View Single Post
Old June 17 2013, 01:27 PM   #47
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Vintage FX: Star Trek vs Lost in Space

trevanian wrote: View Post
Christopher wrote: View Post
ssosmcin wrote: View Post
However, for the most part, Eagles in space were composite shots. I don't have an image to put up, but if you get an opportunity to pop in an episode, space shots of Eagles and other crafts usually are in a part of the screen with no stars. There could be a starless path or the bottom third, say, of the screen would have no stars and the ship would be in that area. This way no stars would show through the shadowed portions of the models.
That sounds like the same kind of in-camera compositing done by Filmation's Space Academy. Rather than using an optical printer and mattes to combine separate strips of film, which would result in loss of resolution, they'd film one image element, then rewind the exposed film in the camera, then double-expose the next element onto the same length of film, and so on until they had a final, first-generation composite shot. They used the same technique of leaving gaps in the starfield for the ships flying through the frame.

So that's not really the same as the bluescreen process ST used, because there are no mattes involved -- otherwise you wouldn't need the gap in the starscape to avoid image bleedthrough, since that's what the mattes are for. Unless what you're saying is that they created mattes using pure light/shadow contrast rather than a bluescreen, in which case the shadowed portions of the ship would just be missing from the image. That seems unlikely, though.
Yeah, the wind back and double-expose in camera is how nearly all of 1999's work was done. If you look at some of ALIEN, the same thing was done there (there is a different quality of black to the space the ship passes through than the rest of frame in some shots as well.) The 'sophisticated grid' work they talked about on ALIEN was the same grid they used in 1999 to make sure the ship wasn't overlapping anything.

It was done far more expertly in MOONRAKER, which has very few opticals, and has got one shot with about 45 passes in-camera.
trevanian wrote: View Post
The articles on ALIEN kept talking about tons of roto work for the ship shots, but I think that was only done for a few shots, with the rest DXed.
I just dug up one of them that mentions the grid and the rotoscoping used on Alien. From Starlog #27, interview with Brian Johnson and Nick Allder on Alien, page 67:

Starlog 27 wrote:
The model of the Nostromo is surrounded
by a black cyclorama. [Allder] "Our camera system
incorporates a very sophisticated grid system
so we can actually do multiple exposures.
This technique, which records only on the
orginal negative, will give us much better
quality than traveling mattes or blue-screen
backing shots. When using the grid we take
very careful records of what areas of the
frame have been exposed in each pass
through the camera. Then we can rewind and
overlay another exposure in what* we know to
be a clear piece of film.

"We can get by with a lot of shots in which
a star field isn't necessary, or is in a different
area of the frame. Where the ship must cross
a star field, however, we have rotoscoped
mattes. Rotoscoping involves taking a se-
quence frame by frame, making line draw-
ings, hand-painting the black mattes, then
shooting that in high-contrast to actually
create our matte and eventual effect. It's the
only time we use an optical printer."
That seems to confirm, which is pretty obvious in the film, that rotoscoping was unnecessary in "a lot of shots".
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote