From the "After The Hunt" VFX Breakdown, by Frame by Frame
When people see a relatively innocuous shot from a movie of a city street, then see that it was an elaborate visual effects shot (either shot against a greenscreen or at a studio backlot), sometimes they wonder “Why didn’t they just film that at a real location? Wouldn't that have been easier and cheaper? Why resort to camera tricks?
Generally speaking, film crews need levels of control over the environment to a degree that is difficult for non-industry people to understand, which makes shooting on location sometimes not the best idea for a film production.
Here's a basic list of some of the reasons they didn’t “just shoot it at a real location” (there are plenty more):
- ultimate control for lighting and sun position, time of year
- location weather unsuitable for the film, either narratively or logistically
- repeatable action for multiple setups
- permissions and permits unreasonable or impossible
- disruption of a community (closed businesses, car and pedestrian traffic) for days or weeks at a time
- safety of crew
- location accessibility for countless trucks and gear and dozens of crew members
- availability of actors and crew
- no location fits the storytelling needs of the production, or the location would require massive structural modification to fit the storytelling needs (period picture, science fiction, alternate reality, etc.)
- additional photography (“re-shoots”) required but location no longer available or weather/season is totally different
- location shooting is much more complicated and time consuming than studio shooting
Update: Here's a terrific video from Olivier Servieres and Bastien Reynal discussing the challenges of filming outrageous stunts on location and with actors on an LED wall stage, called "The Hard Truth about Shooting Car Chases", and gets into the reasons why you would have two separate shoots. Really well done.
No comments:
Post a Comment