How is Digital 3-D Different from Old 3-D Movies?
Film pioneer Georges Méliès used all sorts of camera trickery to create short films like his 1898 "Un Homme de Tête," where the character played by Méliès repeatedly removed his head and put each head on a table, or his 1902 "Le Voyage Dans la Lune" where he sent men to the pie-faced moon on a rocket shaped like a bullet. The camera captured every facial change, including lip and eye movements, and fed the data into software. The data was used to imbue each computer generated character with as much of the actor's real performance as possible, rather than relying entirely on post production animation using reference footage. Another big breakthrough came with "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest" (2006) where Bill Nighy was able to do his entire performance on set with other actors (albeit in a marker-covered body suit and with facial markers). It involves digitally capturing the motion of a live actor to create a 3-D computer model of the body and its motions. But performance capture has the potential to turn an actor into any sort of creature the story requires, without the need for hours in makeup and costuming, and with an entirely realistic appearance and movement.
In "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" (2011) and "Dawn of the Planet of the Apes" (2014) (also both starring Andy Serkis in mocap roles), performance capture was done outdoors on location using bodysuits with infrared LEDs and the helmet cameras. But mocap is a thing of the digital age that's bringing us much more realistic graphics and motion than anything that came before. Vass, Gergely. "Viewpoint Postproduction - Making Mattes." Computer Graphics World. Plus the immediate on-set graphics are bound to get better with time. Steinmetz, Katy. "Gollum's Getup: How 'The Hobbit's' Groundbreaking Technology Works." Time. Rudnyk, Marian. "Rotoscoping in the Modern Age." Animation World Magazine. However, youtube shorts rotoscoping can also be used to execute composited special effects in live-action movies. In live-action film, they allow for scenes that would be expensive, difficult, dangerous or impossible to film in a real-world setting. At its most basic, it is taking film footage of live actors or other objects in motion and tracing over it frame by frame to create an animation.
Max would place tracing paper over the other side of the glass panel and trace over the still image. The final, much more realistic results still come later after many, many man-hours of post-production, but it can be used to better visualize how a shot will really look and give direction accordingly. And as far as motion capture, one only has to look at the differences between Gollum in Peter Jackson's "The Lord of the Rings" films and Gollum in the first "Hobbit" movie. Dent, Steve. "What you need to know about motion capture." Engadget. Their later works included iconic characters Betty Boop and Popeye in the 1930s and the famously realistic (and expensive to produce) "Superman" short features in the 1940s. Rotoscoping was used to varying degrees in all of them to produce life-like character motion while still allowing the creativity and exaggeration that animation makes possible. McLaughlin, Dan. "A Rather Incomplete But Still Fascinating History of Animation - A Brief Prehistory." UCLA Animation. In some circles, rotoscoping of cartoons has a bad reputation as a cheat distinct from "real" animation drawn from scratch, and computer generated artistry has taken the place of a lot of the more old-school methods.
Post a Comment for "How is Digital 3-D Different from Old 3-D Movies?"