@Robkizzy it is the same show, but this is not a copy from you. I extracted it from a the full length video downloaded from mytvblog.org I divided it to parts according the subject and interest because these were much more interesting than other parts of the show. I have now seen your channel and it has amazing stuff, keep up the good work.
Yup, that's what I meant, at 2017 we just can do such a thing with 1 computer (and you don't even need a top of the line with 2 CPUs) but No one comes up with original ideas, these guys at the time did the unthinkable with the technology they had.... our imagination has declined by great heaps in the recent decade
@Ananda Priyadharshan Wrong, the ideas are in the software today you can't see unless you understand something about software development. If you're referring to story telling and not technology. Well, we have very good movies even today. Avatar and Interstellar are one example in the science-fantasy and science-fiction genre.
We have much better technology and I think instead of it being quicker, they spend way more time on single scenes. Like 300+ hours on some of the new avengers
Notice that the film of each of the elements run horizontally rather than vertically, as is typical with 35mm? That's because the elements were filmed in VistaVision.
Nice, I had this shown in my class because in the class we were studying Alfred Hitchcock's Rear Window, and when I was watching the movie there is a bluescreen shot. The shot is at watch?v=oowcsynjIwc at timestamp 2:07.
Yep, caught that as well. The Star Wars triolgy was shot on 35mm anamorphic. VistaVision is both non-anamorphic (perfect for optical composites) and has more image area, even with top and bottom cropped to (about) 2.39:1. The only drawback is that the final optical composite in VistaVision has to be printed onto 35mm anamorphic to be inserted into the original camera negative edit.
@@truefilm6991 _"The only drawback is that the final optical composite in VistaVision has to be printed onto 35mm anamorphic to be inserted into the original camera negative edit."_ The reasoning behind doing the VFX shots in VistaVision, in addition to the fact that it's non-anamorphic, is that it has higher resolution than something like 35mm Panavision. When you make an optical composite, there will be diminished resolution in the final result owing to generational loss because the composite is literally a copy of each of those elements combined into one. Doing the VFX elements in a higher resolution format compensates for such loss, so the final composite will reasonably match, quality wise, with other assets used in editing. Of course, digital compositing solves a lot of the problems involved with optical compositing.
Linwood G. Dunn expanded the concept in the 1930s by creating an optical printer that eliminated the necessity to create optical effects in the camera, and which was used in King Kong. These first optical printers had to be individually developed by each movie studio.
Which is why if you have a vhs or beta max video of the star wars movies you can see the outlines of the of items with in the background scenes, like spaceships and other objects ,you can see the matt inserts everywhere. :)
at 2.13,luke breaks the biker scouts neck,during the bluescreen shot,but this got left out in the final cut,instead the scout was just flung into a giant redwood!
What's wrong with souvenir hunters who goes through the garbage cans? It is garbage after all. If someone wanted my garbage, I would gladly give it to them.
I disagree. Computers increased the possibilities and quality and lowered the costs. Just compare Battlestar Galactica (TOS/1978) with Battlestar Galactica ( re-imagining/2004). The latter is much better in all aspects, even storytelling.
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.83[1/2] เปิดแคมป์หลอนต้อนรับ 2 ตัวพ่อแห่งวงการผี!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2uPuHYHgwiI/mqdefault.jpg)
Best short explanation of a traveling matte I have ever seen
Finally, the explanation I’ve been waiting my whole life for 🤣
How do they create the black silhouette of the ship?
Darth Vardar?
Searched for this comment as soon as ive heard it
More like Darth (Agnes) Varda
@Robkizzy it is the same show, but this is not a copy from you. I extracted it from a the full length video downloaded from mytvblog.org
I divided it to parts according the subject and interest because these were much more interesting than other parts of the show. I have now seen your channel and it has amazing stuff, keep up the good work.
This much for a single scene.... We sure have taken these technologies into granted now a days...
We don't use these technologies nowadays. It's all done in the computer.
Yup, that's what I meant, at 2017 we just can do such a thing with 1 computer (and you don't even need a top of the line with 2 CPUs) but No one comes up with original ideas, these guys at the time did the unthinkable with the technology they had.... our imagination has declined by great heaps in the recent decade
@Ananda Priyadharshan
Wrong, the ideas are in the software today you can't see unless you understand something about software development.
If you're referring to story telling and not technology. Well, we have very good movies even today. Avatar and Interstellar are one example in the science-fantasy and science-fiction genre.
Computers since along time back.
We have much better technology and I think instead of it being quicker, they spend way more time on single scenes. Like 300+ hours on some of the new avengers
"Darth Varder" ?
Notice that the film of each of the elements run horizontally rather than vertically, as is typical with 35mm?
That's because the elements were filmed in VistaVision.
Nice, I had this shown in my class because in the class we were studying Alfred Hitchcock's Rear Window, and when I was watching the movie there is a bluescreen shot. The shot is at watch?v=oowcsynjIwc at timestamp 2:07.
Yep, caught that as well. The Star Wars triolgy was shot on 35mm anamorphic. VistaVision is both non-anamorphic (perfect for optical composites) and has more image area, even with top and bottom cropped to (about) 2.39:1. The only drawback is that the final optical composite in VistaVision has to be printed onto 35mm anamorphic to be inserted into the original camera negative edit.
@@truefilm6991 _"The only drawback is that the final optical composite in VistaVision has to be printed onto 35mm anamorphic to be inserted into the original camera negative edit."_
The reasoning behind doing the VFX shots in VistaVision, in addition to the fact that it's non-anamorphic, is that it has higher resolution than something like 35mm Panavision.
When you make an optical composite, there will be diminished resolution in the final result owing to generational loss because the composite is literally a copy of each of those elements combined into one. Doing the VFX elements in a higher resolution format compensates for such loss, so the final composite will reasonably match, quality wise, with other assets used in editing.
Of course, digital compositing solves a lot of the problems involved with optical compositing.
I think I have this programme on VHS somewhere :)
Helpful explanation. This is pretty technical, I wonder who developed this technique?
Linwood G. Dunn expanded the concept in the 1930s by creating an optical printer that eliminated the necessity to create optical effects in the camera, and which was used in King Kong. These first optical printers had to be individually developed by each movie studio.
Which is why if you have a vhs or beta max video of the star wars movies you can see the outlines of the of items with in the background scenes, like spaceships and other objects ,you can see the matt inserts everywhere. :)
This short documentary is more impressive than the three prequels combined... poor poor George...
Most impressive.
Remember watching this. Brilliant. I never in Indiana Jones 2 they used miniature mine cars.
at 2.13,luke breaks the biker scouts neck,during the bluescreen shot,but this got left out in the final cut,instead the scout was just flung into a giant redwood!
I don’t get it, how do they create the background matte and create the black silhouette of the ship?
well spotted,didn't see that first time!
I guess this how titles were done as well. Of course titles were probably easier to do.
Yaeh, i was brought here by with that question in mind and some google
What happened to part2?
No, we don't call him Darth Varder in Britain lol
Does anyone know how the "background matte" was created?
@guitarmageddon666 I was just about to put the EXACT same comment on!!! Cool vid though! I remember watching it way back when.......
Is this James Cameroon at 4:22 ?
No, Cameron didn’t work at ILM. He worked for Roger Corman’s New World Pictures.
thank God for After effects!!!
Say! I remember this show!
why not just film the ships against a black background and use that to create their matte?
Darlek!
What's wrong with souvenir hunters who goes through the garbage cans? It is garbage after all. If someone wanted my garbage, I would gladly give it to them.
Ackbar must've been dizzy!
the British narrator is kind of random, but he's pretty awesome.
the wforce Well BBC Horizon is a British TV show so i guess its not all that surprising.
I am so confused
Darth vadar! lol
Computers have taken away much of the fun.
not true
I disagree.
Computers increased the possibilities and quality and lowered the costs.
Just compare Battlestar Galactica (TOS/1978) with Battlestar Galactica ( re-imagining/2004).
The latter is much better in all aspects, even storytelling.
Did he say "DAAHrth VAAHder"? lol..oh, the British..
@filmdirectorlord ha ha...powerful mac....(I'm a Non-Mac fanboy)....
LOL @ 0:50 - 1:00 Certainly before the politically correct days of ComicCon and celebrating Nerdom.
@philipnova798 hahahahaha the guy is obviously just reading off a script, lol. too funny
This is a copy of my full upload
Upload Nazi!