You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Xcession's pointless gun test

Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 8:09am

Post 1 of 16

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

I did this ages ago, but my reasons for doing it were simple: i wanted to demonstrate how a muzzle flash SHOULD look - by comparison with ones i'd seen before in the cinema. Anyway its only a test and not exactly the best thing in the world, but i'm hoping someone will slap their forehead and go "oh so THATS how they look!"

anyway, enjoy! wink
More Info
Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 8:50am

Post 2 of 16

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

Pretty classy Dave....
Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 11:39am

Post 3 of 16

Tino

Force: 30 | Joined: 25th Apr 2002 | Posts: 19

Member

I'm not quite sure if you're serious about your clip, but just let me give my 2 cents about it anyway:

Sorry, but I think that's exactly how they should NOT look like...

1. Muzzle flashes are too bright, too solid, too blueish, too contrasty

2. Forget about the shells; it's better without them, they look way too "inserted", they absolutely don't match the brightness/contrast/sharpness of the picture. They MUST be blurry!

I'll try to make one myself, soon...(don't want to be the "much words - no results" kind of guy...! wink)
Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 1:06pm

Post 4 of 16

Hajiku_Flip

Force: 3786 | Joined: 2nd Jun 2002 | Posts: 1669

Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Looks great to me. I agree with Tino about the bullets, they do look to 'fake'. Thats only because the rest of your video is washed out. If you had some serious lighting, they'd look a'okay. Muzzle flashes look poyfect. And you guys notice how the sound effects match up with the muzzle flash? I can't tell you how many times I've watched a movie in the cinema with the sound effects and muzzle flashes not matching up. Drives me crazy... crazy
Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 5:41pm

Post 5 of 16

anonymous

Blueish? i'm not even using those muzzle flashes! razz

You may be right, but my point was that by comparison with 90% of the other times people use muzzle flashes they look better.

my chief quibbles with other muzzle flashes are they no was has a f-in clue!! the flashes are tiny, or horribly distorted or are wedge shaped! or are placed over too many frames, or look like a sorta squitty fart, or just aren't right for the calibre of weapon being used.

However in answer to ur quesiton: i knocked it up in 10 minutes, i was about a serious about that clip as i am when i say i'm the pope!
Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 5:43pm

Post 6 of 16

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

BTW: that was me, stupid login didn't work and i never noticed.
Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 5:51pm

Post 7 of 16

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

EAT IT
Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 5:53pm

Post 8 of 16

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

eat ME!
Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 7:36pm

Post 9 of 16

anonymous

"I've watched a movie in the cinema with the sound effects and muzzle flashes not matching up" in most films they use real guns with blanks, so the fact that they don't match up exactly is how the actually work. Light is faster than sound, so the flash is seen a split second before the bang, Like lightning. These computer generated flashes are presumably meant to represent real flashes and they do it for real, so to be truly accurate with these computer effects you should do the sound after the bang. but anyway I hope to present some of my films on here soon and I prefer to make sure the actual footage is right before I worry about the effects, so when I have some of my stuff up here, i'd be grateful for some feedback as to how I could improve them, afterall you can easily redo a computer effect before you can redo an actual shot. biggrin
Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 7:50pm

Post 10 of 16

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

Heh, i think thats just being pedantic. Seeing as most of the films in the cinema are shot from about 5 metres away from the muzzle itself, light and sound travel at such un-noticeably different speeds that to all intents and purposes, the bang and the flash come at the same time. Perhaps 1 frame later for the sound (IF you are at a decent frame-rate)

i shot my movie about 3.5 metres from the camera. If you can discern a band and a flash at different times.....i'll personally give you a medal!
Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 9:41pm

Post 11 of 16

malone

Force: 18242 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1477

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Rating: +1

Im sure I heard this somewhere that your meant to put the sound before the effect because of the way peoples brains work when watching film. Its something to do with the order the brain expects information. Actually it might have been that your meant to put the sound on after. Hmm, im sure its either before or after...ill shut up now smile
Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2002, 11:24pm

Post 12 of 16

Jealous Flesh

Force: 900 | Joined: 17th Jan 2002 | Posts: 183

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Some of us avoid this whole Hornets nest and jsut use muzzle flashes (m16 anyway) for their best purpose::: Magical Arrows. Duh.
Posted: Fri, 23rd Aug 2002, 4:16am

Post 13 of 16

Magic_man12

Force: 853 | Joined: 20th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1350

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Hey

THe sounds should be rite when you see it. Unless its really FAR away, it is imposible to notice. If your only like 10 meters away, and your thinkin about putting the sound for your funs back a couple of frames because "the sound gets there later" then do it wiht the ppl talkin. if it travelled noticably sl;ower the ppls voices would all be off when they talk.

how can you have the sound of the gun after when the voices are right on? ?? That makes no sense at all

-MAGIC
Posted: Fri, 23rd Aug 2002, 3:37pm

Post 14 of 16

MechaForce

Force: 4654 | Joined: 3rd Aug 2001 | Posts: 1934

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

not bad. it rivals MGR with muzzle flash quality. but you only get 3 stars cause you said [b]eat it and that reminds me of micheal jackson. :shudders:
Posted: Fri, 6th Sep 2002, 6:51pm

Post 15 of 16

Two Gunned Saint

Force: 918 | Joined: 1st Sep 2002 | Posts: 1269

Member

I was just saying there's no point in thinking "I can't tell you how many times I've watched a movie in the cinema with the sound effects and muzzle flashes not matching up. Drives me crazy" because that's just the way it works. That's the way they do it, if it's a split second behind, or at exactly the same time, it doesn't matter. You could have it at exactly the same time for close ups and later for long shots. I just said it didn't matter that much.
Posted: Sat, 7th Sep 2002, 12:20am

Post 16 of 16

moebius

Force: 4436 | Joined: 24th Jun 2002 | Posts: 1727

Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

MechaForce wrote:

not bad. it rivals MGR with muzzle flash quality. but you only get 3 stars cause you said [b]eat it and that reminds me of micheal jackson. :shudders:
That's plain hilarious lol Mecha, you are one of a kind biggrin