Jump to content


Photo

Star Trek


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Ryan Ball

Ryan Ball
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 74 posts
  • Director
  • Los Angels

Posted 17 May 2009 - 03:39 AM

They went a bit crazy with the lens flares in the new Trek flick. I assume a lot of them were added in post?
  • 0

#2 Patrick Nuse

Patrick Nuse
  • Guests

Posted 17 May 2009 - 06:12 AM

2nd that. Didn't Michael Bay start that trend in the first place? I'm sure a lot of that is post as there is so much of it. Joss Whedon started asking his camera OP do it on purpose sometimes when he decided that some accidental ones gave the show a "real" type feel. For me, it did start to get annoying in Star trek though.
  • 0

#3 Ryan Ball

Ryan Ball
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 74 posts
  • Director
  • Los Angels

Posted 17 May 2009 - 08:17 PM

2nd that. Didn't Michael Bay start that trend in the first place? I'm sure a lot of that is post as there is so much of it. Joss Whedon started asking his camera OP do it on purpose sometimes when he decided that some accidental ones gave the show a "real" type feel. For me, it did start to get annoying in Star trek though.



I thought the film looked great and I generally like to see a lens flare every now and then, but it becomes a little distracting when you realize they were posted in. Still an awesome movie.
  • 0

#4 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20068 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 17 May 2009 - 09:09 PM

I thought the film looked great and I generally like to see a lens flare every now and then, but it becomes a little distracting when you realize they were posted in. Still an awesome movie.


Most of the flares were done in-camera, not in post.
  • 0

#5 Chris Burke

Chris Burke
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1720 posts
  • Boston, MA

Posted 17 May 2009 - 09:42 PM

Most of the flares were done in-camera, not in post.




I think that all of them were done in camera. I really liked the look of the film, but the flares were perhaps a bit too much. I think that it is because they were intentionally using lights and mirrors aimed directly into the lens that it could look a bit artificial. All in all, I see what they were going for and kind of dig it, albeit a bit too sweet.
  • 0

#6 Peter J DeCrescenzo

Peter J DeCrescenzo
  • Sustaining Members
  • 620 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR, USA www.peterdv.com Blog: http://herefortheweather.wordpress.com/

Posted 18 May 2009 - 11:06 AM

Meanwhile, in the Cinematography.com parallel universe: :lol:
http://www.cinematog...h...st&p=286141
  • 0

#7 Luc Allein

Luc Allein
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  • 2nd Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 23 May 2009 - 07:13 PM

I thought this was Dan's best work since Domino, and he's not known for being a super "flashy" dp but this was good flashy.

I thought the same thing, "What's with all the lens flare??" (And no cameo this time around? Bogus!) I did like it but I too felt it became a bit excessive. What do you think was the motivation for it, and do you guys think it was a JJ call or a Dan call?

(I was supposed to work on Star Trek but I moved back east for a year; Im STILL kicking myself...)
  • 0


The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Ritter Battery

Tai Audio

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

CineLab

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Visual Products

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

The Slider

Willys Widgets

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

Glidecam