Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

AVATAR 2, 3 & 4 will be shot on Dragon

2, 3 and 4... Wow. Buy by the time they start rolling on 4, won't there be another camera RED makes after Dragon that takes over?

Did Jim drop the 48 HFR nonsense yet? I don't hear too much about the hobbit being 48 FPS anymore. I assume 3D is still happening?
 
3D at 24 FPS can be downright painful. I thing we will gradually start to see more and more 3D films being shot and presented at high frame rates, that is if 3D manages to still be around in a few years.
 
Will Keir said:
2, 3 and 4... Wow. Buy by the time they start rolling on 4, won't there be another camera RED makes after Dragon that takes over?

Did Jim drop the 48 HFR nonsense yet? I don't hear too much about the hobbit being 48 FPS anymore. I assume 3D is still happening?
Click to expand...

HFR isn't going away, it's how we will be watching things. We're just adapted to 24 but cinema is always moving towards looking like reality. Cameron has talked about shooting at 60fps for the rest of the films and did tests to demonstrate the efficacy of it. I think he said 48 was too close to 24. Apparently if all you watch is 48 you stop seeing those time ramping artifacts, which appear to be artifacts of our habituation to 24 (according to people working with 48 day in day out).
 
Some of the Dreamy Quality of 24 I think is limited to film production. 24p covers up a lot of mistakes and inadequacies. For instance I noticed every teeny tiny little bump on the Hobbit's dolly shots. Avatar will have a virtual camera so it can make perfect moves that don't break the illusion with tiny defects. I'll reserve judgement until I see it. For me the CG parts of hobbit generally worked fine in 48 it was the filmed bits that broke down.
 
Avatar-010.jpg

Zoe Saldana and Sam Worthington in Avatar. Photograph: 20th Century Fox


Avatar sequels: New Zealand scores three-movie deal worth NZ$500m ($413m).

Director James Cameron says the movies will be shot together and released between 2016 and 2018.

LINK>>>>>
 
As I was planning my trip to NZ was not happy to hear that Avatar might move away form shooing there do to a stupid 10% incentive debate... I was very happy when I was forwarded the news of an agreement been reached...

I guess in my NZ trip next year we'll have something more to look forward to... ;)
 
Avatar sequels: New Zealand scores three-movie deal worth NZ$500m ($413m).

Director James Cameron says the movies will be shot together and released between 2016 and 2018.
Click to expand...

Of course another way of saying this, albeit not the way that either the studio or the taxpayers in New Zealand want to hear it, is "The New Zealand government and taxpayers announced that they will be spending $100 million to make sure James Cameron and Lightstorm Entertainment make an even bigger profit on his Avatar sequels." That, to me, is a bit clearer and more honest.
 
M Most said:
Of course another way of saying this, albeit not the way that either the studio or the taxpayers in New Zealand want to hear it, is "The New Zealand government and taxpayers announced that they will be spending $100 million to make sure James Cameron and Lightstorm Entertainment make an even bigger profit on his Avatar sequels." That, to me, is a bit clearer and more honest.
Click to expand...


While true, in a way... It needs to be said that there is much more complexity in regards to accounting that just that, never mind the Thousands of jobs assured for the next few years... ;)
 
M Most said:
Of course another way of saying this, albeit not the way that either the studio or the taxpayers in New Zealand want to hear it, is "The New Zealand government and taxpayers announced that they will be spending $100 million to make sure James Cameron and Lightstorm Entertainment make an even bigger profit on his Avatar sequels." That, to me, is a bit clearer and more honest.
Click to expand...

and that won't be re-collected +some through spending/taxes from the production, not to mention the money injected in the economy that wouldn't otherwise be there? i'm not saying in anyway that i like the status quo of chasing incentives, but there is some wildly different math out there, some suggesting net losses and some suggesting net gains... i think there's a lot of miscalculation going on, there's no way this would have been shot there without this deal.
 
KETCH ROSSi said:
While true, in a way... It needs to be said that there is much more complexity in regards to accounting that just that, never mind the Thousands of jobs assured for the next few years... ;)
Click to expand...

"Thousands???????" I'd say more like a few hundred, and even that only for certain periods of time. It might be more if there were any significant amount of live action or location work involved, but these pictures are almost 95% CGI. There is very little live action, and essentially no location work.
 
they're doing a lot of studio work, mike... and i think we can agree this is an extremely convoluted situation with no clear exit strategy other than total loss for everyone involved.
 
M Most said:
"Thousands???????" I'd say more like a few hundred, and even that only for certain periods of time. It might be more if there were any significant amount of live action or location work involved, but these pictures are almost 95% CGI. There is very little live action, and essentially no location work.
Click to expand...

Yeah...no costumes..no hair and make-up people needed..and no-one to drive or feed those people on set.
And not even the smallest trickle down of tourism for people who want to see the film's location landscapes.

What's next economic incentives to companies to make video games.
 
Steve Das said:
Yeah...no costumes..no hair and make-up people needed..and no-one to drive or feed those people on set.
And not even the smallest trickle down of tourism for people who want to see the film's location landscapes.

What's next economic incentives to companies to make video games.
Click to expand...

Well, if you look at a project like Avatar honestly, it really is an exercise in visual effects and post production. Saying they "made" the first one in NZ is a bit of a misnomer if the live action performance capture is to be considered the "production" part of the project (that was all done in Playa Vista, California). What was done in NZ was a very minor amount of live shooting (the lab scenes) and a very large percentage of the animation/VFX work. That does employ a substantial number of people, and for a long period of time. But one needs to define "substantial". As I said, it might be a few hundred, but not more than that. If you look at it that way, it's likely to cost the government (i.e., the taxpayers) multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars for each job that's created. That's the dirty little secret of "incentives." And although NZ may claim that they're not participating in the race to the bottom based on the percentage amount of their rebate, they most certainly are if you look at the actual numbers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top