Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 5:42 am
PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com
Scope Users Community
https://www.forums.scopeusers.com/
Can Throwing
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 6:45 am
fake, but who cares, nice one!
Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:04 am
Why do you think that?katano wrote:fake, but who cares, nice one!
Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:38 am
I have a sick racial joke which elaborates on this topic. Keep in mind I only find humor in these jokes, it's so racist it makes me laugh. It goes like this............................................I recenlty purchased an M109 Barrett, simply put, the worlds most acurate and dangerous snipers rifle. Which shoots am 8" 50 caliber round. At any rate I was buying ammunition at the local hardware store last weekend. I told the salesperson the contents of my list, which were rather large, 400 22 long rifle, 300 223 center fire, 200 45 cal., 200 38 cal., 200 25 cal., 200 30 odd 6, 200 40 cal., and 500 wadcutter type 50 caliber rounds. The salesman says wow, are you starting WW3? I said no, just target shooting. He says WTF are you shooting as targets, I said cans, he said they must be really big cans, I said yes they are, Africans, Mexicans,...etc.
Ankyu,Ankyu,...Please stay seated
Ankyu,Ankyu,...Please stay seated
Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 6:16 pm
because some of the cans are obviously animated.Counterparts wrote:Why do you think that?katano wrote:fake, but who cares, nice one!
!
Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 2:31 am
I dissagree with the 'animation' theory.
The amount of work, computing power, time taken and expense required to blend-in CGI (or even hand-animated) cans with live action would be prohibitive. Especially when compared with the 0-expense and effort of simply editing out the misses from the footage.
Do you know how much effort would be required to blend-in animation in every single frame of live footage?!
Besides, some people are good at throwing stuff
The amount of work, computing power, time taken and expense required to blend-in CGI (or even hand-animated) cans with live action would be prohibitive. Especially when compared with the 0-expense and effort of simply editing out the misses from the footage.
Do you know how much effort would be required to blend-in animation in every single frame of live footage?!
Besides, some people are good at throwing stuff
Re: !
Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 8:53 am
backward, without looking, at that distance?Counterparts wrote: Besides, some people are good at throwing stuff
then I would like to know how much attempts are made...
Re: !
Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:51 am
you may have noticed that all the can 'ballistics' are pretty similiar...Counterparts wrote:...
Do you know how much effort would be required to blend-in animation in every single frame of live footage?!
there's a live video track and a (transparent background) animation track - the latter just scaled and mixed with the 'performance' - but it remains cool anyway
cheers, Tom
Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 1:53 pm
i don't have an exact "theory"(translated as "educated guess) of how they were animated, it's clear that they are, though! cheers! Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:25 am
Oh well, perhaps we'll have to agree to differ on this one
@ Hubird; yes, backwards without looking. I've seen circus performers throw knives at under-dressed young ladies missing them by a fraction of an inch. Wearing a blindfold. They achieve this 100% of the time. Perhaps it takes 20 takes to get the can in the bin, but of course we only see one take..
@ Hubird; yes, backwards without looking. I've seen circus performers throw knives at under-dressed young ladies missing them by a fraction of an inch. Wearing a blindfold. They achieve this 100% of the time. Perhaps it takes 20 takes to get the can in the bin, but of course we only see one take..
Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 6:37 pm
@ counterparts, isn't the fun of making a video like that having it constructed in an artificial way?
it's powerplay, isn't it?
it's powerplay, isn't it?