Stop motion video shot over 2 years with 288,000 jelly beans

Post by hessenwolf » Fri, Nov 04, 2011, 12:16 PM UTC

ugh wrote: post #47

rorrr wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They recorded the girl with green screen. Why not use these frames instead of placing her on top of glass and spending minutes per frame trying to replicate that same shot? And yes, they could've have created a simple animation (which they did anyway), and then convert it to jelly beans with a relatively simple code in Processing.

This video would be pretty uninteresting had they used artificial jelly beans. I think everyone is aware that it’s trivial to convert a simple animation to a jelly bean animation. That’s not the point. Art works by different rules. (Hey, and if you like to be a cynic about it you can also say that viral videos work by different rules. OK Go owes their fame to never taking shortcuts when creating their music videos†.)…

Post by Tloewald » Fri, Nov 04, 2011, 12:36 PM UTC

grusk wrote: post #64

See also: Coldplay - Strawberry Swing (shot on sidewalk chalk) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb9X5jMofEo Maxmaber Orkestar - Malinkovec Valzer (500 People in 100 Seconds - stop-motion video is a movie within a movie) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eqSZSO_sSE Clarika - Bien Mérité (French stop-motion video with photographs) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SF9pMjfrpI

Post by bennesvig » Fri, Nov 04, 2011, 1:17 PM UTC

estel wrote: post #82

pitdesi wrote: post #40

This is the type of thing that you wouldn't have done 10 years ago because noone would have found out about it. Reminds me of the Amazing Honda Accord commercial - the Cog... Rube Goldberg machine all done without CGI (5 months of pre-work, then 605 takes until they got to one that didn't screw up somewhere) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ve4M4UsJQo They did a lot of work that they could've avoided with CGI, but whe…

There's also the Sony Bravia Paint commercial: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3tZPH5my-0&feature=relat...

Post by dandrews » Fri, Nov 04, 2011, 1:58 PM UTC

hessenwolf wrote: post #80

ghshephard wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's rare that I indulge myself in making a pithy remark on HN, but this is one of those rare times I will, karma be damned. You're missing the point.

I agree wholeheartedly with his point. If the populus of HN in general isn't into shamelessly improving productivity in everything, then I am suprised. Aren't we all busy people? (I watched the first 20 seconds of the clip and realised I only cared because the chick was hot, and the jelly beans could have been cgi for all I care)

Post by ElevenElOwl » Fri, Nov 04, 2011, 2:22 PM UTC

prolepunk wrote: post #33

mbreese wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, one thing they could have done that wouldn't have changed their stop-motion commitment would have been to use more than a frames worth of jelly beans. Instead they could have made one long movable landscape. Then they could have adjusted the "viewport" by moving the camera or the landscape. As it is, it looks like they moved each "pixel" for each frame.

I think that behind the scenes video doesn't give that information. Although they did shot last frame last, they didn't say that they shot them in order. Also they only shot 2300 whereas the clip at 24 fps would have taken 4920 though the 'real' frame seems to be lower. Finally moving around jelly beans is a lot easier than setting up the scene from scratch, as mentioned, a frame took 5 minutes to 3 hours to setup. t…