Can someone point me to a URL showing how they manage to spin a camera 360 degrees round a dance couple on Strictly Come Dancing without showing any other cameras?
What makes you think the show's not live? They do ask for viewers to
vote, which they couldn't do on a recording. What I find fascinating
is how the results show on Sunday, which is recorded half an hour
after the Saturday live show ends, manages to pretend it's taking
place on Sunday. The presenters wear new costumes and keep referring
to Saturday's show.
Can someone point me to a URL showing how they manage to spin a camera
360 degrees round a dance couple on Strictly Come Dancing without
showing any other cameras?
Does anyone have any pointers to show how they are now able to create
those scenic changes? I realise it is all done with electronics of one
type or another - but the tree that appeared on Saturday's set and
came/went in less than two minutes of screen time was quite impressive.
My observation is that now the Saturday night part does not even pretend
to be 'live' it give much more time to make the show - without boring an audience to tears.
Clearly a lot of talent and hard work - most impressive!
Tony
Ex RTV and LWT
"Tony Gamble" <tonygamble@compuserve.com> wrote in message >news:j0km7dFnoipU1@mid.individual.net...
Can someone point me to a URL showing how they manage to spin a camera 360 >> degrees round a dance couple on Strictly Come Dancing without showing any
other cameras?
I've seen in some drama productions the camera circle 360 degrees round a >pair of actors during their scene. If the camera is tilted up enough, they >can use a circular track with the camera dolly on it, but I've seen some >where a track would be in shot, so it can only be a steadicam operator >walking around them *very* smoothly - or else a camera on an overhead >crane...
On BBC2's 'Strictly It Takes Two' on weekdays I've seen rehearsals
where one cameraman with a steadycam and trainers runs around the
dancers, so there will not be any other cameras on the floor. All
other cameras are in the dark amongst the audience so can't be seen.
The scenic changes are superimposed electronically and would not be
seen by any audience on set.
What makes you think the show's not live? They do ask for viewers to
vote, which they couldn't do on a recording. What I find fascinating
is how the results show on Sunday, which is recorded half an hour
after the Saturday live show ends, manages to pretend it's taking
place on Sunday. The presenters wear new costumes and keep referring
to Saturday's show.
There was a piece on It Takes Two last week where the Series Director explained how they do things. Available on iPlayer as a separate segment at the moment.
There is some augmented reality. Mo-Sys is credited for it in the end
credits of week 10 results.
My impression was that they have a very well organised props crew who move physical scenery very quickly and the camera work is choreographed as carefully as the dances.
Or a drone. Even some of the little recreational ones you can buy for
a few hundred quid have quite astonishing stability. I've seen
stationary shots that you'd think were locked-off tripod shots, and
with the appropriate software they can also be programmed to follow prescribed routes, so I should think a 360 shot would be easy.
Rod.
On 30/11/2021 09:14, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Or a drone. Even some of the little recreational ones you can buy for
a few hundred quid have quite astonishing stability. I've seen
stationary shots that you'd think were locked-off tripod shots, and
with the appropriate software they can also be programmed to follow
prescribed routes, so I should think a 360 shot would be easy.
Interesting suggestion Rod.
The scenic changes are superimposed electronically and would not be
seen by any audience on set.
Can someone point me to a URL showing how they manage to spin a camera 360 degrees round a dance couple on Strictly Come Dancing without showing any other cameras?
Does anyone have any pointers to show how they are now able to create
those scenic changes? I realise it is all done with electronics of one
type or another - but the tree that appeared on Saturday's set and
came/went in less than two minutes of screen time was quite impressive.
My observation is that now the Saturday night part does not even pretend
to be 'live' it give much more time to make the show - without boring an audience to tears.
Clearly a lot of talent and hard work - most impressive!
Tony
Ex RTV and LWT
"Tony Gamble" <tonygamble@compuserve.com> wrote in message news:j0km7dFnoipU1@mid.individual.net...
Can someone point me to a URL showing how they manage to spin a camera
360 degrees round a dance couple on Strictly Come Dancing without showing
any other cameras?
I've seen in some drama productions the camera circle 360 degrees round a pair of actors during their scene. If the camera is tilted up enough, they can use a circular track with the camera dolly on it, but I've seen some where a track would be in shot, so it can only be a steadicam operator walking around them *very* smoothly - or else a camera on an overhead crane...
On 30/11/2021 02:00, Owen Rees wrote:
Thanks Owen. I've have a rummage around for that iPlayer clip.
There was a piece on It Takes Two last week where the Series Director
explained how they do things. Available on iPlayer as a separate segment at >> the moment.
There is some augmented reality. Mo-Sys is credited for it in the end
credits of week 10 results.
My impression was that they have a very well organised props crew who move >> physical scenery very quickly and the camera work is choreographed as
carefully as the dances.
And also see if there are some promos for Mo-Sys as that sort of thing >fascinates me. Years ago I was invited to the BBC R&D place and saw the >earlier evolvement of those virtual reality studios.
Dave W wrote:
The scenic changes are superimposed electronically and would not be
seen by any audience on set.
I accidentally saw part of a show sometime last year, all sorts of pointless >effects such as bolts of "electricity" shooting along the dancers' limbs.
On 30/11/2021 09:24, Tony Gamble wrote:
On 30/11/2021 09:14, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Or a drone. Even some of the little recreational ones you can buy for
a few hundred quid have quite astonishing stability. I've seen
stationary shots that you'd think were locked-off tripod shots, and
with the appropriate software they can also be programmed to follow
prescribed routes, so I should think a 360 shot would be easy.
Interesting suggestion Rod.
But too much noise, surely?
Yuck. I've never watched this show but from descriptions here and
elsewhere it sounds awful. The old superhero superpower lighning
effect is beyond cheesy, even when it's meant to signify something.
It's probably so easy to add this sort of nonsense in the edit
nowadays that they just do it because they can.
Rod.
On 01/12/2021 11:10, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Have a look at it sometime Rod if you are interested in what the
Yuck. I've never watched this show but from descriptions here and
elsewhere it sounds awful. The old superhero superpower lighning
effect is beyond cheesy, even when it's meant to signify something.
It's probably so easy to add this sort of nonsense in the edit
nowadays that they just do it because they can.
Rod.
technology is capable of these days.
And look at the support websites and you will see it is done real time
and not in a post edit.
Cheesey yes - but fascinating.
T
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 293 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 233:51:50 |
| Calls: | 6,624 |
| Files: | 12,172 |
| Messages: | 5,319,635 |