Friday, 20 May 2011


Obviously, I'm slightly hesistant in uploading this, but it's for own my good I suppose. Had troubles uploading last night, though that's not important, it's up now. Here's where the animation is at right now. It should be obvious where footage is missing (placeholder footage is the eye) and where it hasn't been edited yet.


Richard V-C said...


tutorphil said...

Hey Tom - I've watch it through, and I'm going to watch it a number of times, and make some observations - and leave them on here tomorrow. I know it's scary putting it up - and it appears it was a pain in the arse to do so - but it's important not to go to ground in the final days. Watch this space.

tutorphil said...

okay; forgive me if some of the following states the obvious or picks up on elements you're already in the business of resolving.

1) The titles; I just wonder if the very quick wipe that introduces the title is now as apposite, because the pace of your animation is more leisurely and more 'soft', and I'd simply suggest that you can take a little longer over your title sequence; perhaps have it materialise out of the darkness and then back into darkness - and then bring the garden scene out of blackness as opposed to overlaying the text; a more measured, less contracted approach; you've got lots of time in the music after all, and I suggest you consider ways to spread things - i.e. slower fades in and out of the title and into the garden scene; almost like photographic images appearing out of the emulsion.

2) the bleach out transition from garden into studio just comes in a tad too early; the window just seems a little too far away from us to prompt the white-out; I'm only talking a second or so more but I think the flourish of the music would still fit, and it would just lend some additional energy to this change over.

3) the rose/forever young scene doesn't work, just because there is a disconnect. I suggest here that you should pan onto the rose on the portrait; and it's this rose that we should see wilt and die - you could do this as non-Maya - as simply a series of 2d images cross-dissolved together; if you don't establish this link between the rose, Dorian and the portrait itself, I think your audience will be left scratching their heads a little.

Tom Beg said...

yep, yep and yep. Next? :)

tutorphil said...

@ 56 secs 'How sad it is...' At this point, we should be looking again at the portrait - perhaps tracking down from the face - to the rose on the lapel - and the animated stills sequence previously suggested.

"I'd give my soul for that" This feels as if this should be a really close zoom towards the eyes of the portrait - 'the window of the soul' - with a darkening vignette sort of closing in, so that we're left with an after-image of the eyes alone - before they too fade into darkness - using all of the long sustained musical fade to your advantage; you need to break with the full portrait ratio here and get into the textural, painterliness of the portrait itself.

'But Juliet!' You need to use the poster portrait here - cutting away from the theatre scene; you don't have to show the whole poster, because you can use a full-shot to reveal her name etc when the narration demands it - but the talk track is talking about the specifics of her appearance, and so we should be shown what we're being told. (You're probably very aware of this!)

The wilting rose scene works very well! :D
Likewise, the falling locket :D
Broken vase/locket :D

@ 4.29 sec (approx) I think we need to see the 'door at the top of the house' arrive above the portrait image as it drops away - like a thought bubble; just as you did in the previous scene; you could simply have a 'fade up' on the door, as if it's the idea being had.

The 'cold and foggy night sequence' works well :D

'as if suggested by the portrait' - here, to enliven the scene wherein the narrator tells us that Dorian is having dark thoughts about Basil - just use the ugly portrait as an image; extreme close-ups of the eyes, mouth; use montage here to escalate the tension.

As a general observation, I'd suggest you've got an aversion to extreme close-up and close-up; and you're not using the portraits enough; for example, when we're first introduced to Dorian, and we're hearing his thoughts, use the portrait more; and, when Dorian is looking to kill the portrait and you've got that nice pulsing light; use the pulse to cut between close-ups; fill the screen with one eye; with the mouth. All of this can be accomplished without more renders, just imaginative use of stills.

Much of the magic of this is going to come with the editing, Tom - and remember your Transcription project; there was a stage then too, when your editing was pedestrian, because you were simply allowing your footage to 'play out' - but it came alive, when you took off your 'I made all this' hat, and approached what you'd produced as mere raw materials. Be as bold and as imaginative with the slicing up of your world as you were in making it.

Keep going - and be an editor now; it's a different take on your own work, but it's a transformative stage, so enjoy it.

Tom Beg said...

Wizard. Thanks Phil, I'll implement these changes asap.

tutorphil said...

there was another thing I hesitate to suggest, because I wonder at its implications - but when we see the vase of roses on Sybil's table, an accompanying florist's card, with something like 'To my darling, Sybil, with love Dorian' propped against the vase or lying on the table - would make the significance of the vase much clearer (i.e. that it came from Dorian and that it symbolises their engagement etc.)

tutorphil said...

oh, and you need to lift the theatre poster scene somehow - it does feel very 'flat' - I think we discussed post-lighting effects etc. It needs something to make it pop; I keep thinking about that old fashioned way in which they used to light female stars in the old movies - or Morticia in the Addams Family movies - that butterfly shaped lighting across the eyes.