Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*) (Gaming)

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Monday, August 11, 2014, 15:38 (3756 days ago)

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by Cody Miller @, Music of the Spheres - Never Forgot, Monday, August 11, 2014, 15:56 (3756 days ago) @ Kermit

Really cool.

Beat my last of us movie trailer out the door :-p

Stay tuned this week.

Avatar

Like I've said before...

by Korny @, Dalton, Ga. US. Earth, Sol System, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 09:26 (3756 days ago) @ Kermit

No game has an excuse to not have at least a photo mode from here on out, though I'd be happier with (and I'd pay for) a theater mode. I haven't played Second Son, but I'm assuming that the TLoU's photo mode is based off of it, so I hope this tool continues to evolve, especially if it's an in-house thing.

Avatar

Like I've said before...

by CruelLEGACEY @, Toronto, Saturday, August 16, 2014, 09:04 (3752 days ago) @ Korny

Yes, the photo mode in TLoU is based on the one in inFamous (although it's a little better in inFamous... nicer focus effects, IMO)

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by kidtsunami @, Atlanta, GA, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 09:56 (3756 days ago) @ Kermit

An interesting point about their photo mode is that it's anchored on Joel because it still relies on all the "tricks" they use to keep the quality high. One of the amazing things about Bungie's theatre mode has always been that you can explore with the camera and they manage to simulate/render everything, it's very impressive.

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 10:47 (3756 days ago) @ kidtsunami

Yeah. It essentially acts like theater mode locked into the second-person view. You've got more flexibility of movement than you do in the game, but it's still limited. I've had a blast with photo mode, but there have been times where it's been frustrating when I can't quite get the perfect POV I want.

Of course another distinguishing characteristic of Bungie's theater mode is that you don't have to use it while playing the game. It's difficult to effectively sneak up on clickers with photo mode on.

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by stabbim @, Des Moines, IA, USA, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 21:09 (3755 days ago) @ Kermit

It's difficult to effectively sneak up on clickers.

Fixed that for you.

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by Jillybean, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 10:41 (3756 days ago) @ Kermit

Beautiful - but the old 'dust on the camera' during the lens flare moments gets old very quickly.

I can't remember which CGI film it was, but I remember a cinematographer getting very irate at the programmers putting lens flare IN to the scene, when he'd spent his entire life taking it OUT

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by Cody Miller @, Music of the Spheres - Never Forgot, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 12:24 (3756 days ago) @ Jillybean

Beautiful - but the old 'dust on the camera' during the lens flare moments gets old very quickly.

I can't remember which CGI film it was, but I remember a cinematographer getting very irate at the programmers putting lens flare IN to the scene, when he'd spent his entire life taking it OUT

Isn't that the irony? Here you have a CGI film, which is free from the effects of light bouncing in the various lens elements to create a flare. It is free from film grain or noise. Things that remind you that you are seeing something captured. Yet, we add these things back in.

Maybe on some level we enjoy knowing it's fake.

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 12:31 (3756 days ago) @ Cody Miller

Beautiful - but the old 'dust on the camera' during the lens flare moments gets old very quickly.

I can't remember which CGI film it was, but I remember a cinematographer getting very irate at the programmers putting lens flare IN to the scene, when he'd spent his entire life taking it OUT


Isn't that the irony? Here you have a CGI film, which is free from the effects of light bouncing in the various lens elements to create a flare. It is free from film grain or noise. Things that remind you that you are seeing something captured. Yet, we add these things back in.

Maybe on some level we enjoy knowing it's fake.

Or maybe it makes it feel more real. I highly recommend the making of featurette. They talk explicitly about how they introduce imperfections, and leave in camera bumps, moments of focus adjustment, etc. Despite the fact that they can make it perfect, they don't because if they do something feels off.

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by Cody Miller @, Music of the Spheres - Never Forgot, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 12:39 (3756 days ago) @ Kermit

Beautiful - but the old 'dust on the camera' during the lens flare moments gets old very quickly.

I can't remember which CGI film it was, but I remember a cinematographer getting very irate at the programmers putting lens flare IN to the scene, when he'd spent his entire life taking it OUT


Isn't that the irony? Here you have a CGI film, which is free from the effects of light bouncing in the various lens elements to create a flare. It is free from film grain or noise. Things that remind you that you are seeing something captured. Yet, we add these things back in.

Maybe on some level we enjoy knowing it's fake.


Or maybe it makes it feel more real. I highly recommend the making of featurette. They talk explicitly about how they introduce imperfections, and leave in camera bumps, moments of focus adjustment, etc. Despite the fact that they can make it perfect, they don't because if they do something feels off.

Real in the sense of "created by humans", not real in the sense of "this is actually happening". Would you want film grain or bad focus pulls on your holodeck?

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by Ragashingo ⌂, Official DBO Cryptarch, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 12:34 (3756 days ago) @ Cody Miller

I heard a several minute piece about the demise of movie film on NPR the other day and laughed a bit when one of the people lamenting film going away gave "film grain" as one of the reasons she would be sad to see it go.

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 18:46 (3755 days ago) @ Ragashingo

I heard a several minute piece about the demise of movie film on NPR the other day and laughed a bit when one of the people lamenting film going away gave "film grain" as one of the reasons she would be sad to see it go.

I'm not laughing. Why is black and white often more evocative than color? There is more to visual art than pixel perfect representations of reality.

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by Cody Miller @, Music of the Spheres - Never Forgot, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 20:56 (3755 days ago) @ Kermit

I heard a several minute piece about the demise of movie film on NPR the other day and laughed a bit when one of the people lamenting film going away gave "film grain" as one of the reasons she would be sad to see it go.


I'm not laughing. Why is black and white often more evocative than color? There is more to visual art than pixel perfect representations of reality.

I rarely find black and white more evocative than color. With black and white, you are playing with light and shadow. In color, you can play with light and shadow PLUS the dimension of color. You are simply afforded more tools to make your art.

Avatar

Art fight! :p

by Ragashingo ⌂, Official DBO Cryptarch, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 21:07 (3755 days ago) @ Cody Miller

- No text -

Avatar

Nope

by ZackDark @, Not behind you. NO! Don't look., Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 02:23 (3755 days ago) @ Cody Miller

It's pretty much the same reason why most biology books prefer drawings over pictures. When you use full detail (like a picture for biology or color image for film), you're wasting the viewer's attention with stuff you quite possibly didn't mean to. By reducing the number of variables, you can be a lot more certain you will get the message through (in the case of biology, a particular anatomical feature that would be lost in the background noise; and in the case of film, a shadow play that would be lost in the background hue noise).

Avatar

Well said.

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 04:43 (3755 days ago) @ ZackDark

- No text -

Avatar

Nope

by Cody Miller @, Music of the Spheres - Never Forgot, Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 10:16 (3755 days ago) @ ZackDark

It's pretty much the same reason why most biology books prefer drawings over pictures. When you use full detail (like a picture for biology or color image for film), you're wasting the viewer's attention with stuff you quite possibly didn't mean to. By reducing the number of variables, you can be a lot more certain you will get the message through (in the case of biology, a particular anatomical feature that would be lost in the background noise; and in the case of film, a shadow play that would be lost in the background hue noise).

1. There's a difference there because the biology book is meant to convey information. Not convey emotion.

2. You are not giving enough credit to true professionals who know all of this, and meticulously frame, light, and pick colors and color filters for shots.

Avatar

Nope

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 12:15 (3755 days ago) @ Cody Miller

It's pretty much the same reason why most biology books prefer drawings over pictures. When you use full detail (like a picture for biology or color image for film), you're wasting the viewer's attention with stuff you quite possibly didn't mean to. By reducing the number of variables, you can be a lot more certain you will get the message through (in the case of biology, a particular anatomical feature that would be lost in the background noise; and in the case of film, a shadow play that would be lost in the background hue noise).


1. There's a difference there because the biology book is meant to convey information. Not convey emotion.

Are you really saying that drawings can't convey emotion?

2. You are not giving enough credit to true professionals who know all of this, and meticulously frame, light, and pick colors and color filters for shots.

And there are professionals that know that sometimes any color at all is distracting from what they want to convey.

Nope

by scarab @, Saturday, August 16, 2014, 14:59 (3752 days ago) @ Kermit

Are you really saying that drawings can't convey emotion?

No he's saying that biology textbook diagrams are trying to convey information.

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by kapowaz, Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 02:28 (3755 days ago) @ Ragashingo

I heard a several minute piece about the demise of movie film on NPR the other day and laughed a bit when one of the people lamenting film going away gave "film grain" as one of the reasons she would be sad to see it go.

Film grain isn't always a bad thing. In moderation, it adds texture to a shot. Besides, its equivalent still exists in digital photography — try shooting in low light conditions at high ISOs and you'll get noise in the image, very much like the analogue equivalent.

Avatar

You can't do this with only video capture (Last of Us *SP*)

by Cody Miller @, Music of the Spheres - Never Forgot, Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 10:18 (3755 days ago) @ kapowaz
edited by Cody Miller, Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 10:22

I heard a several minute piece about the demise of movie film on NPR the other day and laughed a bit when one of the people lamenting film going away gave "film grain" as one of the reasons she would be sad to see it go.


Film grain isn't always a bad thing. In moderation, it adds texture to a shot. Besides, its equivalent still exists in digital photography — try shooting in low light conditions at high ISOs and you'll get noise in the image, very much like the analogue equivalent.

It is fast going away. The sensor in the Dragon is pretty insane. You can shoot low light, 2000 ISO, and with no processing have scant noise. With processing, it's incredibly pristine. There was a demo on the previous sensor for the Epic where Leonardo DiCaprio lit a match which was the only light source in the image. There was barely a shred of noise in the darks with no processing at 2000 ISO.

Avatar

Sounds impressive, and out of my price range. :)

by Ragashingo ⌂, Official DBO Cryptarch, Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 10:25 (3755 days ago) @ Cody Miller

- No text -

Avatar

As someone who wears glasses...

by RC ⌂, UK, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 14:36 (3756 days ago) @ Jillybean

Beautiful - but the old 'dust on the camera' during the lens flare moments gets old very quickly.

I HATE that. Stop ruining my image quality!

As someone who wears glasses...

by kapowaz, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 14:40 (3756 days ago) @ RC

I HATE that. Stop ruining my image quality!

On the same subject… I thought the chromatic aberration effects of Destiny looked cool from screenshots, but it turns out when I'm playing I can't tell whether they're post-processing effects or my glasses (which tend to add chromatic aberration fringing at the edges of my vision anyway). Net result: the effects might as well not be there.

Avatar

As someone who wears glasses...

by RC ⌂, UK, Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 14:53 (3756 days ago) @ kapowaz

On the same subject… I thought the chromatic aberration effects of Destiny

No joke: I thought my video equipment was broken.

Avatar

So, about Sony and screenshot modes.

by uberfoop @, Seattle-ish, Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 00:18 (3755 days ago) @ Kermit

Slightly off-topic.

But.

Hopefully the camera control from gamescom winds up in DriveClub's shipping product.

Because, umm.

Wow.

[image]

So, about Sony and screenshot modes.

by kapowaz, Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 02:21 (3755 days ago) @ uberfoop

Because, umm.

Wow.

Those clouds are the most convincing I've seen in a game. Usually they're 2D textures (like Destiny) but those are clearly volumetric. Crazy driving games with their ultra-realism…!

Avatar

Forza 3 burned my first 360

by ZackDark @, Not behind you. NO! Don't look., Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 02:24 (3755 days ago) @ kapowaz

True story.

Back to the forum index
RSS Feed of thread