 New link in the top of page "IRC Chat". |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Last Posts
| IRC Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | XPW | Stats | Color Chart | Photo album |
|
| | ||
New link in the top of page "IRC Chat". |
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Last Posts
| IRC Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | XPW | Stats | Color Chart | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in General Chat. |
| User | Post |
| Stitch Posts: 1848/2785 |
Blasphemy. How dare you request a Trekkie to do Star Wars. I should do stuff, but I'm lazy. Instead, I will just scowl in disgust. |
| Bitmap Posts: 3246/7838 |
Originally posted by Zabuza Man, I feel bad for reading your paragraph terriably wrong...My Bad Zabuza... and I agree with Rogue, The way you made it fake really made me chuckle with glee....You should like...I dunno try some Star wars or something.... Im so gonna do that... |
| Stitch Posts: 1845/2785 |
It's true that the early communicators were made from lady razors among other things. Low budget show. It's piecing together a Sci-Fi show using only products from the 99 cents store. |
| Rogue Posts: 1907/11918 |
I'm just amused that you can still see the glass. And amused in the "Haha, good parody!"
I always thought it was amusing that the transporter effect was just glitter in water, stirred around with a spoon, but then again, that's Star Trek for you. The most random household objects become detailed props, like how the early communicators were supposedly lady razors. |
| Stitch Posts: 1840/2785 |
In TNG, that was a computer animation in the later series.
In TOS, it was a fade method in the green screening. |
| FX Posts: 210/3775 |
calm down
i did read the thing below, and u said that that is how they originally did it, and im saying that in the original, it did something else, how did they do that? jeez |
| Stitch Posts: 1835/2785 |
okay.
*deep breath* THIS WAS MEANT TO BE A CRAPPY REPRESENTATION OF A STAR TREK TRANSPORTER, NOT A FULLY OPERATION CINEMATIC PIECE OF EXCELLENCE. IT TOOK TEN MINUTES TO FILM AND FIVE TO EDIT, THERE WAS NO PURPOSE TO THIS OTHER THAN MENIAL ENTERTAINMENT ON MY PART.
|
| FX Posts: 208/3775 |
ya but didnt they have it so that it shrunk down, untill just their chest was sparlky in the end? also, you can see the cup at the very end. |
| Stitch Posts: 1833/2785 |
Well, if you had read the paragraphs below the video, you'd know that I explained that the Original Series and the first few season of TNG did the same thing I did, but used green screens (or "movie magic" as you call it) to facilitate easier fades.
This is my crappy transporter footage, not meant to be cool in any way, shape, or form other than the fact that I have a Star Trek (not Track) uniform. |
| Bitmap Posts: 3223/7838 |
Diddnt the people who made star track did the exact same thing you did? but ( No offence ) alot better movie magic?
I do think that its very unique that you made a movie of you doing that... |
| Stitch Posts: 1829/2785 |
Okay, it only takes me a few minutes to get into my Star Trek uniform. Aside from that, I was trying to execute a quick and dirty recreation of the way The Original Series and part of TNG executed the transporter sequence. It was done by a green screen overlay of a swirling class of glitter suspended in water or oil, and the fade out timed to the speed of the swirl. I, being out of glitter (or gay faerie dust), used cut up pieces of aluminum foil and water, and superimposed one piece of footage over the other as the footage containing myself faded out. I think it looks better, despite its crapiness, on the ending transporter sequence as opposed to the first one. But, I'm getting glitter the next time around, with a green screen for the glitter sequence, and editing it at school. Windows Movie Maker can't handle green screen sequences. |
