: Erik Max Francis <max@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: That's not quite what I meant in terms of "shaky-cam"
Yeah, I know, you meant "pretend the camera is being held by an amateur
with palsy and has no image stabilization feature". But deliberately
introducing gratuitous camera motions is the general category that
includes both. Both are fourth-wall-breaking, pretty much. In the
case of turbulence-cam, it behaves as if there's a physical object that
represents the viewpoint, which draws the attention to the fact that,
in fact, there isn't, or shouldn't be. Traditional shaky-cam draws
attention to the fact that, gosh, there is a cam and a camera operator
and a whole crew out of sight of what you're looking at.
Now, shaky-cam motions representing pilot head movement, or even shaky-cam
motions representing an actual physical object, like the plane one is
seemingly aboard, are less distracting, at least to me.
: My real complaint about _Battle 360_ wouldn't be the fake turbulence
: effects, it'd be the constant stream of digital noise that they put in
: a surprising number of shots -- it looks like a 3D grid of nonsense
: streaming past at all times, and it's in something like half of the
: episode -- including things like interviews with the actual
: participants. It adds nothing and is really distracting.
Yes, good point. I presumed it was showing actual latitude and
longitude; an arguably useful feature... except that it's so faint that
it's only a background annoyance instead of anything actually useful.
And as you point out, it seems to be done in shots where it makes
no sense.
Your boy's suit I designed to withstand enormous friction without
heating up or wearing out, a useful feature.
--- Edna Mode
Wayne Throop throopw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://sheol.org/throopw
|
