Miniature Frame Rate Question

Tim Nuttall · December 1, 2009

Hi all,

I have a miniature shoot coming up on an arctic base at night built in 1:96 scale. According to my calculations using the classic frame rate formula, the model would need to be shot at 235 fps to achieve normal gravity. The only base motion I would anticipate would be smoke from buildings and possibly blowing snow from "heavy" winds. Also, there maybe some F/G snow, but that could be an optical added later as that wouldn't necessarily be miniaturized.

My questions are:

- Besides a Phantom, what film gear could shoot at this high a frame rate? (It's a 35mm show by the way)

- Do you think we could cheat the frame rate back to say 150 fps and still get away with realistic blowing snow?

Any suggestions or experiences are greatly appreciated. Thanks.

James Steven Beverly · December 1, 2009

I'm trying to figure out how you're going to make 1:96 scale snowflakes. Your model makers are gonna have one hell of a time! I would worry too much about using an ultra high frame rate for something like that effect. I'd go for something that looks right. MAYBE put your model in a fish tank filled with water and maybe use milk or something like that to wash over the base OR use white smoke and small fan to gently blow the white smoke or talcum powder over the base. I mean is this a shot of the snow blowing over the base from a distance as in they are caught in a snow storm or is this you are close enough to see the show build into drifts? Here, take a look at these snow storms and extrapolate from that what a snow storm would look like from a bird's eye view (I'm assuming the shot's going to be from a higher angle as the scale is 1:96):

Brian Dzyak · December 1, 2009

Hi all,

I have a miniature shoot coming up on an arctic base at night built in 1:96 scale. According to my calculations using the classic frame rate formula, the model would need to be shot at 235 fps to achieve normal gravity. The only base motion I would anticipate would be smoke from buildings and possibly blowing snow from "heavy" winds. Also, there maybe some F/G snow, but that could be an optical added later as that wouldn't necessarily be miniaturized.

My questions are:

- Besides a Phantom, what film gear could shoot at this high a frame rate? (It's a 35mm show by the way)

- Do you think we could cheat the frame rate back to say 150 fps and still get away with realistic blowing snow?

Any suggestions or experiences are greatly appreciated. Thanks.

I'm no expert with miniatures, but ILM is and the attached image is from their book, http://www.amazon.com/Industrial-Light-Mag...2799&sr=1-2 page 112. I hope that helps a little! :)

Brian Dzyak · December 1, 2009

This forum won't let me upload the image, no matter how absurdly tiny I make it. I'll put it on my server and provide a link soon.

Brian Dzyak · December 1, 2009

Ok, here it is http://www.dzyak.com/miniaturecalculation.jpg

David Mullen ASC · December 1, 2009

If the smoke element is forcing you to shoot the miniature at high speed, which in turn is not allowing you to stop down the lens enough... I'd add the smoke later in post. Getting a believable depth of field is the most critical part (that and the lighting but I assume you are shooting this miniature outdoors.)

As for blowing snow, I suspect blowing white powder of some sort might float and drift correctly when shot at high speed.

Stephen Williams · December 1, 2009

Photosonics 4ER does upto 360 FPS, 4ER+ upto 425 FPS

John Holland · December 1, 2009

Why is the miniature so small , ? build a bigger one then you wont have to hire expensive cameras to shoot it !!

Tim Nuttall · December 2, 2009

Why is the miniature so small , ? build a bigger one then you wont have to hire expensive cameras to shoot it !!

Thanks for all the great responses. The miniature is built to this scale mainly for cost and space restrictions. I think I may do some tests at 120 or 150 fps to see if it could still sell the blowing snow.

Steve Wallace · December 2, 2009

...I suspect blowing white powder of some sort...

White powder of some sort? That could get expensive David. :huh:

Phil Rhodes · December 2, 2009

Miniature snow effects annoy me.

I've seen more than one instance of people building a model that is, to scale, about four miles deep, then wanting it to be snowing. Of course, any amount of snow more than one flake a minute will reduce visibility to far less than the depth of the miniature, so what tends to happen is that they make it snow near the camera, then magically not snow anywhere else.

Please don't do that.

P

Will Earl · December 2, 2009

Just a thought - the smoke from the buildings and the snow from the storm might require different frame-rates in order to look like they have the correct (aesthetically speaking) movement. These things typically get done with a filmed or cg element because there is more control over the shot.

But if your going for it in one and it's a static shot then you might be able to retime the shot so it's slower or faster.

Mei Lewis · December 11, 2009

Ok, here it is http://www.dzyak.com/miniaturecalculation.jpg

You can derive that formula using equations of motion and the assumption that the miniature will look the same as the real world if things take the same amount of time to move the same distance in the miniature as they would in the real world. That is, if when playing back they take the same number of frames.

I can write it up if anyone is interested.