel kit...

i also have a studio at my disposal...

i really need your help on this, "preparation is the key"

thank you...

adam jon kennedy.
  • 0

#2 G McMahon

G McMahon
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 161 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 27 August 2006 - 11:04 PM

I was warned against the use of smoke and green screen. Hard to key out. But there is nothing to stop you from using smoke in the other shots that don't see the green screen. There is a scene in bladerunner where there is heavy smoke and one wide which looks at the city in the BG where there is no smoke used. They got away with it.

I don't know much about rotor scoping, I just kept it simple knowing the effects on the screen would play up the production value. The production forgot to get the smoke alarms turned off so I didn't get to use my smoke for the other shots.
  • 0

#3 Jon Kukla

Jon Kukla
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 399 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 August 2006 - 02:04 PM

IIRC, isn't smoke usually added separately with "black screens"? Basically a blacked out background which is lit so that you can easily separate anything that appears in front of it, including particle-based matter like smoke. But that does seem a bit elaborate...
  • 0

#4 Michael Morlan

Michael Morlan
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Austin, Texas

Posted 29 August 2006 - 08:44 AM

I haven't tried this but don't all the keying software companies make much ado about how they can key semi-transparent elements like glass, wispy hair, and smoke?
  • 0

#5 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 29 August 2006 - 09:27 AM

I was warned against the use of smoke and green screen. Hard to key out. But there is nothing to stop you from using smoke in the other shots that don't see the green screen. There is a scene in bladerunner where there is heavy smoke and one wide which looks at the city in the BG where there is no smoke used. They got away with it.

I don't know much about rotor scoping, I just kept it simple knowing the effects on the screen would play up the production value. The production forgot to get the smoke alarms turned off so I didn't get to use my smoke for the other shots.


Hi,

Don't forget smoke + water have been very easy to 'key' for over 15 years using 'Ultimatte'. When I test a new wonder software I always shoot Smoke + Water for the test.

Stephen
  • 0

#6 Adam j Kennedy

Adam j Kennedy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Student

Posted 29 August 2006 - 11:24 AM

Thanks you guys,

i had a friend in the business that told me to shoot the smoke against a well lit green screen and then composite that into your other footage keeping them both clean and seperate, and then adding them together in post...

what do you guys think?

thanks,

Adam jon kennedy
  • 0

#7 G McMahon

G McMahon
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 161 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 29 August 2006 - 12:11 PM

Hi,

Don't forget smoke + water have been very easy to 'key' for over 15 years using 'Ultimatte'. When I test a new wonder software I always shoot Smoke + Water for the test.

Stephen


Like I said, I am not too familiar with effects. Is this a high end program? If not I am pissed that I let the tail wag the dog on this particular project. Was the effects guy being lazy?
  • 0

#8 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 29 August 2006 - 12:42 PM

Like I said, I am not too familiar with effects. Is this a high end program? If not I am pissed that I let the tail wag the dog on this particular project. Was the effects guy being lazy?


Hi,

Originally it was an analogue box! Now available as a plug in, free demo available for download.
I think the effects guy may well not know of it's existence. It works on the same principle as the film Blue Screen matte process, not the same as a key! Its 'inventor' has 2 academy awards to his name.

Stephen

Disclaimer In the late 1980's I did a few demo's for the Ultimatte Memory Head, so I have worked freelance for the Ultimatte Corporation for about 6 days in total. It was in this connection that I worked with John Holland on an Anchor Butter commercial.
  • 0

#9 G McMahon

G McMahon
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 161 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 29 August 2006 - 12:59 PM

Hi,


I think the effects guy may well not know of it's existance. Stephen


In saying that, would it have made more hours of extra work?

Also, moving the camera (dolly while the screen is in shot), is that asking for extra hours?

I only say that as the effects guy is an industry player doing a favour for the director. Myself, being inept in the technology, seeing a ray of smoked light across a blue/ green screen would mean keying around the light ray and then some how compositing the BG behind the smoke allowing the smoke to still play naturally. Not knowing the program, and only knowing photoshop, its sounds like a heavy task. Am I wrong in this assumption?

Thanks
  • 0

#10 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 29 August 2006 - 01:10 PM

In saying that, would it have made more hours of extra work?

Also, moving the camera (dolly while the screen is in shot), is that asking for extra hours?



Hi,

What I like about Ultimatte is that you get a very good matte instantly, its very quick to work with. Fiddling with the set ups will usually fxxk up the composite! The hours I have seen wasted in expensive Flame suites doing what could be done very simply with Ultimatte always amazes me!

Stephen
  • 0


Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

The Slider

Abel Cine

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Tai Audio

CineLab

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

Visual Products

Opal

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Technodolly