|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldeneye
Lorien
Jul 9 2015, 7:56pm
Post #1 of 11
(893 views)
Shortcut
|
|
GoPros used in the DOS barrel sequence
|
Can't Post
|
|
I saw a post on the Hobbit subreddit today, which mentioned that a number of fans disputed the fact that GoPros were used in some parts of the barrel sequence in DOS. Of course this was confirmed by Weta some time later, but I just wanted to know what those of you here thought. To me it was a bit distracting and obvious, but the shots didn't really last long enough to be a huge annoyance. There really is no comparison between a $80,000 RED Epic and a $300 GoPro...
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jul 9 2015, 8:12pm
Post #2 of 11
(840 views)
Shortcut
|
|
That was discussed here some time ago....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
... and had a (predictably!) mixed reception. I don't pretend to know about the technicalities of film cameras but my feeling is that if - as I understand it - the shots you're talking about are the ones where the audience is almost in the river with the barrels that really tells you my answer. Maybe the resolution isn't as good but those shots do have an immediacy that more polished ones might not. They make the action feel very real.
|
|
|
Mooseboy018
Grey Havens
Jul 9 2015, 8:48pm
Post #3 of 11
(818 views)
Shortcut
|
I like the idea behind the shots, but there's something about the quality that's a little jarring. I'd rather have them there though than not have them at all. They're kinda fun.
|
|
|
Lindele
Gondor
Jul 9 2015, 8:53pm
Post #4 of 11
(807 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I am wildly against the use of them
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The GoPro shots look horrible, are completely jarring and totally compromise the cinematic integrity of the world PJ has created in these six films. Imagine if he had taken a shot of one of your home movies from when you were a kid and spliced it into the film somewhere...that is essentially what we got.
I've sort of learned to get over it because there is nothing I can do now, but if there was one thing I could change about the trilogy, it would be the use of these cameras.
They should have either thrown away an Epic, or had an underwater rig that they used in the studio river, or something...anything but what they did. Terrible choice PJ, terrible choice.
|
|
|
Bofur01
Lorien
Jul 9 2015, 9:29pm
Post #5 of 11
(781 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Those were definitely shots that would've been better done with CG...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...for once :p
|
|
|
balbo biggins
Rohan
Jul 10 2015, 12:28am
Post #6 of 11
(730 views)
Shortcut
|
they certainly looked completely different to the surrounding shots, its very obvious now you look at it,
i assume those shots were not true 3d shots? so had to be done in post production, makes me think how many other shots were done like this , i always assumed every shot was meant to be filmed in true 3d, but now im thinking otherwise.
|
|
|
Elarie
Grey Havens
Jul 10 2015, 12:45am
Post #7 of 11
(730 views)
Shortcut
|
Putting the audience in the water really worked for me, and I didn't notice any quality problems, maybe because they just went by so fast.
__________________
Gold is the strife of kinsmen,
and fire of the flood-tide,
and the path of the serpent.
(Old Icelandic Fe rune poem)
|
|
|
Bofur01
Lorien
Jul 10 2015, 10:11am
Post #8 of 11
(625 views)
Shortcut
|
|
That would make no difference to the 2D image though...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And it's still really obvious in 2D that the quality dips...
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jul 10 2015, 11:17am
Post #9 of 11
(600 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes, but I think the point of that - well, it seems so to me anyway -
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
..is that if you're in fast flowing water you can't see as clearly. I think that's what makes those moments feel much more real.
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
Jul 10 2015, 11:17am
Post #10 of 11
(602 views)
Shortcut
|
|
OKAY! PJ has stated that he is Always
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
looking for ways to make Something, Anything more dangerous
so, putting US in the Water? was his way to include us in the
sequence.
Secondly, it was also been said that rendering 3 D water digitally
was a BRAND New thing that... they spent many hours
trying to get right.
So, eventually they decided a few Close-ups under water or
@ water level with a Go-Pro camera was the best choice.
Remember, they shot @ a Ration of about 800 to one?
Outdoors on the Pelorius River, Inside on their Water Carousel
& in their computers, too..
Sounds unrealistic? but that is what they did.
NOW, after going through that..They are Experts @ rendering
Turbulent Rushing water, but BEFORE?
No one had ever done that... on this scale.
www.charlie-art.biz
"What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"
(This post was edited by Bombadil on Jul 10 2015, 11:18am)
|
|
|
Fimbulfambi
The Shire
Jul 11 2015, 2:53pm
Post #11 of 11
(477 views)
Shortcut
|
...really doesn't fit in the film. I think that it was a bad editing decision to bring them in. The motive they're showing though are thrilling and cool to watch and "experience", it is simply the quality of the image which is annoying. The sequence would have worked well without those shots.
|
|
|
|
|
