Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by RobertScorpio, Aug 6, 2009.
Well, we could always do the Robert Wise did and smear Vaseline on the screen.
Uh..because we want to. Its all in good fun and is in no way being done to belittle what they did. But when you've seen an episode, oh, 100+ times, finding these matt-paintings or zippers or what other tricks they did, is fun...F U N...fun.
Lighten up, don't be so....ahem...destructive!
There are zippers on the engineering walls?
see?? Now I have to go back and look for zippers in the walls..
My favorite, by far, comes from TNG. Part-two of Unification when you can see the reflecton of the camera man on that crystal like thing on the Romulan Senator's desk...THAT was cool...
I don't mind being ABLE to make them out, I just don't need to see them any clearer than I can now is all.
How dare you make fun of my lazy wording???
Here's another thing I try to ignore, camera shadow in the frame during location work. Shore Leave, Friday's Child, Private little War, OMG it's everywhere!!!
We were watching DOOMSDAY and saw some shadow there too.
Another thing I don't like? Scuffed up hallways. There's one episode where they walk down this hallway and its all scuffed up. Or finger-prints on doors..i hate that!
Who says the floors aren't scuffed by the 'ship crew' as opposed to the film crew? Heck Uhura's door 'sticks, so ships get broken and need to be fixed and get scuffed and need to be cleaned.
It doesn't matter to me how the scuff marks got there..having been in the military, and serving on many a/c's, I expect CLEAN floors. Its called XO happy hour; so actually SPOCK is at fault here! They all report to him.
Maybe they've "evolved beyond that."
Hmmmm...wasn't that dust that Kirk was looking for in the engineering room in KHAN. Maybe Kirk got hammered for having a dirty ship and learned his lesson..or..being an admiral went to his head!!!
Rob, that avi is awesome.
thanks..though I have since switched to DAN FOUTS for just a bit!!!
Where? Or are you talking about the blurriness caused by the use of the split diopter?
As to the matte painted people in TMP, sheesh, I noticed that on VHS. Where've your eyeballs been?
Also, just to be correct, the image used to extend the corridor outside Engineering is not a matte painting. A matte painting is a post production effect that requires a matte (hence the name). What you're looking at is probably a TRANSLITE, which is backlit artwork, or, at the very least, a painted set extension. As it's shot live on the set, it's not a matte.
The painted people have been obvious since before day one, newsweek or time ran a still of that shot pre-release and it was obvious there, but it was seriously obvious in the theatre, and the shot design doesn't hide it ... you've got that booth on the left and the tram on the right and life in the foreground, so the dead painted area draws the eye BECAUSE it is dead.
Well..maybe for you. And maybe this stuff was known a long time ago at the dawn of the dinosaurs..but not for me. Consider me a late bloomer. I didn't notice it until just about two weeks ago and I've been showing everyone how 'smart' i am. Now here you come along telling me this is old stuff..you are ruining the image my friends have of me; all knowing..all wise!! STOP IT!!!
Just kidding..seriously..I never saw this stuff until now so that is why its fun to do. And as I said before, its all done in total respect of the movie making process and not mean to make fun of anyone...
Have mercy DS, kids don't know this stuff. "Matte" covers everything that FX Peeps used to do, doncha know?
Well, scenic artists aren't fx people (vfx or physical/practical effects), so ...
Given how much discussion of VFX there is on this board, maybe a "VFX And What Ain't 101" thread would be a good idea. Then everyone would know the difference between rear projection, front projection, IntroVision, Zoptic, hanging miniatures, glass shots, matte shots, repeat-pass motion control elements, go motion, stop motion, sodium vapour process, etc., and what a translite, forced perspective set, cyclorama, etc. is, too.
The again, I ain't writing all those descriptions!
Let them eat Google.
Yeah...unfortunately, being the internet, lots of the Googled results are of dubious merit. I recently had to revise a nearly incomprehensible and inaccurate description on IntroVision on Wikipedia, which read like someone was copying information from an article but didn't really understand what they were reading. Me, I looked up the patent and used that as a primary reference!
Separate names with a comma.