That's some strange orange you got there.

My opinion: The orange color is suitable.

Make the orange one color instead of that mix of different shades, and you have a winner.

I must say that the orange has a very strange illumination to it...

Anyways, if anyone would be so kind as to tell me how this shot was made? (I know, I'm a bit of a n00b for Smeagol's awesomeness)

I think it was made by camera mapping in Carrara and PSE, but it could have been done through other ways as well (Also, when I said shot, I meant the entire sequence of the first plant shot).

Maybe I misspoke myself-I meant how did Smeagol composite the plant behind the bricks, but in front of the wall.

If we must speculate then yes, it appears to be a combination of masking and blending of a computer generated image of a plant over a sequence of still images.

If you look carefully, I speculate that the plant was rendered with a white background and masking, rather than keying, was used or else that bright aura around the base of the plant behind the transparent brick would not have been noticeable when the encasing device's shadow was casting over it.  Anyways, while it is in shadow, the plant image is darken to appear consistent with the still images when the plant is in shadow and brighten (or rather, not darken) when there is no shadow.  Unfortunately, it would appear Smeagol may have only done 3 different levels of darkness to the plant's base and the brighter version was used 2-3 frames prematurely, hence the minor inconsistency.

The rest involved perhaps noise and blur filters to make the base of the plant appear to be behind the transparent piece.  But given the low resolution of the plant in this shot, I don't think it was necessary. Given that this is a nearly flat angle shot, refraction did not need to be taken into account for realism.

There's also the added benefit of a digital zoom in post-prod rather than a dolly shot on set, making the masking and blending process easier in this shot because it's all done with one single computer generated image over maybe about 11 still images on the computer.

This is, of course, only speculation.  I highly doubt camera mapping was used.  Camera matching, yes, although given the flat angle shot, it didn't seem necessary.  The orbiting shot following this one most likely required some camera matching.

Personally, I would rendered the plant with a key-able background color and done all the masking and blending in After Effects for instant playback so I'd know if it's too bright or too dark at certain frames.

Last edited by Lechnology (February 11, 2011 (05:49am))

An updated version of the backdrop:

[Edit] it posted my reply twice

Last edited by StanTheLegoMan (February 24, 2011 (07:33am))

Thanks for the feedback, guys.
Juggernaut, the image isn't done yet. It's a low quality one, so you can't see a lot of the details in it. If you look closely, you'll be able to see the gaps between the bricks, but perhaps I should make them a little bigger. There will be buildings all along the canal (not just 3 ), so you won't be able to see the sky. I'll add DOF and color correction last, when all the other elements are done. Thanks again for your suggestions; I appreciate the help.

Last edited by StudioL30 (February 24, 2011 (12:05pm))

I don't know whether this will be different when it is finished, but I think the water looks very realistic, while the rest does not. This contrast makes the shot seem slightly odd. Also, the "edges" of the water are straight, although there are tiny waves. But still, the shot looks nice, good work.