I'm trying to make sense of what should be two moving points (the subject being filmed, and the camera), both relative to a fixed reference (the 'interior' of the ISS).Flabbergasted wrote:Twenty-five minute tour of the ISS:
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doN4t5NKW-k
I wonder what they put in the lady´s hair...
To me, there's insufficient change in the separation between the camera, and the ISS walls/surfaces. The pseudo-random drifting of the she-naut film subject should be getting emulated by the camera operator, but it's not: at least not sufficiently. There's a feeling of framing and centering of the POV as depicted that just isn't properly consistent with someone filming this with a hand-held camera.
Please comment on this point
Also, still focusing upon the point behind the POV: how the hell would this physically work? The cameraman appears to move like a sperm tadpole. How does he manage to initiate a movement? And how does he stop?? Why don't we see a sudden lateral jerk in the framed image when he starts chases the subject? Suppose he pushes himself by his feet: that would duck the axis of shot up/downwards, which would then be over-corrected for, then damped back to straight-on. This does not occur. Similarly, if he's using one hand to pull/anchor, how can he visually relate to those contact random points...whilst constantly framing his subject with such accuracy?
And...how does he manage to zoom, like Superman crossed with a torpedo, with his neck anatomically bent backwards by under 90degrees (even with mitigation from a pivoted viewfinder). Never colliding with the sides at all. Even down at the insane tight-spot down at the re-entry module.
Note the classic ISS dissolve edits...
There's also a point in the movie when the camera appears to zoom-in, towards the 'Mission Badges', where she does a little show-and-tell, but I'm feeling that the continuity forgets that it's a zoom, and thinks it's a close-in of the whole POV...or is it vice-versa?
My theory regarding the apparent inequality between the random physical seperations (she-naut and camera, versus ISS walls/bulkheads) could be measured. By applying dot-plots, the average lateral clearances should be roughly the same. Two peas falling down the same pipe (and how does that 'falling' work??)
Please consider the above points...if I'm on a trivial pursuit, and this isn't artificial imagery, tell me where my instincts are going wrong.