Stuart McCammon

To answer the original question, while I don't have a clue how they did the original hologram, the difference in brightness between the hologram and the background may give a clue. I'm thinking green screen for the hologram image and then a composite in post, which would indeed be expensive and a pain. You are feeling sleepy, sleeepy . . . take a computer class, taake a computer claaasss . . .

I have to vote for glass on this one. if you shoot the "ghost" as a reflection in glass (could be easily done in a stage or garage), then you can composite it without applying an effect, having the actor stop, etc. - it will also allow you to quickly get your location shot and eliminate the hassle of lighting and relighting to match the changes in sunlight through a sliding glass door, which would probably be the biggest single headache of this shot if done differently.

Congrats Richard)

Right you are, Michael - I claim senior moment - actually what got me going is another clip that also begs for a guy in a rubber suit and I guess I was still thinking CGI when I posted the shark - here is the other clip: http://www.guzer.com/videos/lame_cgi.php

This clip is a great answer to the statement, "We'll just do it in CGI" http://www.guzer.com/videos/funny_cgi_shark.php

Dear Lindsay, To better understand Haskell Wexler's reknown you might try the following: take your HVX-200 out in the hills with a friend, and recreate the opening sequence from "Cuckoo" (just the landscapes and the car driving through the hills), then come back here and post your footage - Best wishes,

For those tough craft service rigs: http://www.solocup.com/soloconsumer/images...0Blue1C9EB4.jpg

Ishtar - mostly for the funniest rendition ever of "Little Darlin'" - of course who can forget Aliens, simply the most exciting edge-of-your-seat rollercoaster of a film since Terminator, and followed up by Abyss - in any sport they would call that a streak, wtg James Cameron

CGI

Lots of shoots don't worry about the line and just take it out in post - might be more important for the line to be the same color as your bike than the background)

I just thought that, compared to a potentially large investment in time waiting for the right sky, the expense of a tank (not necessarily 100-gal.), hot and cold water and some paint sounded cheap, and certainly much more controllable than Mother Nature)

Two words: cloud tank The cheap, always-predictable, easily redoable solution)

Expect him to tell you something based on an inside joke only he and his best friend the costume designer understands, then watch as they both shift into open derision when you don't get it. Solution? Nod furiously.

What a loss - many regards to his family - the world has lost a great and sublime artist

Alan Smithee would seem to be a much more appropriate name)

Not sure about mailing the equipment, but in Los Angeles Wooden Nickel has cheap cheap equipment rental rates.

When in doubt, jump the shark!

Hi Fred, The big problem with Windows Movie Maker, last time I checked, is that it will only import/export .wmv files. Two other cheap tools for the PC are Quicktime Pro, which is a $29.95 download and Nero Ultra 7, which is commonly available from Fry's for free after rebates. Quicktime is also limited in its file formats (.avi and Quicktime, if I remember correctly), but has built-in H.264 compression and the file formats it works with are more common. Nero will theoretically work with any file format and has better tools than Quicktime or Movie Maker. Another cheap alternative would be to buy an older version of Adobe Premiere on Ebay. Cheers!

So Richard, if you came out with a RED-only steadicam it would have to be named - BOD - right? David, that is awesome - two more reasons for me to visit Texas - Schlitterbahn here I come)

Many people use glycerin for tears, because it is shinier and moves slower, I think it looks kind of fake, but there may be some glycerin mixture that will work for you - you will quite possibly also need more light and to overcrank.

Not sure why, but I can't get this list out of my mind - why no Total Recall? Talk about a movie that had every single different kind of visual effect in it - I am amazed - nothing against some of the movies on the list but I think Total Recall is more significant than many that made it -

Wow, A Trip To The Moon is only #13, and a movie that did not innovate a single new effect is #1, go figure lol - David I agree with you, this list is extremely biased and myopic in its view of the history of effects)

What if you just had greenscreen elements in frame - like a picture frame, the top of a coffee table, the corner of the room, the TV screen, etc, and then had your kid pop into those spaces? Actually, you could incorporate greenscreen elements throughout your tracking shot and have the kid pop in all along the way. You would need to have only one matte green item in frame at a time and use other background as a sort of "wipe" in between, but you could probably come up with a pretty interesting tracking shot that way. Anyway, that is the best low-buck idea I can come up with)

I can't think of a way to create steam safely on an actor's face - there is the two-part chemical used for food shoots, but I think might be toxic. This effect might best be accomplished through a combination of a strong reaction from the actor and audio effects.

This is what I was referring to, Chris: http://www.unilux.com/display_industry.php?iid=5 Thanks for letting me know this is a cinematography forum - I will try to remember that)