Ruairi Robinson
Well-known member
Hey, just curious about one thing. The S35mm size chip is a great advantage, and this is not remotely a complaint, but the one time it definitely will not help is with miniature photography - where narrow DOF really does not help at in creating the illusion of grand scale. Was wondering if this had been considered at all, and what the best workarounds would be...?
(couple of theoritical future projects which might require vast amounts of miniature sets, and I want to start thinking about it now...)
Cheers,
R.
(couple of theoritical future projects which might require vast amounts of miniature sets, and I want to start thinking about it now...)
Cheers,
R.
) miniature delivers the most bang for the buck. The scale we used was 1/12th, which hindered our ability to deliver credible DOF, but made for a smaller (read: cheaper) miniature. Miniatures are a fantastic way of gaining production value and one need only reference Peter Jackson's King Kong to see this ancient art form reach it's fullest digital fruition. But lack of skill in building, painting and shot planning will kill all your hard work. We also shot indoors in a low-ceiling room, which in hindsight was another strike against getting useable footage because it limited the type of instruments and the amount of raw candle-power that we could dump onto the surface. Had we shot the same miniature (which looked fine) outdoors and in 1/6th scale, we could have captured some usable footage. As it was, since the producer only had funds for a single-day shoot, coupled with the fact that we could not see the results until the film was processed, the day was a nearly complete waste of time and money with the possible exception that we (or at least I) learned so much from it. We also shot some HDV(!) footage, which delivered great DOF but was still unusable due to the fact that the GOP produced such bizarre motion artifacting that it could not be salvaged. In the final analysis, it really pays to experiment on a small scale (dollars, not measurements) and be very circumspect about what you really want to achieve with the shot. In my opinion, when a shot combines live-action and miniatures, you don't shoot for the amazing camera move to sell it. The scope of the shot and the reality you've created by combining the two scales is what you should rely on. The fancy camera move will telegraph "fake" and just cost you a fortune in post for little or no payoff unless you have Jacksonian resources, which let's face it, you probably don't have if you're considering miniatures in the first place. The shoot I was on also points out another failure, not of planning, as this shoot was extremely well-planned, but one of blind certainty. Obviously the plan we used was flawed at the outset because it was based largely on conjecture and while that did not have to be fatal to the experiment, it ended up being so because it was coupled to an overly ambitious shot list. You really have to throw assumtions out the window and really just slog through the trial and error. The level of math required can be decieving and one miscalculation can doom your work. The VFX supervisor's experience worked against him on this one because he trusted his assumptions with certainty and clearly in hindsight his certainty cost him the whole day. When you're shooting miniatures as a novice, a good strategy to use is experiment, experiment, experiment and assume your assumptions are wrong until proven right.
