Sollthar wrote:The bamf effect itself looks a bit pasted in and, while the addition of real stock footage smoke helps a lot, the particle effect doesn't quite work for me. It doesn't look like there's actual smoke there. The real footage works the best for me.
I'm fairly satisfied with the effect, but a bit more subtlety would definitely have helped. The X2 bamfing is very subtle, for example. It works better in some shots than others, I think. With a bigger budget I imagine I'd have mixed in a lot more stock footage and had more time to experiment with different techniques.
The fluid-through-ground-effect I really really dig. That looks great and the accompanying sound is perfect! On both shots that is - the one where he goes down and the one where he lands! Awesome!
Glad you like them! Personally I'm not too keen on the first sinking shot. I wish it were slower and more T-1000-esque. The framing of the shot annoys me, too, as the sinking itself happens far too close to the edge of the screen for my liking.
The fall from the ceiling, though, I'm really, really happy with! I think it's a really successful bit of greenscreen compositing.
The skidding car shot is ace.
The shot where Adam bamfs out of the car and shortly runs on the street coming to a halt misses work done on his shadow, which is quite obviously seen. It would have been a nice detail which I noticed (either needs fixing while "bamfing in" or the shadows cast by a cloud of bamf should somehow interact with the light and therefore his shadow on the ground).
Yeah, I did spot the shadow glitch but unfortunately didn't have time to do anything about it. The deadline was fast approaching, and some fine details such as the shadow had to be overlooked. I did have time to put a bit of reflected bamfing into the big table when he approaches the 'top secret' folder though.
The total shot of the girl flying up is a difficult shot, but I find it the weakest of all. It looks the most fake to me. Not sure if it's her size or simply her movement or her compositing. But somethings off here for my eye.
I think it's the animation, personally. The take-off is too slow, and the camera angle and move is just too...dull. It needed to be much punchier, with the camera titling up to see her shooting up into the sky with a sonic boom.
Alas, time got in the way of that one.
The fighting between the two is pretty much impactless imo. To be very blunt, I find it rather "powerless". Doesn't look convincing at all.
Yeah, I'd agree. I'm not very experienced at shooting action, so mixing an action sequence in with quite complex effects was a dangerous move.
Conceptually it was a difficult fight to shoot and that rather limited the editing choices. While snappier editing would have helped, it would also have risked hiding some of the effects and, as you say, this film did have the dual personality of being an effects promo and
a short film at the same time.
What is my major gripe in this clip is the cinematography though eg the lighting and what has been done with it in post.
In terms of lighting, we didn't have any, as I'm sure is very obvious. Budgetary restrictions meant that it was a very limited shoot in terms of tech - most of the time it was just me, a camera, an actor and a greenscreen. No lights and no time to set up lights even if I did have some.
Given that it's all natural light I'm actually very pleased with most of the shots - but there's no denying that it would have looked better with some proper lighting.
and there's this odd blurryness to it all which makes most look very fake.
Not sure if you went for a depth of field effect or something in that direction, but it's way too blurry for my taste and doesn't look natural.
It works much better in the high quality version, I think, coming across as a more subliminal and subtle effect. It also helps when you've got it on a large screen, rather than in a tiny window.
The blur effect was a deliberate homage to Heroes
, which uses a very similar technique. It's an odd one, certainly, and not to everyone's tastes, but given the subject matter I thought it'd be fun to mimic it.
In most of the shots I actually really like it, and the way it forces your eye to a particular part of the frame. But as I mentioned, I think this works better on a bigger screen - when you're watching a youtube sized video, you can always see 100% of the frame at all times, so you can't really draw the viewer's eye in the same way.
This is a cool clip which surely shows a lot of techniques and surely advertises the program while working nice as a tutorial I imagine, I find it good but weak compared to the other one, which is many levels above this for me.
Thanks for the feedback! All very valid, I think.