Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2015 January 24
| Entertainment desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < January 23 | << Dec | January | Feb >> | January 25 > |
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
January 24
[edit]video zoom in filmmaking
[edit]You are making a professional movie (i.e. it will be shown on full sized theater screens) with professional high resolution video equipment. You take a certain live action shot that can't be repeated. During editing you realize you want to zoom in on a certain part of the frame.
- Is that a normal thing to do with editing software, to get an effect that looks like you zoomed with the camera instead of afterwards? That is I don't just mean crop the frame for the whole scene. It's supposed to look like you started with a wider shot, then zoomed or brought the camera closer during the shot.
- Is the loss of resolution likely to be noticable to viewers during projection, if the scene is just a few seconds long? The zooming isn't to show fine detail, but rather to just emphasize the part of the scene being zoomed on. Let's say the zoom factor is moderate, like 1.5x or 2x, but not extreme.
Thanks. 50.0.205.75 (talk) 19:26, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- It certainly wouldn't be their first choice (optical zoom would be), but I suppose it's a lot quicker than re-shooting a scene. So, if they are nearing their budget limit, they might be tempted to take shortcuts like that. StuRat (talk) 06:44, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- Re-shooting the scene was absolutely impossible in the situation in question (one-of-a-kind footage, not a budget issue). My question is whether simulating zoooming during editing is a known technique supported by existing software. Thanks. 50.0.205.75 (talk) 15:49, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- The answer to your first question is yes, and to the second, no. --Thomprod (talk) 19:18, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks. 50.0.205.75 (talk) 21:43, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- The answer to your first question is yes, and to the second, no. --Thomprod (talk) 19:18, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- Re-shooting the scene was absolutely impossible in the situation in question (one-of-a-kind footage, not a budget issue). My question is whether simulating zoooming during editing is a known technique supported by existing software. Thanks. 50.0.205.75 (talk) 15:49, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- It might be interesting to the OP that (slowly) zooming into a still image, usually with some panning, is well known in documentaries; there is even a name for that kind of shot. Unfortunately, the name (I think it's "(FirstName)(LastName) shot", something that's not exactly searchable) has escaped me and my browser history. (It's even a trope on TV Tropes.) - ¡Ouch! (hurt me / more pain) 07:52, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- Ken Burns and Ric Burns are known for that, along with panning across still pics while sad violin music plays. :-) StuRat (talk) 08:05, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- Good catch! "Shot" was not even in the page title. Damn. TVT Link - ¡Ouch! (hurt me / more pain) 16:28, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- Ken Burns and Ric Burns are known for that, along with panning across still pics while sad violin music plays. :-) StuRat (talk) 08:05, 28 January 2015 (UTC)