There is some method for that but I don't remember exactly how it's done. I suppose they drop every fifth frame.
in some situations, simply playing 30p back at 24p allows a more languid, fluid shot. Certainly generic shots can be slowed down ~20% without the viewer noticing.
I have a friend who shots for video stock libraries, most of his work is shot at 30p, then slowed to 24p.
I am sure we have all seen the slightly slowed down action shots. Can look very nice.
I'm not sure that's a compliment to the iPhone so much as it is showing lack of care/professionalism in making the movie.
Yep or a publicity thing. 250 million iOS users is a big audience to try and appeal to. I'd have said the shot they made on the iPhone was at 1:05, the other shots seem a lot sharper as they were probably shot on 4K film cameras. Also, phone cameras have rolling shutter and focusing issues so they'd only be able to use it for fixed camera shots.
But I'm not sure how they can shoot a scene at 720p and be able to show it in a theatre. There's a chance they filmed some of the actors for CGI with the camera vertical but the compression artifacts would make keying unnecessarily more problematic.
If there was no other option, it's fair enough but I highly doubt there was no other option on a big production like this.
I'm not sure that's a compliment to the iPhone so much as it is showing lack of care/professionalism in making the movie. But if it was done for artistic effect I suppose that would be ok.
After a movie shoot entirely with an iPhone won best short at Berlin International Film Festival, unHollyWood woke up.
Now cell phones are contributing for art?
: Times are changing.
: Indeed!
Cellphones are not just "contributing for (sic) art", but are changing it. Apps like Instagram are not pure photography apps. They are allowing the user to modify it. The result is a highly distorted version of what is recorded.
I'm not sure that's a compliment to the iPhone so much as it is showing lack of care/professionalism in making the movie. But if it was done for artistic effect I suppose that would be ok.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
If there was no other option, it's fair enough but I highly doubt there was no other option on a big production like this.
You have to wonder, what can an iPhone shoot that a Red One could not, and better?
You have to wonder, what can an iPhone shoot that a Red One could not, and better?
iPhone affixed to a remote controlled model helicopter could possibly get some shots that larger traditional cameras may not be able to do as well. Also not as much of a financial loss if it crashes.
I'm waiting for that Internet marketing company to post their usual false flag like, "I'm a Hollywood cinematographer with over 10 years of using iPhones to make movies and after the disappointing launch of the iPhone 4S (I heard nobody wants to buy it), I decided to try the Samsung™ Galaxy™ S℠ II®. Boy was I glad I did. Mr. Spielberg saw the results and said I could keep my job and that he wouldn't blacklist me from Hollywood. I'm sure you all think I'm making this up, but I've put up my website at facebook.com/samsungmobile. Oh wait, did I say samsungmobile? I mean facebook.com/not-affiliated-with-samsungmobile. Oh and don't ask me to post my name or filmography because, you know, I'm just some anonymous handle who signed up two days ago to post this and you'll never see me again."
iPhone affixed to a remote controlled model helicopter could possibly get some shots that larger traditional cameras may not be able to do as well. Also not as much of a financial loss if it crashes.
You can drop an iphone 13,500 ft from a plane, crack the screen, but still be able to sync it up and download your footage. Try dropping a RED ONE out of a plane.
I would find it a little strange to have a movie that will likely be digital 4K and shoot parts in 720p. I can see leaving the iPhone shots in a throwaway trailer, but I would be surprised if they were left in the final film.
The 1-second shot of Captain America standing behind Iron Man at 1:05 looks like it has less sharpness and dynamic range than most of the other shots. Could have been an iPhone shot.
Also, it's an unusually low angle, looking up at Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans. That might have required a lengthy setup if the crew had needed to move the main camera nearly to the floor. So, instead, the director might have decided to save time (and time equals money in film production) by shooting it on an iPhone on an improvised rig. It'll be interesting to see where and why the iPhone was used.
he now says he simply used an iphone to produce video that looked like it came from a cell phone
"McGarvey has clarified with the International Business Times that he took "one shot in 'The Avengers' movie on an iPhone 4." McGarvey explains that the shot "was meant to be a cell phone user's image," and "it is untrue that an iPhone was used to photograph any [full-length] scenes." He says the film was shot using an Arri Alexa digital camera."
he now says he simply used an iphone to produce video that looked like it came from a cell phone
"McGarvey has clarified with the International Business Times that he took "one shot in 'The Avengers' movie on an iPhone 4." McGarvey explains that the shot "was meant to be a cell phone user's image," and "it is untrue that an iPhone was used to photograph any [full-length] scenes." He says the film was shot using an Arri Alexa digital camera."
You can drop an iphone 13,500 ft from a plane, crack the screen, but still be able to sync it up and download your footage. Try dropping a RED ONE out of a plane.
With a big enough budget you can drop almost anything out of plane. Regardless, military parachute riggers have been dropping equipment out of the sky for years weighing tons.
Seems fair, but can we petition for Batman to defect to the Marvel universe so he doesn't have to be surrounded by complete and utter garbage? He is the only thing keeping DC relevant anymore.
Comments
There is some method for that but I don't remember exactly how it's done. I suppose they drop every fifth frame.
in some situations, simply playing 30p back at 24p allows a more languid, fluid shot. Certainly generic shots can be slowed down ~20% without the viewer noticing.
I have a friend who shots for video stock libraries, most of his work is shot at 30p, then slowed to 24p.
I am sure we have all seen the slightly slowed down action shots. Can look very nice.
I'm not sure that's a compliment to the iPhone so much as it is showing lack of care/professionalism in making the movie.
Yep or a publicity thing. 250 million iOS users is a big audience to try and appeal to. I'd have said the shot they made on the iPhone was at 1:05, the other shots seem a lot sharper as they were probably shot on 4K film cameras. Also, phone cameras have rolling shutter and focusing issues so they'd only be able to use it for fixed camera shots.
But I'm not sure how they can shoot a scene at 720p and be able to show it in a theatre. There's a chance they filmed some of the actors for CGI with the camera vertical but the compression artifacts would make keying unnecessarily more problematic.
If there was no other option, it's fair enough but I highly doubt there was no other option on a big production like this.
http://www.iftn.ie/news/?act1=record...chnews&force=1
The low to the floor shot of walking feet.
They've got to be the shots of the Hulk. They are the only low-res shots in the trailer.
I'm not sure that's a compliment to the iPhone so much as it is showing lack of care/professionalism in making the movie. But if it was done for artistic effect I suppose that would be ok.
Not many cinematography will look like Baraka.
After a movie shoot entirely with an iPhone won best short at Berlin International Film Festival, unHollyWood woke up.
Now cell phones are contributing for art?
Cellphones are not just "contributing for (sic) art", but are changing it. Apps like Instagram are not pure photography apps. They are allowing the user to modify it. The result is a highly distorted version of what is recorded.
I'm not sure that's a compliment to the iPhone so much as it is showing lack of care/professionalism in making the movie. But if it was done for artistic effect I suppose that would be ok.
If there was no other option, it's fair enough but I highly doubt there was no other option on a big production like this.
You have to wonder, what can an iPhone shoot that a Red One could not, and better?
really confused....
You have to wonder, what can an iPhone shoot that a Red One could not, and better?
iPhone affixed to a remote controlled model helicopter could possibly get some shots that larger traditional cameras may not be able to do as well. Also not as much of a financial loss if it crashes.
iPhone affixed to a remote controlled model helicopter could possibly get some shots that larger traditional cameras may not be able to do as well. Also not as much of a financial loss if it crashes.
You can drop an iphone 13,500 ft from a plane, crack the screen, but still be able to sync it up and download your footage. Try dropping a RED ONE out of a plane.
[...] McGarvey's previous films include relatively low-budget dramas like 'Atonement,' 'Charlotte's Web' and 'The World Trade Center.' [...]
"World Trade Center" had a budget of $63 million. Most big-time Hollywood movies have budgets in the range of $40 million - $100 million nowadays.
Here's the IMdB entry for World Trade Center: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0469641/
Also, it's an unusually low angle, looking up at Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans. That might have required a lengthy setup if the crew had needed to move the main camera nearly to the floor. So, instead, the director might have decided to save time (and time equals money in film production) by shooting it on an iPhone on an improvised rig. It'll be interesting to see where and why the iPhone was used.
"McGarvey has clarified with the International Business Times that he took "one shot in 'The Avengers' movie on an iPhone 4." McGarvey explains that the shot "was meant to be a cell phone user's image," and "it is untrue that an iPhone was used to photograph any [full-length] scenes." He says the film was shot using an Arri Alexa digital camera."
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/2354...s-mcgarvey.htm
he now says he simply used an iphone to produce video that looked like it came from a cell phone
"McGarvey has clarified with the International Business Times that he took "one shot in 'The Avengers' movie on an iPhone 4." McGarvey explains that the shot "was meant to be a cell phone user's image," and "it is untrue that an iPhone was used to photograph any [full-length] scenes." He says the film was shot using an Arri Alexa digital camera."
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/2354...s-mcgarvey.htm
Thanks, so many people in their fanboi tunnel vision are ready to equate iPhone4 for a 4K camera.
You can drop an iphone 13,500 ft from a plane, crack the screen, but still be able to sync it up and download your footage. Try dropping a RED ONE out of a plane.
With a big enough budget you can drop almost anything out of plane. Regardless, military parachute riggers have been dropping equipment out of the sky for years weighing tons.
Apple and Marvel -a dream team.
D.C. - made for Droid.
Seems fair, but can we petition for Batman to defect to the Marvel universe so he doesn't have to be surrounded by complete and utter garbage? He is the only thing keeping DC relevant anymore.
Batman can come, but Flash is banned!