optical compositing

Art Trumps Science

In a world filled with movies and television sporting the latest trends in digital, data-driven effects, we tend to forget how good optical compositing and keen artistic interpretation will trump these digital hydras every time. Just because the data in the computer for a particular shot is accurate to the laws of physics, why does it still feel rigid and cold compared to the vinyl-aged practical effects? The art is missing. The art has been slowly cornered by science, rather than an artist interpreting a scene by instinct.

In a recent video that was reposted by Prolost (Stu Maschwitz’s blog) from a previous post on FX Guide, Dennis Muren, ILM legend discusses this trend toward data and away from art.

When Stu references the T-Rex's big reveal in Jurassic Park there is a strong blue light shining from apparently nowhere in the real world, yet it works. Why is that? Artistic interpretation for heightened effect. We don’t go to the movies to watch a film. We go to the movies to be immersed within a film.

We are at a crossroads where the latest digital techniques need to be corralled back toward the arts. Science is a great foundation for a shot, but knowing when to bend the rules, and sometimes even break them in order for the shot to become memorable to the viewer is key.

ABOVE IMAGE © UNIVERSAL PICTURES.

Visit Prolost.


Art of the Title

If you enjoy a great film, but find more satisfaction in the art and design of the film’s title sequences this site is for you. From Saul Bass’s spirographic Vertigo to Kyle Cooper’s demented Se7en one can spend hours pouring through the sheer volumes of titles. One thing I find curious is that the titles created in the days of optical compositing stand out as stronger in regard to design, color, and composition in many respects, although the animation can be quite crude compared to today’s digitally interpolated scenes.

ALL IMAGES ABOVE © CECCHI GORI PICTURES, © JUNO PIX, AND © NEW LINE CINEMA.