Penrose steps illusion (does auto-align videos efx exist?)

[Michael Szalapski]

The best way would be to hide cuts or transitions somehow, like having something pass between the camera and the subject. That way you can do a take for each floor.

To keep it from being repetitive, you might have a floor or two have the actor motion tracked into the shot.

– The Great Szalam
(The \’Great\’ stands for \’Not So Great, in fact, Extremely Humble\’)

No trees were harmed in the creation of this message, but several thousand electrons were mildly inconvenienced.

[Adriano Castaldini]

Michael, thx for your reply. Yes, I agree with you. Perhaps a good strategy is NOT stabilize the shot with gimbals or else, but maintain an handheld shaky style to edit without noticeable steps. Do you agree?

[Wallace Adrian d’alessio]

How “Auto” does it need to be?

Just compose your layer stack, set a key frame at the beginning for each layer with your scale and position values, then go to the end of the composition and again set key frame values.

Anything in between which is off can be time remapped or adjusted with mor key frames for transposition matching.

Beyond that you can graph edit the acceleration curves for easing and add expressions to effects for each layer. Looking around on AE expression script sites you may find expressions and behaviors to automate layers which fit your vision or are adaptable. But chances are you can achieve your goal with some rather easy tinkering in AE. And you can look in the effects and behaviors presets as well for help.

You can either learn to be an After Effects artist or buy some of the numerous commercial effects and processes presets to do the work.

Adrian D\’Alessio aka; Fluxstringer

fluxstringer@gmail.com
https://www.facebook.com/FluxStringer
https://www.linkedin.com/in/fluxstreamcommunications

https://twitter.com/FluxStringer
https://mog.com/FluxMuse

Tweets by FluxStringer

[Michael Szalapski]

Shoot the video as smooth as you can in production. You can add shake in post if you need to. Less shaking means better tracking! Especially if you’re shooting indoors without adding a bunch of lighting, the motion blur introduced by running will make compositing things very difficult. The less shake, the better.

– The Great Szalam
(The \’Great\’ stands for \’Not So Great, in fact, Extremely Humble\’)

No trees were harmed in the creation of this message, but several thousand electrons were mildly inconvenienced.

[Adriano Castaldini]

I must admit that you’re right. Stabilization means a lot of money for a zero-budget production… Anyway, I’m doubtful: Steadicam, Gimbal, or Rig? I can’t buy everything, so I’m looking for buying something good for this project and also for (many other) future projects.
A gimbal (Moza Lite 2) seems the best for stabilization, and you can mount extra monitor and remote focus controller on it, but it seems to me that you have more “direct control” and “dynamic changes of movement” with a cheaper Steadicam (Glidecam DGS). Both steadicam and gimbal are heavy for my thin arms, and will surey imply a support vest in a near future, but the steadi-vest is only half the price of a gimbal-vest. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think that a good use of steadicam gives near the same stabilization than a gimbal. The only problem I see with steadicam is the lack of focus control (no extra monitor and no thumb remote focus for weight reduction), but I think that this feature can be add in the near future buying a vest.
There would be a third option in my doubtful mind: the Edelkrone RigOne. It’s a simple rig, just to add monitor, microphone and follow focus to your camera. It’s not actually a stabilizer, but you can shift the burden of the rig on the trouser belt, so you can obtain a sort of stabilization. I don’t know if this could be useful on a stairs-longshoot.
What is your advice? (Thx.)