Jump to content


Photo

Miniature Frame Rate Question


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Tim Nuttall

Tim Nuttall
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York, NY

Posted 01 December 2009 - 04:12 AM

Hi all,

I have a miniature shoot coming up on an arctic base at night built in 1:96 scale. According to my calculations using the classic frame rate formula, the model would need to be shot at 235 fps to achieve normal gravity. The only base motion I would anticipate would be smoke from buildings and possibly blowing snow from "heavy" winds. Also, there maybe some F/G snow, but that could be an optical added later as that wouldn't necessarily be miniaturized.

My questions are:

- Besides a Phantom, what film gear could shoot at this high a frame rate? (It's a 35mm show by the way)
- Do you think we could cheat the frame rate back to say 150 fps and still get away with realistic blowing snow?

Any suggestions or experiences are greatly appreciated. Thanks.
  • 0

#2 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 01 December 2009 - 09:18 AM

I'm trying to figure out how you're going to make 1:96 scale snowflakes. Your model makers are gonna have one hell of a time! I would worry too much about using an ultra high frame rate for something like that effect. I'd go for something that looks right. MAYBE put your model in a fish tank filled with water and maybe use milk or something like that to wash over the base OR use white smoke and small fan to gently blow the white smoke or talcum powder over the base. I mean is this a shot of the snow blowing over the base from a distance as in they are caught in a snow storm or is this you are close enough to see the show build into drifts? Here, take a look at these snow storms and extrapolate from that what a snow storm would look like from a bird's eye view (I'm assuming the shot's going to be from a higher angle as the scale is 1:96):

http://www.youtube.c...feature=related



http://www.youtube.c...feature=related

http://www.youtube.c...feature=related

http://www.youtube.c...feature=related
  • 0

#3 Brian Dzyak

Brian Dzyak
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1517 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Encino, California USA

Posted 01 December 2009 - 10:57 AM

Hi all,

I have a miniature shoot coming up on an arctic base at night built in 1:96 scale. According to my calculations using the classic frame rate formula, the model would need to be shot at 235 fps to achieve normal gravity. The only base motion I would anticipate would be smoke from buildings and possibly blowing snow from "heavy" winds. Also, there maybe some F/G snow, but that could be an optical added later as that wouldn't necessarily be miniaturized.

My questions are:

- Besides a Phantom, what film gear could shoot at this high a frame rate? (It's a 35mm show by the way)
- Do you think we could cheat the frame rate back to say 150 fps and still get away with realistic blowing snow?

Any suggestions or experiences are greatly appreciated. Thanks.



I'm no expert with miniatures, but ILM is and the attached image is from their book, http://www.amazon.co...g...2799&sr=1-2 page 112. I hope that helps a little! :)
  • 0

#4 Brian Dzyak

Brian Dzyak
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1517 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Encino, California USA

Posted 01 December 2009 - 11:03 AM

This forum won't let me upload the image, no matter how absurdly tiny I make it. I'll put it on my server and provide a link soon.
  • 0

#5 Brian Dzyak

Brian Dzyak
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1517 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Encino, California USA

Posted 01 December 2009 - 11:18 AM

Ok, here it is http://www.dzyak.com...calculation.jpg
  • 0

#6 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 01 December 2009 - 11:40 AM

If the smoke element is forcing you to shoot the miniature at high speed, which in turn is not allowing you to stop down the lens enough... I'd add the smoke later in post. Getting a believable depth of field is the most critical part (that and the lighting but I assume you are shooting this miniature outdoors.)

As for blowing snow, I suspect blowing white powder of some sort might float and drift correctly when shot at high speed.
  • 0

#7 Stephen Williams

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

Posted 01 December 2009 - 12:10 PM

Photosonics 4ER does upto 360 FPS, 4ER+ upto 425 FPS
  • 0

#8 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2248 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 01 December 2009 - 12:57 PM

Why is the miniature so small , ? build a bigger one then you wont have to hire expensive cameras to shoot it !!
  • 0

#9 Tim Nuttall

Tim Nuttall
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York, NY

Posted 01 December 2009 - 07:54 PM

Why is the miniature so small , ? build a bigger one then you wont have to hire expensive cameras to shoot it !!


Thanks for all the great responses. The miniature is built to this scale mainly for cost and space restrictions. I think I may do some tests at 120 or 150 fps to see if it could still sell the blowing snow.
  • 0

#10 Steve Wallace

Steve Wallace
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 163 posts
  • Other
  • Burbank, CA

Posted 01 December 2009 - 10:31 PM

...I suspect blowing white powder of some sort...

White powder of some sort? That could get expensive David. :huh:
  • 0

#11 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11937 posts
  • Other

Posted 02 December 2009 - 04:32 AM

Miniature snow effects annoy me.

I've seen more than one instance of people building a model that is, to scale, about four miles deep, then wanting it to be snowing. Of course, any amount of snow more than one flake a minute will reduce visibility to far less than the depth of the miniature, so what tends to happen is that they make it snow near the camera, then magically not snow anywhere else.

Please don't do that.

P
  • 0

#12 Will Earl

Will Earl
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 385 posts
  • Other
  • Wellington, NZ

Posted 02 December 2009 - 07:56 AM

Just a thought - the smoke from the buildings and the snow from the storm might require different frame-rates in order to look like they have the correct (aesthetically speaking) movement. These things typically get done with a filmed or cg element because there is more control over the shot.

But if your going for it in one and it's a static shot then you might be able to retime the shot so it's slower or faster.
  • 0

#13 Mei Lewis

Mei Lewis
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • UK

Posted 11 December 2009 - 09:47 AM

Ok, here it is http://www.dzyak.com...calculation.jpg


You can derive that formula using equations of motion and the assumption that the miniature will look the same as the real world if things take the same amount of time to move the same distance in the miniature as they would in the real world. That is, if when playing back they take the same number of frames.

I can write it up if anyone is interested.
  • 0


Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Technodolly

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Paralinx LLC

FJS International, LLC

Glidecam

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

CineLab

Abel Cine

The Slider

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

Aerial Filmworks

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC