Re: More Hobbit pictures [2] SPOILER THREAD

[azriel]

Your welcome Petty !,I think its cos Im an English lass that I also can "Feel" the difference in light,etc. Sunlight,moonlight is detectable by you in the country of your origin,I think. Same as with bird songs.You know what time of day it really is even tho Team,(on any set) try to convince you its not.

[halfwise]

If you got the picture by screen capture that would explain some loss of contrast.

Anyway, I can't speak to plant differences and midday would definitely look different in the two locations, but the exact colors are an artifact of the digital grading. That at least you can't blame on New Zealand until you see the originals.

I like Dave's point about the aspect ratio of fields in pre versus post horse periods. Tolkien's original drawings of Hobbiton seem to show he was aware of this. There's still nothing that can be done about the vegetation types, (though the wooliness could be taken out) but that's only gonna stick in the craw of the fraction of a percent of the world's population who actually grew up in proper pubs. I can see not wanting to move clear around the world for these shots.

[Pettytyrant101]

Oh I know why they shot it where they did- made financial sense- not arguing that- only that the decision to do so means a trade off between it looking very like the descriptions (by shooting it in England) or a not quite the same version of it in NZ- we got the latter- I would prefer the former- but I understand why we didnt get it.

By the same token I think if they had started shooting the Shire stuff in England and ended up shooting the Minas Tirith stuff in Southern Europe the natural changes in light and vegetation would be consisitent across the journey they take south and would sublimily add to convincing the viewer they were seeing a genuine journey.

Whereas even with the colour grading you mention Halfwise the lighting in Minas Tirith looks the same as the lighting in the Shire- which it is as they are all shot more or less at the same latitiude and in the Southern Hemisphere.
But the lighting in the Uk is quite different from the lighting in southern europe- which is why so many Brit artists over the centuries have gone to paint in southern europe specifically for its light properties.

[halfwise]

All quite true.

[Mrs Figg]

only one is NZ countryside, can you tell which?

[azriel]

May I guess ? Id say the 2nd pic.

[Mrs Figg]

No, its impossible to tell, as the poster its impossible to tell that half was made in NZ and half in England. It is absolutely impossible to tell the difference. There is shaggy unkempt grass in England, there is well tended manicured grass in NZ. There are grey blue lighted days in NZ there are golden yellow toned sunny days in England and any combination inbetween and vice versa. Any changes can be manipulated in post production. To use the excuse of painters going to southern climes to paint, does not apply here. painters went to Mediterreanian countries to paint for a dramatic change in light, in Italy, and South Europe the light tends to the yellow, in North Europe its blue. The shire tones in Fellowship were more golden, Minas Tirith was bluer. Its all done in post production. Middle Earth is based on English countryside, but its not England, its Middle Earth, a fantasy land, in which case PJ has complete artistic licence. The Shire in Fellowship perfectly embodies the rural pastoral feel of 18th century pre-industrial English-type fantasyland. Its idealized, in reality England in the 18th century was full not of well fed jolly Hobbits with gardens full of roses but starving and poverty stricken serfs, the Inclosure Acts caused great hardship and took away the rights of the individual peasants. There gardens were probably not well tended, but made to scratch a poor living as best they could. The romantic image of English country life, is just that, a romantic fallacy.

[halfwise]

Picture #1.

The only thing post production can't change is the type of vegetation in broad shots, and high noon sun angle. I would guess visually noon in england would look like 2 pm in a lower latitude clime, it just wouldn't 'feel' the same if you were there because of other cues. Number of days of cloud cover: but in a film you just pick your days.

[Pettytyrant101]

as the poster its impossible to tell that half was made in NZ and half in England.- Mrs Figg

Odd then that I spotted it before the information came out that the background was taken in England. Must be my uncanny psychic powers at it again!

Odd also that a tv crew- and in particular the Director of Photography on something like Robin of Sherwood would comment on the newer Robin Hood having noticably the wrong light- and that was just being shot in central Europe. Guess he was just talking out his hat then?

'painters went to Mediterreanian countries to paint for a dramatic change in light'- Mrs Figg

So is there a dramatic difference in light between the UK and southern europe or not? Make your mind up.
And if painters went for that purpose why would film makers not?
One of the reasons Hollywood is where it is is because of the quality of the light in California.
Light is th emnost important part of the film medium.

And as to the romantic notion of englands pastural past- it makes no odds if its real or not- all that counts is the version of it Tolkien wrote about. And in it the fields, the woods and little streams are tended- things are neat and ordered- simple.

[halfwise]

I don't think the light is different, just the distribution of different types of lighting: sun angle and clouds and haze. You will get days in England that are indistinguishable from southern France and vice versa, just a matter of how often it happens.

and the old Robin Hood films didn't have digital grading.

[Pettytyrant101]

The new series of Robin Hood would have- and the old series (talking 80's here) which did not have digital grading was quite big on good old fashioned camera filters for colour corrections (for example all the night scenes are shot in daylight and a blue filter placed over the lens to make it night- now that would be done digitally- same effect though)- you can tell its shot in England still though and the newer one is not. And its not from the landscape it is just that the light is different.
Why its different is another matter and there your points about distribution, angles ect all come into play I am quite sure.

[halfwise]

maybe it's because all the scenes shot in England are shot from inside pubs. Europeans actually go outside for exterior shots.

[Pettytyrant101]

Yes well that may be true but all those european types are crazy with the sun you see- and in the uk its nearly always raining so you are best being somewhere warm and near the buckie.

[Mrs Figg]

No its not uncanny, its just you look for things to critisize and pick holes in that most people wouldnt see because they dont exist. You looked at the poster and found something because you needed to find something negative. Painting is a completely different medium, Film can be manipulated afterwards in post production. Its very simple really, painters went south to paint the more intense colours and light, whereas film makers can change the light with the editing suites, all it needs is a coloured filter, so in theory it doesnt matter if its NZ or London. It depends on the weather and time of year.

[Eldorion]

I've had plenty of disagreements with Petty myself and I do think that he sometimes goes a little overboard in his criticisms but he's fundamentally a reasonable person. Even when I disagree with him, I respect the effort he puts into explaining his opinions and backing them up when challenged. I think it's unfair to Petty to casually dismiss him as a mindless hater.

EDIT: You edited your post since I made mine so my point is a bit diluted, but I'm a still a bit discouraged by the harsh tone this thread has taken on.

[Mrs Figg]

Did I say he was a mindless hater?, they are your words not mine. I said he looks for things to critisize, things that most people dont see, because for whatever reason are not an issue. I mean who apart from Petty would dissect a perfectly lovely poster? Its just another pleasure he denies people, because it makes you peer at the poster looking for the fucking demarcation line from one bit of grass to another bit of fucking grass, because according to him its all wrong. It ruins innocent pleasure in an innocent poster, why the fuck would anyone even look at a stone bridge or a bit of grass and nitpick? its fanatical hating and its not coming from me.

[Eldorion]

If you feel that Petty is ruining your enjoyment of something, then I think you should stop putting so much stock in his opinions. I'm sure that Petty will correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never known him to try to force people to agree with him. He is quite vocal about his opinions but they're just that -- opinions. Everyone else is free to agree or disagree with them as they please.

Besides, tons of people both here and on other Tolkien forums over-analyze and pick things apart. It's not that they hate everything, but it's how some people express their fandom. I get that it's not for everyone but fortunately nobody is making anyone else engage in that if they don't want to.

[Pettytyrant101]

You looked at the poster and found something because you needed to find something negative- Mrs figg

I am so glad to have you here to tell me why I do things otherwise I just wouldnt know.

'Its just another pleasure he denies people..It ruins innocent pleasure in an innocent poster'- Mrs Figg

Indeed my sole puropse in coming here is to ruin posters specifically for you. Its all I have ever been doing here- for the years you were not a member I was just biding my time awaiting your arrival to ruin stuff for you. Really?

'Its very simple really, painters went south to paint the more intense colours and light, whereas film makers can change the light with the editing suites, all it needs is a coloured filter'- Mrs Figg

This statement tells me all I need to know about your understanding of the practilities of colour correction.
I use a professional product for this myself- Adobe After Effects- used by many internet companies, tv stations and smaller film companies the world over (big ones have their own dedicated programs).
I can spot an after effect filter or effect on most tv when I see it and it has taken me more than five years of use to get anything like half proficient with the program.
I wish it was like you describe and then I wouldnt spend so much time trying to get stuff looking right.

[Mrs Figg]

you may think you know about colour correction but all I have seen is some amateurish dabbling. That poster you so 'professionally altered was in my view quite badly done. You failed to understand perspective or distance. You flattened the picture and removed texture.

[David H]

starting to feel I was batting alone out here!

You've persistently instructed us all in the arcane arts of crabbitry for months and years now. You wouldn't want us to turn around and agree with you, would you? What's crabbit about that?

[Pettytyrant101]

Actually the original picture has a perspective issue- if you lok at the point where the NZ picture joins the background one (a good area to study is just above the chimney) you can quite clearly still see tufts of grass- it is no more than a few hundred yards away- the background it joins just to the right of that is some half mile or so distant- so the problem is contained in the orginal compositing of the two pictures.
And I did say I did it in under ten minutes and 'without much care' just to quickly offer Eldo a version without the line he said was now prominant to him when he looked at it.
I was reletively pleased with the result for a quick go at it and so was Eldo so as far as I am conserned job done satisfactorly- you prefer the original- fair enough- you dont see me spending three pages badmouthing you for that do you?

David you are quite right- and I have crabbit in reserves if needed!

[Mrs Figg]

I have given my opinion, if you dont like it. tough.

[Pettytyrant101]

And that is fine by me Mrs Figg- you have your opinion and I have never had a problem with that.
I have mine and you have spent about 5 pages attacking it.

[halfwise]

You two are kinda funny. If I didn't love you so much I'd be turned off by all the bickering but I'm sorta enjoying it.

[RA]

Well, on the bright side, there are now two posters to enjoy.