The first animated movie that I noticed (and was blown away by) the
"photography" was "Finding Nemo". The way they made it look like really
filming underwater was amazing. Total attention to detail including
"backscatter." From what I read, Pixar required everyone to get
certified in SCUBA. Also their first "test" underwater animations had
to be redone because it looked to real.
--
Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/
Larry Colen wrote:
We went to the cinema last night, and there were several times during
the movie I noticed the photography. Nice colors, lighting,
composition, good use of depth of field, and so forth. It was very
visually appealing.
But, the movie was "Up". It was completely computer generated, which
makes calling it photography somewhat problematic. However, judging
it by exactly the same standards as one would judge photography, it
was still very pleasing.
I'm honestly not sure whether the closing credits were filmed,
computer generated, or a mixture. The dof of the credits were weird,
with the edges and the top of the screen sharp, and the middle and
lower middle less so, I couldn't tell if that was camera work,
computer generated to get you to read the top of the screen, or just
due to things being misaligned in the theater.
As to the movie itself, Pixar did it again. It's a good story, a fun
movie, and the computer animation raised the bar on the state of the
art.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
