Resub// Industrial Light & Magic.

 IL&M is probably the greatest VFX company in existence today. Founded originally by George Lucas in 1975, Industrial light and magic have done the special effects for over 300 motion pictures. Including all of the Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Back to the Future and Jurassic Park series.

Almost certainly one of the greatest special effects teams in existence and the movies I have referenced really do prove this. The Star Wars series for example. Despite the incessant slandering of the prequel trilogy, I personally, love them. I mean, why wouldn't you ? Why doesn't anyone want to see more lightsaber battles and full scale alien wars ? its beyond me, but the point is that the special effects in all of the star wars films were outstanding. Even more so in the prequel trilogy as the advancement of VFX technology has vastly increased since the 70s and 80s.

Whats most impressive about the company is that since the 70s they have managed to keep a consistent quality of VFX. This is pretty incredible since the special effects in Star Wars and Indiana Jones still look really good against todays standards, which just proves to me that special effects don't have to look shit, but sadly thats the way it appears to be going these days.

The two images I have selected above are from The Pirates of the Caribbean. As you can see before Light and Magic came in, Bill Nighy's make up looks like an accident. However once Light & Magic got involved you can see that all those little dots are tracking markers used to make sure that the model (middle image) fits perfectly onto Nighy's face so that his facial expressions can be replicated in the model so that it looks as if he actually has an octopus on his face.

This is something that I need to take into consideration when doing my own VFX pieces  Poor tracking marker set up will result in a dodgy converge between the footage and the model. If this happens, even once, the whole ruse of 'special effects' is ruined and we see it for what it is. Great special effects are the ones which make you wonder if it was special effects or was it real.

Resub// Green Screen Keying Tutorial

Learning about pulling off a clean key is a really important skill needed in the VFX module because if it is done even slightly wrong it ruins the whole illusion of the green screen.

First we imported some footage into AE first we need to so separate the actor from the background then use the screen colour ink dropper to remove the green screen.

Use a screen blur for a smoother edge (use a value of 3)

Change the black and white values to 58 for the black and 75 for the white, this will equalise the black and white for a cleaner key.

Make sure the white background is a pure white, any grey
will lessen the quality of the key.

Creating a Simple choker will also tighten up the edges of the key. Finally we need to separate the actor from the background completely.

Actor Separated from background.

Make a Junk Matte and this will remove all unnecessary background colour. Draw a wide ring around the actor to make account for any extreme movement they might make. 

Resub// Blend Shapes

Today we learnt about blend shapes and how they are used in Maya. Blend shapes all you to deform multiple shapes so that you have a smooth blend between movements. Such as when someone opens their mouth their cheeks recede inwards because the skin stretches.

Blend shapes are very useful for making the movements of characters more realistic. The above image is a demonstration to how they work. I made 4 cubes, then i deformed each one in a certain way, front, top and right. I then selected them all, making sure the first (master) was the last selected. Then i went into the animation menu and selected blend shapes. Now when I select the the blend shape value on the right tool bar the master cube deforms to the other cubes on the right.

Resub//Avatar's Green Screen.

I saw this video earlier when looking up some more VFX processes and companies and I found the techniques used in Avatar. Pretty easy if you ask me, nothing there is massively difficult in terms of VFX programming. I'm pretty bad at it and I think I could do this.

Theres nothing massively wrong with this, its just really simple. I know anything is simple when you know how to do it, but it wouldn't take long to teach this. This can teach me that even simple animatics can look really good if you pay attention to the smaller things involved. Such as keying properly, and making sure the green screen has no creases or folds.

Another very simple fly by animation but in this case it shows how the model (the gunship) can be completely separated from the background and applied to any other background which could be anything the designer wishes. However to make it look realistic it must be the correct angle in relation to the background otherwise its just doesn't look real. Adding the shadow and rotar blade noises, maybe  small bird tweets and a slight breeze to make sure all the elements of the real world are simulated. 

This is the thrid game of thrones vlog about their filming in Iceland. Now the reason I watched this in the first place was because it said 'in Iceland', this immediately interested me as I love on location shoots. They mention things like the blizzards and icicles in the characters beards were all real and very little was green screened. This doesn't have a lot of VFX relevance but if through the development of VFX technology we acquire the ability to simulate these sort of biomes correctly then we should still film it on location. An amazing set with an amazing VFX team could create a master piece which shows the both can work side by side in harmony without one trying to out do the other. But as long as the 'cheaper' option is always the best I can't see it turning out that way unless we value both as separate  art forms but combine to make a better one.

Resub// Talking to Green Screens & Weta

Weta are a Kiwi production  company which did a lot of the special effects on the Hobbit, bellow I have written about their use of the green screen in both good and bad ways. But I must say that the Hobbit was a fantastic film, very well put together, and immensely enjoyable. Having said that I would have done certain things differently, and used less green screen.

I watched a video recently which is a demonstration of how the hobbit was assembled with all its CGI and special effects, before it is finally shown in its finished format, in the cinema. It shows how a lot of the sets and backgrounds in the hobbit, as well as most of the characters, are CG which, especially to Sir Ian MacKellen, was pretty annoying.

This shows one of the initial (very long) scenes in Bilbo's house. The above image shows the basic set, and the last one shows the final product. Due to the heavy use of the green screen we end up with a green house with (almost) everything that is in it is made of green screen. 

A problem starts to show itself when we look at the middle image. The middle image is a screen grab I managed to get showing the transition between green and the finished product. It shows Gandalf talking a glass of something out of the hand of the dwarf standing on his left, what we don't see in the cinema is that the dwarf isn't actually there. The glass of cherry, or whatever, is placed on a green screen table which mirrors the height of the dwarf 'standing there'

Now i'm not an actor, but in my opinion it must be pretty weird and disconcerting that instead of trying to immerse yourself in the world of the Hobbit, with all its finery and medieval decor, you are forced to act and react to in a green house, in a green room, with a green table, and a phantom like glass of cherry appearing on said green table, next to you. 

       This too me seems altogether foolish and building a world out of green screen is never going to bring the best out of your actors. You need to recreate the world that they are living in otherwise they're just an idiot in a costume. As the director I would also make sure green screen was only used when absolutely necessary. Otherwise theres just too much green.

I think this is a very relevant point to bring up regarding my scene. The actor needs to react, in time, and with the correct emotion to convince us that they are not a green screen imagination.

Obviously scenes like, the troll scene, the trolls had to be digitally created, because costumes of that much scale and detail wouldn't look anywhere near is a good. The costumes would also be cumbersome and dangerous if they were heavy. However the fire we see in the second image surely could have been a real fire ? Maybe fire doesn't look fantastic on film as it could be too much light for the camera to deal with, but surely some grading and tweaking of the footage could sort that out. It would have probably been a lot cheaper as well to have a real fire instead of 30 odd, high wattage, imitation fire-lights.

What i'm trying to say is that whether it is props or actors. 'Real' actors are going to always find a lot of trouble acting as well with the presence of green screen at every turn. We cannot stop the immense use of green screen, as it allows our imagination to run amok without the limitations of reality. However we must remember that too much green screen can ruin a movie and make it especially hard to act if the amount of physical props and objects are at a minimum. 

In an interview with 'Contact Music' Sir Ian MaKellen said that the enormity of imagined characters and sets eventually bought him to tears.

"In order to shoot the dwarves and a large Gandalf, we couldn't be in the same set. All I had for company was 13 photographs of the dwarves on top of stands with little lights – whoever's talking flashes up. Pretending you're with 13 other people when you're on your own, it stretches your technical ability to the absolute limits. I cried, actually. I cried. Then I said out loud, ‘This is not why I became an actor'. Unfortunately the microphone was on and the whole studio heard."

- Sir Ian MaKellen

Resub// The History of Chroma Key

I stumbled across a really interesting video on YouTube about the history of Chroma keying, it was very informative about how green screening came to be. Initially when this technique was developed it was called a travelling map which would mean that a static image, like the one of the aeroplane below, and then layering it onto a moving image to give the appearance that the plane was flying.

It looks almost ridiculous now but for the 1930s this was pretty good. The technique was pioneered by Linwood Dunn, who was sort of the godfather of special/visual effects as he had a hand in inventing them himself. He worked on Citizen Kane and the original King Kong.

Larry Butler, another grandfather of special effects, invented a way of compositing images with a blue screen. 

Butler did this by splitting up the image into RED, GREEN and BLUE each with their own respective postive and negative cuts, and he the used the GREEN positive and the BLUE negative to form a solid matte which then could be composited onto blue screen footage. 

Even with today's standards the compositing in this film is pretty good. Its not a perfect key but I imagine it would have been far more difficult without editing software, so in this respect its a really good achievement. You can almost see the footage of the horse riding on the ground. but who images a flying horse without moving its legs, it would just look stupid. This was also how they got some of their flying carpet effects which I think is really well done even BY today's standards.

But as technology improved and we got smarter it was realised that green screens were better for filmmaking that blue screens. Even though blue screens were better for the skin tones of people, due to needing less light, capturing more detail and having a better luminosity than blue, green screens became the predominant screen used in the motion picture industries. 

The two images above show that iconic scene in the matrix where Trinity jumps into that pose and the camera freezes. The first image illustrates that when the camera circles her, all of the background that you have seen was composited into the shot where she's jumping. This could not have been done with blue screen as it wouldnt have picked up all the detail in the environment as green screen does

However for my piece it might be wise to consider using blue screen instead of green screen to see if the results I get are any different to the green screen. This information I have gained by watching the video has given me a greater understanding and respect for these special effects. I still maintain that when used poorly can ruin a film but in 'The Matrix's case it only enhanced our film viewing experience by making the world that bit more fantastic.

Resub// The Hobbit & 48fps

The Hobbit, directed by Peter Jackson, was the first film to use pioneering filming techniques, with the evolution to shooting in 48fps. This new way of filming doubles the number of frames seen every second by the view to give a much smoother, clearer picture. The reason I mention this is particularly to do with Gollum and how he has evolved, digitally, to be a much more detailed version than shown in Lord of the Rings. This is a huge leap forward for the filmmakers out there but perhaps more important for the people designing and creating the visual effects.

Gollums got better looking since LOTR

and weirder..

The blue suit is keyed out in after effects and the small
black squares are tracking points so Gollum moves
with Andy Serkis.

The people on the visual effects teams and visual effects companies will now, more than ever, be able to create characters from modelling softwares and insert them seamlessly into the footage. However, if possible, a real actor should be used and CGI applied to the actor and his/her costume to enhance it in terms of colour and complexity. But in this case with Gollum, he is too deformed and weird to be acted with a costume, so the brilliant Andy Serkis, acts it out in a special suit with tracking markers on it so Gollum's skin colour/texture, eyes and facial animations can be added in after effects afterwards.

As you can see from the pictures of Gollum above the detail has dramatically improved since LOTR. The skin looks identical to that of a human, just really dirty, bruised and scarred. Every cut and bruise has been added to make him that bit more real and the colour of his skin matches the way a persons skin is in terms of how there are many different colours that comprise the pigment of our skin. In Gollum's case though its more grey and pale than a normal skin colour of a caucasian.

In the above image it is clear too see by the bottom panel how much better the CGI is in Hobbit Gollum than in LOTR Gollum. The skin is much darker and his facial animations are much smoother and more precise. This is due too the 48fps providing more frames to convey the images, and due too the tracking spots on Serkis' face. In the above image he has no tracking marks on his face which is why Gollum's facial animations aren't as good quality in LOTR because they didn't have as many tracking points to record Gollum's emotions and expressions.

In my sequence I can take some of these techniques and apply the rules they use to create a much more convincing piece. They do this by making sure that the keying of the character is done well so that the character and the blank shot merge seamlessly. When the character is in the spaceship make sure that the character isnt too bright or the background too dark so, again, they merge seamlessly.