So, sort of the Banksy of photography? posted by Thorzdad at 8:26 AM on February 1
Thorzdad - exactly what I was thinking posted by radioamy at 8:31 AM on February 1
I find myself wishing these were drawn on the backgrounds, instead of illuminated from the backgrounds. (Since the stencils appear even on the skies, it's clearly the latter.)
By contrast, the "Light stenciling" link details how to do both - use a cardboard box cutout for the stencil (lined with aluminum foil and powered by an inserted flash) placed in-scene, but "grass" and "red ground contour lines" are painted on with green lasers and a spotlight, respectively.
I'm now curious how it would look to "paint" these stencils onto the background itself. Obviously the fall-off would be considerably uneven if the background dropped away (a flat street, for instance), but against a wall, maybe with things in front - trashcans, light posts, passers-by - the effect could be neat.
I'm now curious how it would look to "paint" these stencils onto the background itself.
You'd need some optics to focus the image you were projecting on the background, and if the background wasn't parallel to the camera, you could have focus issues in addition to falloff issues. Some have tried this.
What if you used lasers to illuminate the image, and had the lens very close to the lasers to avoid parallax? That would avoid focus issues. posted by Joe in Australia at 4:16 PM on February 1
Thorzdadwrites"So, sort of the Banksy of photography?"
Without all the vandalism. posted by Mitheral at 7:36 PM on February 1
Thorzdad writes "So, sort of the Banksy of photography?"
Mitheral: Without all the vandalism.
...and the immense talent. posted by IAmBroom at 7:31 AM on February 2
« Older Over its amazing 35 year run, Soul Train provided ... | We are the priests.... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by filthy light thief at 7:47 AM on February 1