Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,969   Posts: 1,558,554   Online: 1045
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by holmburgers View Post
    This I believe. I was just getting frustrated because it seemed as though Q.G. had the secret.

    However, riddle me this, wouldn't focus-stacking effectively achieve this goal? It seems to me that the only real difference between imaging something that is big and little is the inherent qualities of lenses and the focusing of visible light.

    For instance, electron microscopy doesn't appear "small", because DOF is so deep.
    Focus stacking will only solve the DoF problem.
    Not the i'm floating somewhere above, looking down on reality problem.

    They used to use boroscopes with very short focal length lenses, move them along models at the proper level and the proper distance to the model, to create more or less convincing images. That really is something you should pursue, if (!) you're aim is to make the images look like they are of real-life-scale thingies, and not a model.

    (Used to use, because now everything that used to be done with models is modelled in computer graphics).

  2. #12
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,422
    Images
    2
    Yeah, but you could certainly be up in a tower, or in a hot air balloon...

    This issue of perspective seems self-evident. I guess I am wondering how we can overcome the limitations of lenses. Alas.....

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    905
    Borescope, Light Pipe, carefully placed first surface mirror, any/all of these effects will help you to realize your goal. Focus stacking, as Q.G. pointed out only helps with the DOF issue, and should be the last consideration after point of view and realization of that point of view.

  4. #14
    erikg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    pawtucket rhode island usa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,417
    Quote Originally Posted by holmburgers View Post
    Yeah, but you could certainly be up in a tower, or in a hot air balloon...

    This issue of perspective seems self-evident. I guess I am wondering how we can overcome the limitations of lenses. Alas.....
    Don't use a lens at all, use a pinhole.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    61
    If you are talking about the guy who does mockups of 1950's Main Street small town scenes and then photos them, he uses nothing more than a compact digital camera.

  6. #16
    nick mulder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,204
    Images
    14
    Perspective can be an issue for sure - people pick up on these clues/cues unconsciously or even consciously if it's bad enough - if you have miniatures then to achieve normality the camera and everything related to it should be miniature also (even the grain). Not possible, so special periscope 'snorkel' lens systems have been made to fit big cameras into small areas...





    The periodical Cinefex although it deal a heap with CGI nowadays has lots of articles on this kind of carry on - you can order back issues of most of your favourite films

    As for what you can do with your equipment is just think the opposite way around - whatever tilt faking requires just flip the thinking on it's head - and yes, one of the aspects that make that tilt faking work is using higher perspectives...

    Pretty good example here: http://vimeo.com/9679622

    to quote:

    "I was lucky to have friends, contacts and a some helpful people I'd never met but asked nicely allow me access to rooftops and balconies"

    I know you're after the opposite - but it just serves to prove the point I guess. For examples of what you're after just watch any effects heavy film from the 70's and 80's (they've been doing it since day one almost, but this particular era is the most laden) - and chuck in Kubricks 2001 for sure
    Cleared the bowel problem, working on the consonants...

  7. #17
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,678
    Many of those T/S pictures that look miniature look that way because of vantage point. That is, a shot from a building down to an intersection looks miniature because in real life, depth of field should be much greater than that portrayed. On those types of shots the perspective is right; that is, the T/S pictures are taken from a naturally occurring perspective. So I think perspective as referred to here is not always part of the answer. It certainly is when realistic shots are wanted from the perspective of someone within the scene. But when an image shows a scene of naturally deep DoF, as would be seen looking down from say, a 12th story balcony, then the T/S effect will give that "model" look by unnaturally portraying DoF as if the object were very close.
    So in converse, a miniature taken from that "same" perspective will rely mostly on DoF to eliminate the look of it being a miniature. The angle is realistic for a 12th floor balcony shot. The challenge is to render DoF realistically.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    The challenge is to render DoF realistically.
    Yes.
    And when we assume that DoF has been fixed, the challence is to get perspective right.

    The OP's question are two questions.
    We do not need to decide which of the two answers to these two questions is the right one (singular). Both are.

  9. #19
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,678
    Quote Originally Posted by holmburgers View Post
    Hey all,

    So I was thinking, if you wanted to make a miniature look life-sized, what could you do to achieve this?

    Obviously, everyone is familiar with how to miniaturize a photo using tilt/shift, but how about the opposite?
    Use tilt-shift.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  10. #20
    Rudeofus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,700
    Images
    10
    Does anyone remember the movie "Team America"? For this movie they used puppets about 1/3 of normal human size, yet achieved rather realistic looking sceneries ... One could certainly look at the camera angles and perspective used in this flick.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin