Yes, of course. I have watched it now five or six times and like it more each time.
There isnât room for rear projection. The light is already coming from the screen when he tilts it up from the floor. The robot holds on in the center of the back of the screen. Again, insufficient room for rear projection.
Looks like they do mostly camera movement stuff from the website. This is a demo project. Big budgets and lots of people. Mission: robots in the arts and entertainments. They have done a lot of work.
( Look, itâs not like I donât know it is my attitude that keeps me from having big budgets. I do know that. Oof. )
Indeed. Thatâs why theyâre using front projection. Hence the shadows of the screens on the wall behind them, and the shadow of the operatorâs hand on the screen at 1:18.
How do they do the lit up screen just as he is lifting it right at the beginning? Itâs lit as soon as the edge comes off the floor.
It looks to me to be that the screen itself is illuminated from the back at that moment before the front projection kicks in.
Awesome. Is that a Jarre score?
nope. from the credits: Music / Sound Design: Keith Ruggiero
Missed the credits. Nice work Keith.
If you look at it frame by frame, youâll see that itâs not illuminated until the edge is about a foot off the floor.
[quote=âtimquinn, post:7, topic:10566, full:trueâ]
That is why they are using the ambiguous term projection-mapping instead of saying it is projected.[/quote]
And for some examples:
https://www.google.com/#q=projection+mapping&tbm=vid
This is regularly used to turn entire building facades into trippy, animated features where the architecture can seem to shatter or melt before your eyes⌠Itâs not that much of a stretch to see it being used to project masked video onto moving flat surfaces. Itâs not as though theyâre claiming itâs being rendered in realtime as itâs projected.
The precision of the projection mapping is made possible by the motion control of the robot arms. The robots can be programmed to make exactly the same movements over and over. So you film it once with just the blank projection screens, put that footage into your animation software to use as a template, so you can see just how it will look, and then when you reproject the robots are making the same exact moves and your (stationary, masked) projectors fit the choreography perfectly.
I also enjoy knowing how magic tricks are done, but still find them wonderful.
1 Like
Thank you,
I typed before thinking, a problem I am learning about.
144 robots wielding 70" flat panels to replace scenery flats on stage. Avatar: The Musical! Directed by Julie Taymor.
Production halted when both the lead and his understudy lose limbs during tech rehearsal.
1 Like
Theyâve definitely souped up this performance by also taking into account the cameraâs viewing angle. Usually they use a single, unmoving viewpoint (since usually theres an audience to consider), but the way the perspective and parallax moves in this one, when the screens are static and only the camera moves for example, means it must be at least a bit odd to view were you in the same room during the performance (and not moving with the camera). The illusion falls apart.
A hell of a great effect on video, though!
One of the points of this is to trick you, so I guess it works.
The poor black levels on the screens pulled me out of the illusion on a few occasions but overall the effect was quite well done.
But what was missing was the light on the TOP of the hand.
1 Like
That was my conclusion eventually. I was the perfect audience. Offended that my perception was challenged.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
