The Lytro Still Camera

Continuing with the last few days about Lytro cameras, today is about the Lytro still camera.

I have used the Lytro Still camera and I have to say it is a great camera to use after you get used to how it works.

I mention this because I finished shooting some video last week and one of the cameras I used auto focused and locked onto a wood railing in the foreground of the subject I actually wanted in focus, so the main subject is a little fuzzy, and now there is no way to reproduce the moment nor fix the focus.

And I expect to be paid for the shoot anyway. I have issues with that piece of video but I do have other video, thankfully, that captured the whole scene.

I will make it work, but...

That's why you buy a Lytro. After-the-fact, fix-it-in post refocusing a scene.

That is a nice feature the future has brought to us.

Lytro 755 Immerge

I began yesterday writing about the 755 Immerge Lytro camera, and then I went off on a pessimistic rant.

'Sorry about that.

The new Lytro camera does have this interesting ability to capture the vector light rays in a scene in a 3 dimensional mathematically based form and house them in a computer server.

By doing so, film makers, and I believe anyone that needs to work with a 3D image, like a heart surgeon might with a heart, or a brain surgeon, or anyone working in a 3D space will be able to reach in with an editor and remove, quite nicely, anything the media resolves, and replace it with something different.

A flower pot in the scene might become a hair dryer, or a lamp, or a hovering bird.

It will lead to new design advances for architecture, and any construction medium, cellular to landscape and beyond.

Here is a link to TechCrunch, notice that it states the Lytro Immerge system is going to kill the green screen.

It appears that..

It appears that the future of film is going without the green screen:

Click here to follow to a new page...

The above link takes you to a page posted by American Movie company about the new Lytro Light Vector capture camera. The 755 Immerge.

Over the years one of the things I have heard over and over is this is the hot new tech or this is the new way or this is where we are going with technology.

I was part of a Master's Thesis once upon a time wherein the writer and I met online in a virtual world and we discussed the future of tech and virtual reality worlds in general.

I have surmised, and it seems more and more this vision is coming true... I surmised that we can make such an eye appealing world with technology that people are going to want to spend their lives in virtual reality instead of in the real world.

Call it the Matrix or whatever, as crimes become more intense, and terrorism visits us closer to home, and we become poorer, and the cycle of inflation kicks in, and we deplete the value of the dollar into 16 trillionths of a dollar of debt (the dollar bill divided by the current approximate debt of the United States), escapism is going to become more and more desirable...

People will be locked in VR worlds and the building they are living and viewing the VR in will be destroyed by some occurrence and they won't even know it happened, except a momentary burning feeling as they are blown apart or incinerated.

But I am going off on a tangent.

One of the things about new technology is that as something new comes on the scene something else seems to come along that becomes the Public's preferred way to go. And it isn't the early on predicted way.

This social phenomenon is powered by the media, trends and other factors like the economy, and so on.

For example, in the 50s cigarette commercials, one of the ads used to say "More Doctors prefer such and such cigarettes..."

And so Doctors smoked more cigarettes.

Media influences our decisions in very powerful ways that we don't even realize.

We have been lead to believe that smartphones, and tablets and you name it is going to save us.

Growing up I would have said to you that technology is going to save us but I think we are now realizing, with malicious hackers tearing apart our social fabric tied together by technology, terrorist driving herds of stampeding people across the globe, and other such societal events and eventualities, that we may not be so lucky. I think it is quite possible that we are not so much entering the biblical end times, or an apocalypse ( revelation ), but I think we are heading towards a kind of Fermi's Paradox, wherein a kind of house of cards has been built out of credit and technology. And it is going to crumble nearly as fast, if not faster, than we can rebuild, renew, and outrun the inevitable. What ever that may be.

If you have read Bootstrapping Complexity, you will understand the analogy I am about to make...

In Bootstrapping the writer likens humanity as a surfer on a wave, always riding a crest of a wave, and with certain right turns and wrong turns the surfer will either wipeout and have to start over or will get it right and ride the crest of the wave for a nice long ride. Such are the likes of Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet and the United States largest land owner.

For the rest of us, we end up in the house of cards crumbling, for the surfing analogy, we end up in the boil. The boil is the bottom of the wave where previous waves have crashed and filled the water with air. These areas are dangerous because a human doesn't float well in them and sinks.

So our society has became filled with debt and credit boil. Our society is so filled with such that it can't hold anything up. I hope I am wrong.

The glass is half full or half empty? I want to believe it is half full, but I believe it is so aerated that nothing can float on it except those lucky few somehow already above it all.

Recently in the headlines of the news the coal mining industry gave up and went bankrupt.

Ever it seems that old tech is replaced with new tech. But it is never quite so direct as that because of the numerous factors I wrote about above.

Back to the Lytro camera. The premise this is being sold on is that green screen technology, which is so embedded in Hollywood movie making, and makes incredibly eye appealing imagery, will somehow vanish. I suspect it will become part of the tool kit, and probably more useful to the gamers world than the movie world as anything in the movie world will be able to be readily re-created into a game world.

It remains to be seen if this camera and its tech will become desirable to film makers. It is like people saying the desktop computer is gone. Not yet, not so fast.

But it is happening increasingly fast.

I don't think the green screen will be so easily abandoned.

There is too much money to be made. Except it is more like counterfeit money than money backed by anything with real value.

As I keep heading towards making my first feature film...

As I keep heading towards making my first feature film I keep building aspects of it in my mind.

Questions haunt me all the time. things like, whats the opening sequence going to be? When I look at the first Star Wars movie it had so many things going for it. A great title, a re-working of the cowboy western into outer space, awesome, visionary, and visually interesting effects...

Imagine having a government space offense/defense program named after your movie.

The list goes on.

I see several opening scenes for my own movie in mind. When I think about it I recall plays like Silent Alarm, the opening for Star Wars and that incredibly huge Imperial Cruiser chasing down the Millenium Falcon, and how long that was on screen to purposefully pull us into that moment and give us a heightened sense of action.

I see other opening sequences as well, but none that grab like SW did.

I have spent much time over the last few years shooting photographs. And my background is in commercial and public broadcasting. I understand lookspace and how to compose a photograph and how to frame up a video shot.

But how do you get off on the right foot with a feature movie?

I am not sure yet but, because I am enamored of Stanley Kubrick, I intend to make a sunrise, sunset hyperlapse video clip. I have already made a hyperlapse clip of the community I live in and a neighboring town as well. Here is the link to view it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO4Z_Xe9fb4

One of the aspects I come away with this video is when I watch it I see the way the dynamic changes when I drive into the forest area going up Harris Hill. It is one thing to drive around on flat area, and to see the quick stops and starts at stop signs. It is entirely different to see what happens during the seconds from 2:13 to 2:40. And...it has just occurred to me what might be down to enhance a hyperlapse that I don't currently see in others on the net.

I will make one and show you what I mean, maybe, or maybe I will keep it a secret.

On the Watch list

Deb and Zach Snyder,

On the watch list, click this to visit the link.

Take 751

When I started in media, which was when I was in 4th grade, we had Bell and Howell film projectors, and film strips and tape recorders and ...

That isn't what I am writing about today. Today I am going to write a little comparison between Stanley Kubrick and Clint Eastwood, that has little or no academic verification. What I am about to write is what I can tell having watched informative videos of Stanley Kubrick and having read somewhere about Clint Eastwood and comparing the two different styles of director and production styles.

I was looking today online at a production company that had called me a few years ago but I was unable to help them out. Today I believe the same company was involved in making the Revenant. I recently read a story about the director for the Revenant which brings me to one of my past experiences and a comparison to Mr. Eastwood's productions.

I used to be a radio announcer. I used to also listen to my recordings of myself speaking so I could become better at it.

One day I made an ad for the station. I had a pretty good voice recording on the first take, and another around the 4th take, and then another out around take 75.

Here is the question, what are you prepared to put up with?

The director on the Revenant, according to the story I read, put his actors through a lot of hard work to get what he wanted. I suspect that meant a lot of takes as well.

Stanley Kubrick also did this. 80 takes wasn't unusual. I also believe Alfred Hitchcock did this.

Clint Eastwood, Malpaso Productions, is known for going out and getting a film done in 3 weeks. I suspect that Malpaso probably does a lot of prep work first, and a fair number of rehearsals as well, and then with everyone familiar with the work to be done, they go and knock it out fairly quickly.

So three weeks is actual production time with a lot of pre-preparation work before hand. Like a painter painting a room in a few hours but spending two or three days prepping the room so it will only take a few hours.

So... having been there, so to speak, because I have put myself through take 700* to get the best take, what are you prepared to do to get the take that is going to work for your film?

* I've never done 700 takes but my point is it can take a lot of takes to get the keeper.

The making of:

There are books and TV shows out there about the making of certain motion pictures.

Here is a link to the Making of Star Wars:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Making-Star-Wars-Definitive/dp/0345494768

Here is a link to Youtube video that features the making of Star Wars:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSuDjjlIPak

There are others. Here is the making of 2001: A Space Odyssey

http://www.amazon.com/The-Making-Stanley-Kubricks-2001/dp/3836559544

Please keep in mind that 2001 was written by Arthur C. Clarke, who also came up with the concept of the satellite. He did not make the movie.

And, I haven't researched this but, I remember reading somewhere that George Lucas wasn't a very good writer.

I post these thoughts and links because I think making a movie is similar to making any good piece of art or anything in general. Do a lot of preparation and research. You can wing it and create something quickly, there are plenty of people who do, but I also think your results will vary according to how skilled you already are and how good the subject is and whether or not your audience enjoys your work.

Call it "ten thousand hours." There is more to it than that, being at the right place at the right time. with a receptive audience has a lot to do with how well anything goes over. Read Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers for more on this.

Frank Lloyd Wright is known to have waited until the last moment before designing great pieces of architecture and other works. I imagine he had plenty of experience before making short work of great architecture designs.

What I am pointing out is that I think it is important to read and learn as much as possible about any endeavor you attempt. And then properly prepare, like a great 10 course meal.

I think you may have a better idea about how to proceed if you are better prepared.

Addiction

A link to a New York Times article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/09/opinion/when-addiction-has-a-white-face.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

For what its worth:

Follow this and read it:

http://www.wired.com/2015/05/inside-ilm/

One of the most important things you can do...

If you are serious about making a movie, digital video, or film...

Go to school for it.

In the United States the, THE film school is at USC, the University of Southern California Cinematic Studies school, Here is the link to the Stark School of Cinematic Studies:

http://cinema.usc.edu/producing/index.cfm

Good luck.

I personally am going to download the PDF files that have the course sylabi available.

By doing this I will be able to read the recommended course books and educate myself about that particular field of Motion Picture making.

The problem is, there isn't a syllabus available for every course BECAUSE:
Many of the courses are hands on and taught by industry professionals. And often the courses do not have a syllabus available because of an agreement by the school and the individual teaching the course. Most of the teachers are working in the industry, and come to the school one day or night per week to teach a course.

Today I went to my local library and took out a book on making a movie, "The complete guide to making a movie - low budget and beyond." By Lorene Wales, reviewed positively by Kritie Stahl, the producer and owner of Whitestone pictures.

Here is a link to a Whitestone online story:

http://whitestonemp.com/film/john-henry-and-the-railroad/

-CB

Listening to your second audio track on a DVD

A couple weeks ago I was playing with the remote and happened to discover the secondary audio available on the SG-1 DVD I had from the library.

As I clicked the audio select button, I came in just as the people were talking about the new SG-1 opening, and that they used a Frazier lens to get the incredible depth of field, which allowed them to put the camera almost on the Stargate, shoot at an angle, and keep the whole curve of the Stargate in focus up to several feet away.

I borrowed the DVD again from the library just to pick up on that little piece of information and was lead to this website talking about the Frazier lens system:

http://petapixel.com/2011/04/19/frazier-ultimate-lens-shows-everything-in-focus-with-massive-depth-of-field/

There is a nice video on that page that shows you how that lens system works.

From there I happen to find another link into the camera company that so many movies are shot with, Panavision:

http://www.panavision.com/products/macro-and-specialty-lenses

And yesterday I inquired about having the garage in back of our house blown up via CGI. I went to http://www.revelpix.com/VideoProduction and then contacted the owner. He was referred by a friend as pretty good with CGI. His reply was it would be about $1500 dollars to create the scene I want with some give or take, depending on how long the segment is and how realistic I need it to be.

The rule of thumb on such is to mark it up by at least 10 percent. So in my head, if I were to budget for this shot, I'd price this out at $2,000. Better to have the extra cushion than to not have it.

Music, no music.

It isn't so much about music.

In my Radio and Television class my professor used to tell us to turn off the sound.

Do it.

The lesson here is that, and you may hear this term someday, video follows audio.

Turn off the sound, watch the movie. It makes almost no sense.

But...

Turn off the picture and turn the sound back on...

You can listen to a movie, or ad or whatever, and fairly well make out what is going on. You have dialogue, and you have the music. We have all been trained to eerie sounds, tense music, happy sounds, sad and so on.

Music brings a lot to the picture.

Recently the guy who wrote the song Wild Thing was interviewed on NPR. He was talking and then in the middle of the song he said listen, and the song stops for a few moments, he then says that's one of the best parts of the song, because there isn't any sound there.

In graphic art, the correlation is negative space.

Stop looking at your cell phone if you have the TV on in the room. Or go turn it off and pay attention to your cell phone. Don't do both.