Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Lars von trier "antichrist"

So ... I saw Antichrist yesterday and in my opinion it's visually a stunning piece of work... an absolute masterpiece. However there are a lot of passages in the film where it looks very video-ish; I'm wondering if they opened up the shutter too much to let in more light because it sure is a very dark movie.

I'm also wondering how they did the extreme slow motion stuff in the movie... I will ask.

I think it's a definite must see for everyone who likes the art of making movies.
 
filmmaker's gang said:
to speak about form as B&W is not speak about form.
Click to expand...

Actually the point with Lars Von Trier is that in some ways it is b&w - for him.

I didn't get it until I realized that he will not bend from what he has set out to do. He will go with it, for good or for worse, but he will not bend. He will simply solve the task within the parameters set out in advance - he sees that as the challenge.

If you see "The five obstructions" I think you'll see what I'm trying to say.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Five_Obstructions
 
5107W8W92DL._SS500_.jpg


"The five obstructions" is must see movie (on DVD) especially for our "advertisement oriented DP or Director artists" that are as usual overloaded at the forum like this.

You know to whom should be dedicated and exactly you what I mean very well at this forum...

Also about "Antichrist" I'm sure is a big joke and something even far beyond as a point of criticism in this present state of our "global culture and civilization"... I know Lars's work very well...
 
I saw Antichrist last night and I have to tell that was a incredible !
Great mix between RED and PHANTOM.
The grades are perfects.
This is film a masterpiece for me.
I made nightmares last night.
 
where did you saw phantom pictures ? the film is shot entirely with red....

they used SFX2 filter as standard, probably thats the reason of its very soft look...

film was graded on scratch....
 
"Antichrist" on IMDb didn't mention use of Phanthom at all

LINK>>>

I'm sure they even slowed down already 120 FPS slow motion in the post production process...

Also sure that Anthony Dod Mantle will clear this soon...
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
"Antichrist" on IMDb didn't mention use of Phanthom at all

LINK>>>

I'm sure they even slowed down already 120 FPS slow motion in the post production process...
Click to expand...

Don't be so sure... IMDb doesn't always get all the right informations. And the following 8 minutes "making of" video in French clearly speaks about a "1000fps camera" that was used for the very first time in a big European feature. What else could they be speaking about if it wasn't the Phantom-HD (or the Weisscam)?

I'm sure they used the Phantom-HD on certain shots...

http://www.paperblog.fr/1605461/antechrist-de-lars-von-trier-premiere-video-du-tournage/
 
Emmanuel Decarpentrie said:
Don't be so sure... IMDb doesn't always get all the right informations. And the following 8 minutes "making of" video in French clearly speaks about a "1000fps camera" that was used for the very first time in a big European feature. What else could they be speaking about if it wasn't the Phantom-HD (or the Weisscam)?

I'm sure they used the Phantom-HD on certain shots...

http://www.paperblog.fr/1605461/antechrist-de-lars-von-trier-premiere-video-du-tournage/
Click to expand...

Emmanuel,

thanks for the link.

Also I didn't hear that were talking about Phantom HD or any other camera for slow motion.

I saw Lars von Trier and Anthony Dod Mantle that were operating with RED1.

The pictures are below from that video.

Lars_RED1_01.JPG

Lars von Trier shooting "Anarchist" with RED1.

DodMantle_02.JPG

Anthony Dod Mantle, BSC, DFF, at the same set of "Anarchist".

Also I know that 120 fps is slow enough for human movement (walking, running, etc) and if you even slow down more in post-production then you can get a nice pretty slow movement.

1000 fps of Phantom HD is good for a car crash, diverse explosions, liquid dropping and such effects shots like those...etc.

But anyway Anthony Dod Mantle should in a sort of future interview about his work on "Antichrist" for sure clear it up what he used and how he did it.
 
weirdcrew said:
Actually the point with Lars Von Trier is that in some ways it is b&w - for him.

I didn't get it until I realized that he will not bend from what he has set out to do. He will go with it, for good or for worse, but he will not bend. He will simply solve the task within the parameters set out in advance - he sees that as the challenge.

If you see "The five obstructions" I think you'll see what I'm trying to say.
Click to expand...

This approach may sound radical today, but what you're describing is really just "formalism". Look at the complicated verse forms which were once common, even in rhyme-poor languages like English.

What's striking about Lars von Trier is that within the constraints of this self-imposed formalism he's drawn to outrages against conscience, or to bad taste. If he can think it, he'll film it, the more offensive, the better. The sublimation which usually goes on in art is all on the surface in his films where (arguably) it ceases to mean anything, though it may offer other excitements or provoke controversy.

Transgression and formalism isn't without precedent either -- there's a long history of formally accomplished pornographic art -- but this guy takes the cake for salesmanship and calculated insults.
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
Also I didn't hear that were talking about Phantom HD or any other camera for slow motion.
Click to expand...

They used a "1000fps camera"! It's clearly said at 4'30 (cfr. the video-link I gave) :) :sifone:


Sanjin Jukic said:
Also I know that 120 fps is slow enough for human movement (walking, running, etc) and if you even slow down more in post-production then you can get a nice pretty slow movement.
Click to expand...

Not that slow... So long as the movement can be predicted, I think you're right: computer algorithms can do a fine job. But even "human movement" can get troublesome to predict sometimes. For instance, the movements of the clothes or the hair in the wind is hardly predictable in my opinion...

Also, I believe the very first scene in the movie was shot with the Phantom. From what I heard (I haven't seen the movie yet), that scene (SPOILER ALERT) is about a little child who tries to catch a snow flake and accidently falls from the window. The shots are so slow that they all look almost like stills... Obviously, shooting the falling snow and slowing it down that much requires something else than 120fps and a little bit of computer magic...
 
Emmanuel Decarpentrie said:
I just found a new trailer, where you can see a couple of shots from the first scene, in B/W (hint: the snow is falling in extreme slow-mo)

http://www.traileraddict.com/trailer/antichrist/trailer-b

Now, I guess we'll all agree about the fact these ones weren't shot with the RED-One! These ones were shot with a Phantom-HD (or a Weisscam), that's for sure!
Click to expand...

Emmanuel,

I do know exactly what I'm talking about.

Here are the facts:

I didn't find 120 FPS footage at the moment but found one with 75 FPS.

There are a couple of dogs running in a park and a woman is walking in the background.

Slow_motion_01.jpg


Slow_motion_02.jpg


Here are the both clips (1K) together in one footage>>>
 
Thanks for your two clips! It's very interesting because it gives a good idea of what truly is possible to achieve, even though it's just "frame blending", which is the poorest way to achieve a slow-mo effect in post. The fact of the matter is that the dogs and the girl are all far away so that it's very hard to notice the inevitable artifacts coming from the frame blending. If you zoom enough, you'll see their movement is not natural. The result you'd get if you shot the same take with a 750fps camera would be infinitely better, but these caracters are so small you'd have a hard time to notice the difference.

But, one thing is for sure: the result you get by slowing down (frame blending) to 10% a 75fps shot is far from "professionnal quality" as far as I'm concerned. And should you use interpolation (Twixtor, Shake, Retimer), you'd have a heck of a lot of work to cut (rotoscoping) each dog and the walking girl: it's easily a few hours of rotoscoping per take. And can quickly become days (then, what's the point? You'd be much better of, financially speaking, if you were shooting these with a phantom-HD)

And, here, we only have running dogs! Piece of cake to slow down, even with the professional frame interpolation and rotoscoping method. We're not talking about a shot where you have thousands of falling drops (rain) or snow-flakes. This would be impossible to get good results with, no matter the method (frame blending or frame interpolation).

I do know exactly what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

I never said you didn't :)

I just said that multiple sources confirmed the fact Lars did use a Phantom-HD (or at the very least, a 1000 fps camera, but if it isn't the phantom, the question is: which one?)

And I totally understand why they used a 1000fps camera when I saw the couple of shots they did with the falling snow! If you pay attention to these shots (just have a look to the second trailer) , I'm sure you'll agree with me: it's impossible to achieve this kind of slow-mo in post, especially not with FCP! I'm not talking about Realviz Retimer, which is a heck of a good software for slow-mo, but even Retimer has a certain limit. You said it best yourself: liquids can't be slowed in post. Why? Simply because their pixels are hard to track, and their movement is impossible to predict. I'm pretty sure it's the same with rain, or falling snow, hence they decided to shoot that particular scene with something else: a Phantom-HD!

Anyway, I'm not guessing: they have said they used a special 1000fps camera! They said it in the making-of and during the press conference, so I believe there is no point to debate this fact.
 
Someone on the inside told me today that they did in fact shoot the slow motion stuff on Phantom.
 
Tony Lorentzen said:
Someone on the inside told me today that they did in fact shoot the slow motion stuff on Phantom.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much for this confirmation. Could you please ask him something about the foggy scenes in the woods? How did they create this fog (what kind of fog machine)? Or did they simply "wait for a foggy morning"?

The problem with artificial fog on natural sets (which I guess were used throughout this film for the exterior scenes) is that, no matter the apparent lack of wind, it tends to dissipate very quickly. And I need to prepare such a scene on a (natural) lake (about 50m in diameter) and was wondering how I could possibly get(control) such a fog.

Many thanks in advance.
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
DodMantle_02.JPG

Anthony Dod Mantle, BSC, DFF, at the same set of "Anarchist".

But anyway Anthony Dod Mantle should in a sort of future interview about his work on "Antichrist" for sure clear it up what he used and how he did it.
Click to expand...

We should wait for Anthony Dod Mantle to get a right info...
 
when makes a point sj never gives up ehehehehehe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top