Comments

AlanC wrote on 10/17/2008, 9:11 AM
I watched Bathtub III 3 times and I'm still not sure if it's real, if only the backdrop is real and 3d models are used in the foreground or if it's all CGI or if part of it is CGI.

So I watched Bathtub II and The North Wind and Beached but now I'm even less sure.

What's going on and why is the top half blurred?

Is it real? Am I real? I don't know anymore.
baysidebas wrote on 10/17/2008, 9:58 AM
The best I can figure out the illusion is this:

The film is a genuine time lapse of an outdoor scene. Several elements have been manipulated to make it appear as if it were a scale mockup. The use of a tilting lens [as claimed] renders the upper part of the image out of focus, which creates the illusion of macrophotography with the corresponding shallow depth-of-field. Normal filming of such a scene would result in everything being in sharp focus. Further, it appears that some manipulation of colors was performed, adding to the illusion of unreality. We can only go by our experience of observation, and these elements were manipulated to suggest other situations than the ones actually present.
baysidebas wrote on 10/17/2008, 11:40 AM
It also reminds me of the age old practice of hyper-stereo, where stereo pairs of scenic shots were made where the individual exposures were separated by distances far greater than the normal interocular distance of approximately 2.5 in. This practice resulted in depth information far beyond the usual limit, but had the, sometimes, unintended effect of making the scene resemble a tabletop tableau.
farss wrote on 10/17/2008, 1:30 PM
You've got it. I believe it was all done in camera. A Nikon D90 with a tilt/shift lens. The combination of the DOF and the stuttery timelapse makes reality look like stop frame animation of tiny models shot with a macro lens.
It certainly had me going for a while too.

Bob.