and hnag on, i've just noticed the inherent sarchasm there.
The originality for me is using a conventionally still format, 35mm film and pinhole cameras, to convey movement in what is essentially a still image.
(, Tue 4 Jun 2013, 16:09, Share, Reply)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_time
®Warner Brothers 2005
(
HappyToast Groat froth, Tue 4 Jun 2013, 16:18,
Share,
Reply)
Yeah I know, I know...
But in that, they were using a coupla hundred digital stills cameras, timed to fire at a slight delay, then they used a BUCKLOAD of digital post-processing to produce the final image, which was a moving image.
In this, they've used standard 35mm film, about 600 pinhole cameras (notoriously unpredictable to make, and DAMN hard to light correctly) fired all at the same time, to create an illusion of movement, whereas the actual subject is frozen in mid-shot.
Also, NO post-processing, just developed, as you would a normal 35mm roll.
The apparent simplicity, when you understand how many variables are involved, is amazing.
IMHO
(, Tue 4 Jun 2013, 16:34, Share, Reply)
I took a shit in a urinal once
(
gronkpan https://twitter.com/VomitingLarry, Tue 4 Jun 2013, 16:20,
Share,
Reply)
This sounds like a job for the hardly boys !!
(
gardenclaw mac fuckes your gradeds balls!, Tue 4 Jun 2013, 21:12,
Share,
Reply)
here you go, from 1993
using exactly the same technique
www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIpmUi8HI1k
(
mutated monty, Tue 4 Jun 2013, 17:20,
Share,
Reply)