Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

alex-buono.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 61 posts

Re: How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

#51

Post by dlgeek »

fragmede wrote: post #29
brokentone wrote: post #12

This is incredible. Normally just one or two of these techniques would represent a pretty impressive feat. This used 3d printing, freelensing, pixelstick lightwriting, and a custom bokeh cutout -- in addition to the cool, but more common helicopter shots, timelapse, tilt-shift, and steady cam work. Being willing to (or maybe having the budget to) use all these techniques AND getting a consistent result is SUPER impre…

> cool, but more common helicopter shots, I'm glad they pointed out that a similar shot could have been done via drone. I've been told that drones have made cool aerial sequences available to directors who don't have the budget of SNL's 40th though I'd be interested in learning more.

He mentioned this in the article: "There are a lot of ways to shoot aerial footage these days; we could fly a DJI Phantom with a GoPro, mount a Dragon to a Freefly Cinestar drone, handhold a MoVI out an open chopper door…or we could just hire the best aerial pilot in New York – Al Cerullo – which is what we did."

Re: How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

#52

Post by thrownaway2424 »

fragmede wrote: post #29
brokentone wrote: post #12

This is incredible. Normally just one or two of these techniques would represent a pretty impressive feat. This used 3d printing, freelensing, pixelstick lightwriting, and a custom bokeh cutout -- in addition to the cool, but more common helicopter shots, timelapse, tilt-shift, and steady cam work. Being willing to (or maybe having the budget to) use all these techniques AND getting a consistent result is SUPER impre…

> cool, but more common helicopter shots, I'm glad they pointed out that a similar shot could have been done via drone. I've been told that drones have made cool aerial sequences available to directors who don't have the budget of SNL's 40th though I'd be interested in learning more.

Photographers were using RC helicopters long before multicopter thingies that people like to call drones for some reason became trendy. These are still around and they have the lift capacity to hoist your 5D or your Red Epic on a pan/tilt rig, unlike most multicopters that can hardly lift a go pro.

Re: How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

#53

Post by rspeer »

jcl wrote: post #41
npinguy wrote: post #23

Is it just me or is stuff like this way harder to appreciate these days (with the ubiquity of CGI), unless you work in the industry, or see a behind-the-scenes look like this? This is simply incredible, and yet I don't normally pay the title sequence any attention at all...

A personal favorite: the motion graphics in this "making-of" video for a 1983 HBO intro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqzihgR_-SI#t=309 This is the pre-Tron era, where the easiest way to get a picture of a chrome logo is to build one out of brass. The starburst and light ribbon effects later in the video are similarly brilliant examples of pre-CG CG.

Now I'm reminded of the video to Justice's DVNO, which is almost entirely made of homages to '70s and '80s title effects, including a huge reference to the HBO logo sequence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiDsLRQg_g4

Re: How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

#54

Post by dsl »

fragmede wrote: post #29
brokentone wrote: post #12

This is incredible. Normally just one or two of these techniques would represent a pretty impressive feat. This used 3d printing, freelensing, pixelstick lightwriting, and a custom bokeh cutout -- in addition to the cool, but more common helicopter shots, timelapse, tilt-shift, and steady cam work. Being willing to (or maybe having the budget to) use all these techniques AND getting a consistent result is SUPER impre…

> cool, but more common helicopter shots, I'm glad they pointed out that a similar shot could have been done via drone. I've been told that drones have made cool aerial sequences available to directors who don't have the budget of SNL's 40th though I'd be interested in learning more.

Commercial use of drones is generally illegal. If you want to use it for TV or film production, you have to contract with one of six FAA blessed companies. http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId...

The MPAA is actually doing a lot of good work to help free up restrictive laws on drone use.

Re: How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

#55

Post by raverbashing »

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #52
fragmede wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cool, but more common helicopter shots, I'm glad they pointed out that a similar shot could have been done via drone. I've been told that drones have made cool aerial sequences available to directors who don't have the budget of SNL's 40th though I'd be interested in learning more.

Photographers were using RC helicopters long before multicopter thingies that people like to call drones for some reason became trendy. These are still around and they have the lift capacity to hoist your 5D or your Red Epic on a pan/tilt rig, unlike most multicopters that can hardly lift a go pro.

That's the issue, this equipment is heavy!

Sure, digital is usually "lighter" but get a DSLR in your hands and you see that even that is not something any drone can carry

Re: How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

#56

Post by ygra »

wgx wrote: post #11
HorizonXP wrote: post #3

This is a fantastic blog post. I love that we can get this behind-the-scenes look behind something so iconic. The light painting and lens-whacking details were awesome to read about. I'll definitely have to give the lens whacking a try.

I got one of these as a gift a while back - lets you experiment with the 'moving lens' technique without as much potential for sensor damage: http://lensbaby.com/lenses-spark

I love my Lensbaby (an older one), but the effect is a bit different. There is no light leakage behind the lens like there'd be with freelensing. You sometimes get fun and weird artifacts from light sources just outside the frame, but a subtle streak over the image where light enters the camera behind the hand-held lens ... not so much.

Both interesting effects, though.

Re: How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

#57

Post by masklinn »

fragmede wrote: post #29
brokentone wrote: post #12

This is incredible. Normally just one or two of these techniques would represent a pretty impressive feat. This used 3d printing, freelensing, pixelstick lightwriting, and a custom bokeh cutout -- in addition to the cool, but more common helicopter shots, timelapse, tilt-shift, and steady cam work. Being willing to (or maybe having the budget to) use all these techniques AND getting a consistent result is SUPER impre…

> cool, but more common helicopter shots, I'm glad they pointed out that a similar shot could have been done via drone. I've been told that drones have made cool aerial sequences available to directors who don't have the budget of SNL's 40th though I'd be interested in learning more.

OK Go's "I Won't Let You Go" was filmed entirely using a drone. And as they are wont to do, as a single take.

Re: How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

#58

Post by taude »

iLoch wrote: post #35
joezydeco wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many shows have opening credits this long anymore? You have some shows, like The Good Wife , that use a five-second title card. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rOhzdWZS7E Some have more elaborate titles, but still only go 15 seconds (e.g. The Mindy Project ) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HarfyFwRfhA Compare with an 80's show like Dallas , where the credits went a whole 1:10! That's like lost real estate for tw…

Homeland's intro is about 1:20 I believe. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x17tp3q_homeland-intro_shor...

I was going to add this to the list, because I think the Homeland intro is really interesting and well done. Usually I fast forward through them, but I notice something new everytime with this one.

Re: How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

#59

Post by masklinn »

pluma wrote: post #42
joezydeco wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many shows have opening credits this long anymore? You have some shows, like The Good Wife , that use a five-second title card. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rOhzdWZS7E Some have more elaborate titles, but still only go 15 seconds (e.g. The Mindy Project ) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HarfyFwRfhA Compare with an 80's show like Dallas , where the credits went a whole 1:10! That's like lost real estate for tw…

True Blood is something like 1:30 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjooosDIFgQ Dexter is even longer with ~1:47 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIqBQWB7IUM

Game of Thrones is a good 1:30 as well.

Re: How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

#60

Post by foomoo »

brokentone wrote: post #12

This is incredible. Normally just one or two of these techniques would represent a pretty impressive feat. This used 3d printing, freelensing, pixelstick lightwriting, and a custom bokeh cutout -- in addition to the cool, but more common helicopter shots, timelapse, tilt-shift, and steady cam work. Being willing to (or maybe having the budget to) use all these techniques AND getting a consistent result is SUPER impre…

Thanks for the hint, eventually i stumbled upon the note about Pixelstick in the article, never heard of it before. They had a successful Kickstarter last year, the video briefly introduces the tech and shows many more applications: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bitbangerlabs/pixelstic... Now I want one!
Post reply on HN