Jump to content


Photo

Six minute oner for Johnnie Walker by George Richmond


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Ed Moore

Ed Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 185 posts
  • Midlands, UK

Posted 29 May 2009 - 03:42 AM

Don't think this has been posted before. Never seen this until an old friend who's now a cocktail designer (!) sent me a link saying "this combines my interests and yours".

Brilliant operating I thought - the lockoffs at each end are astounding to me. And the timings of Robert Carlisle getting to each prop at the right point in the dialogue must have taken a serious amount of rehearsal.

For the speed they're going and the length of the run I'd say this pretty much has to be vehicle mounted in some way. There's also two grips in the credits.

There's no steadicam credit but as the DoP is listed as George Richmond I'd say it's pretty certain it's the same George (http://www.imdb.com/...104/maindetails)


  • 0
Ed Moore
DP / occasional steadicam op
edmooredop.com

#2 Lawrence Karman

Lawrence Karman

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 808 posts

Posted 29 May 2009 - 10:37 AM

Nice concept and work by George, but what was he saying? Maybe they should do one in English.
  • 0
Lawrence
imdb page

#3 RonBaldwin

RonBaldwin

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2197 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 29 May 2009 - 11:43 AM

I'm tired just watching it! That's a serious walk/talk, I need a drink.
  • 0

#4 Kevin Andrews SOC

Kevin Andrews SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 329 posts
  • Denver CO

Posted 29 May 2009 - 12:12 PM

Thanks for posting Ed!

How did they keep the noise of the vehicle out? The tires on gravel sound must have been overwhelming?

Very impressive. Wonder how many actual takes they did.
  • 0
Kevin Andrews SOC
www.DenverSteadicam.com

#5 Mark Schlicher

Mark Schlicher

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 758 posts
  • Nashville, TN

Posted 29 May 2009 - 01:59 PM

Very nice indeed. At two points the shot received some "help" from a slight zoom, which I suspect was done in post...in both cases to delay a reveal of one of the bigger props. The first was the TV wall and the second was the banner.

Don't think this has been posted before. Never seen this until an old friend who's now a cocktail designer (!) sent me a link saying "this combines my interests and yours".

Brilliant operating I thought - the lockoffs at each end are astounding to me. And the timings of Robert Carlisle getting to each prop at the right point in the dialogue must have taken a serious amount of rehearsal.

For the speed they're going and the length of the run I'd say this pretty much has to be vehicle mounted in some way. There's also two grips in the credits.

There's no steadicam credit but as the DoP is listed as George Richmond I'd say it's pretty certain it's the same George (http://www.imdb.com/...104/maindetails)


  • 0

#6 Lars Erik

Lars Erik

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 508 posts
  • Norway

Posted 29 May 2009 - 03:55 PM

Thanks for posting Ed!

How did they keep the noise of the vehicle out? The tires on gravel sound must have been overwhelming?

Very impressive. Wonder how many actual takes they did.


They have recorded Robert Carlyle's dialogue in studio after the takes.

Nice work, but I found it to be a bit boring, sorry. A long steadicam shot wuth nothing or little happening in the background isn't very interesting to watch. Instead of using just props, they could have used actors adding to the story.


LE
  • 0

Lars-Erik Kristiansen
www.steadi.no


#7 Charles Papert

Charles Papert

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2152 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 May 2009 - 06:56 PM

There were a ton of zooms (or image repo's--this was apparently shot on RED so they could have done a 2x zoom in and still deliver 1080), interesting. By the same token, they could have done some additional image stabilization in post--the operating was almost too good to be true.
  • 0

#8 Brad Grimmett

Brad Grimmett

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 715 posts

Posted 31 May 2009 - 03:00 AM

Blimey! If that's steadicam, then bravo! Does anyone have any confirmation that it is? I must say it looks like a stabilized head on an arm/crane, mounted on a vehicle to me. Some of the accelerations at the beginning scream vehicle shot. And the lockoffs just aren't believable, unless they used image stabilization like Charles said.
In any case, it was a nice idea nicely done.
  • 0
Brad Grimmett
Los Angeles
bradgrimmett.com

#9 Jess Haas SOC

Jess Haas SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 1029 posts
  • Culver City, CA

Posted 31 May 2009 - 08:53 AM

Looks like an optical zoom vs. image repo to me. Looked like there was a bit of a vertigo effect going on at atleast one point although my eyes could have been playing tricks on me.

Gyros maybe?

~Jess
  • 0

#10 Ed Moore

Ed Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 185 posts
  • Midlands, UK

Posted 31 May 2009 - 09:24 AM

Looks like an optical zoom vs. image repo to me. Looked like there was a bit of a vertigo effect going on at atleast one point although my eyes could have been playing tricks on me.

Gyros maybe?

~Jess


The one coming up to the stack of TVs is definitely a zoom as you can see the perspective of the hills in the background change quite a lot.

But I wouldn't be at all surprised to find Charles is right and they've stabilised some of this, especially the lock offs at each end which are just phenomenal if they were done by hand.

Couldn't find a contact anywhere for George but I've emailed the DIT to see if we can get some behind the scenes info.
  • 0
Ed Moore
DP / occasional steadicam op
edmooredop.com

#11 Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2897 posts
  • LA, Ca

Posted 31 May 2009 - 12:47 PM

Looking at it I don't think it's a steadicam shot, I think its a stabilized head on a short arm, hence the two grips. There are few spots that to me it looks the XR head in action. With something like the XR head you wouldn't need to do any post stabilization, and honestly it's the way I'd shoot the spot.


XR head info
  • 0

Eric Fletcher SOC
Los Angeles, Ca

 

http://www.ericfletcher.com

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0281995/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


#12 Lawrence Karman

Lawrence Karman

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 808 posts

Posted 31 May 2009 - 10:56 PM

Think I'm going to have to agree with Eric. Not sure about the type of stabilized head, though. I thought all the XR heads were converted to Predator duty in Iraq/Afghanistan/Pakistan. Nobody throws a glass away better than Robert Carlyle!
  • 0
Lawrence
imdb page

#13 Matt Petrosky

Matt Petrosky

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 190 posts
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 01 June 2009 - 03:21 AM

Looks like an optical zoom vs. image repo to me.


Agreed, the perspective change and depth compression give it away. And like Charles said, there are a TON of zooms, it's almost constantly zooming.

And I agree with Eric and Doc, looks like a stabilized head shot, and why not, this would be a great way to do this.

-Matt
  • 0
Matt Petrosky
Los Angeles, CA

#14 Charles Papert

Charles Papert

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2152 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 01 June 2009 - 04:11 AM

Perspective change would be essentially identical with optical vs digital zoom. Theoretically depth compression (assuming you mean depth of field) would also remain the same, although having seeing examples that prove this, I always feel like I don't buy it for some reason.

I had thought 3-axis stabilized head when watching this also but got thrown off somewhere along the line, thought someone had said it was definitively Steadicam but I guess that wasn't the case.
  • 0

#15 Ed Moore

Ed Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 185 posts
  • Midlands, UK

Posted 01 June 2009 - 04:17 AM

Got a reply from the DIT:

The job was at least a year ago now, so some details are getting sketchy in my memory - I can't remember what lens it was but I think it might have been an Ultraprime, and I guess a 24 or a 32mm judging from how close Bobby was to the camera.

It was a rickshaw, pulled by two grips, with a garfield mount plus steadicam, operated by George. I'm not sure if the beginning and end were stabilised, but they didn't need it - I remember there was a tiny bit of very organic, non-distracting movement in the original, so I think they have taken it out.

They have done zooming in post on the actual frame during the shot, which ends up being a contrazoom, as the camera is coming further away from Bobby, but they have simultaneously zoomed in on the picture. Watch the background at 1.29 for eg. It's horrible. Again, unnecessary, as they seem to have done that just because they wanted a slightly tighter frame. I think there's another one later, but I don't have time to look for it now.

We had one half day for technical rehearsal, then two days shooting for just this one take. I think we did about 30 in all... I'm pretty sure the one they used was the very final take of all three days.


  • 0
Ed Moore
DP / occasional steadicam op
edmooredop.com




The Slider Camera Movement System

rebotnix Technologies

Varizoom Follow Focus

Paralinx LLC

Betz Tools for Stabilizers

Hocus Products

PLC - Bartech

Camera Motion Research

Lemo Connectors

GPI Pro Systems

Omnishot Systems

Stabilizer Workshops

PLC Electronics Solutions

Ritter Battery

Glidecam Industries