|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/3/2008
|
Oops, shame mode on! I attached Claudia's image that I had still on my desktop after doing some changes on it. OK, here is the one I should attach.
Now, don't tell Claudia! She'll hunt me for that! ;-)
Nick
|
Dynamo and stick again |
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/3/2008
|
I used to use it quite often and I still use it from time to time again, Ian. You just take a battery powered dynamo and metal sticks of different lengths and weights. The rotor of the dynamo should have some kind of "pod" for attaching the sticks perpenticularly to the rotor. If the sticks are attached in an unbalanced way then of course the dynamo will start vibrotating when you switch it on. And if it is attached to the camera then the whole system will be vibrotating in the frequency of the dynamo - or of you have luck also in combination of eigenmodes of the camera and the dynamo. So, if you have also some way to control the voltage applied you can achieve different frequencies. And by changing the position and weight of the stick you can control the amplitude of periodic motion. Imagine something like the attachment - attached on the camera. I'll take an image of the setup too soon.
BTW, the camera doesn't really rotate around the optical axis of the lense this way. It only fulfills vibrotations. The rotational part of that is only cyclic swing between certain limits of angular positions. But of course, if the camera is somehow fixed on a frictionlessly rotating axis then it could also fulfil circular motion (if the metal stick is attached in a balanced way) with a lower frequency for angular momentum preservation. If the stick is still unbalanced then the camera will fulfil some kind of rotatory motion but not exactly circular.
Cheers!
Nick
|
Dynamo and stick |
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/3/2008
|
I think the same holds for me too, Aziz. But this is what turns it interesting for me - when it gets too hard to think of some other possibility. I guess, it's one of the images that can't be really "liked" and can't be really "rejected" immediately, simply because one can't say what the heck is going on.
Anyway... thanks a lot for the comment, and cheers!
Nick
|
|
|
|
Ian McIntosh
{K:42997} 10/21/2008
|
dynamo and metal stick? a photo of the set up could amuse! these close views with partially defined forms are interesting. how could this be refined? it is gone! (I'd try a slight anticlockwise rotate to make more of a wave out of it though).
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 10/16/2008
|
Thanks a lot for the detailed comment and the suggestion, Saad! It will be hard to get the motion blur only for the "mouth" but not for the background. Right now I can't imagine any method, but I think further.
My impression of the background here is of some kind of creeping/crawling dense "fog" over the ground, which fits such a scene in an undefinite way. But still I am eager to try what you suggest.
BTW, Alien is no beast. Just another guy of a different looking minority group that has been demonized. Imagine, he doesn't even get his social insurance though he does pay taxes and works like a horse in movies under the worst conditions, having to live in dark tunnels and dirty places where they put him. That's no fun, man! ;-)
Cheers!
Nick
|
|
|
|
aZiZ aBc
{K:28345} 10/16/2008
|
I observed the photo but no idea !
Like to know the others suggestions.
So will return to read them.
H&H
Aziz
|
|
|
|
Saad Salem
{K:89003} 10/15/2008
|
Hi Nick,since the shaking of the camera blurred both the subject and the back ground in the same way,I myself will not have that feeling,if you figure a way to shake only the mouth of the beast against the clear and focused background,it be convincing to me in a rather magnificent way,my regards,
Saad.
|
|
0 
