| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/28/2007 08:35:55 AM · #1 |
I am looking to get this effect on a bat for a senior portrait I am going to do, but can't quite figure out how they do it. I triedit once with sterno, but it didn't really work like I wanted. Anyone know what they use to get this effect?
Not my picture:
My picture... I know it's out of focus and the lighting sucks, etc...
 |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 08:44:37 AM · #2 |
Yours looks fine.
I think the bat angle in the one you were trying to imitate looks cooler plus the natural wood against the black background might add something. Their flame is a little more consentrated at the end of the bat and not so spread out. I'd bet that's also a little less light to contend with. Minor tweaking could be the difference.
It's also very possible that that flame was added on in PP.
Just noticed, it looks like their flame was created from a whole book of matches set on fire. Sorta resembles that.
Message edited by author 2007-07-28 08:48:06. |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 11:00:28 AM · #3 |
A couple of things you have to ask your self.
This is Albert Pujols, 1st base player for the St. Louis Cardinals.
HOW would they make a flame on a bat so that a highly paid, highly talented athlete like Pujols won't get burned?
The bat has to be held in a way to be convincing, without any combustible liquids dripping down the length of the bat, burning Pujols.
There are a lot of things that can combust. Gas, oil, Sterno, propane, the list goes on.
Now, ask your self, what is it that you don't see? You don't see the top of the bat, right?
Also, ask your self why is that flame so high? And why is it in one place and not all over like your example is?
I would have to guess, I would say, they drilled a hole in the bat for starters.
What ever combustible that was used had to have height when burning. Sterno doesn't give height.
Knowing some SPFX tricks due to my career, there might be a hose that you don't see, hidden along the bat, and in the cloths of Pujols, that is feeding propane. That would give you the height, but seem like a lot of rigging to get this effect.
Any way, these are my observations.
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
07/28/2007 11:04:00 AM · #4 |
For the fire, my guess is rubber cement. A common technique. I used it one this one.
 |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 11:04:11 AM · #5 |
i'd agree there is a hole made in the bat.
it could be the bat is rigged like a pipe, with a verticle hole at the tip ( where the fire is ) and a horizontal hole down the length to feed the fuel through. if that's the case it would be pretty easy to remove the feed hose from the lower right corner of the image.
|
|
|
|
07/28/2007 11:07:15 AM · #6 |
WOW, just a dab of rubber cement? How long does the flame last and does it melt and start dripping fire everywhere??? I'd like to learn from others' mistakes and not burn the place down. :)
|
|
|
|
07/28/2007 11:15:25 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by CalamitysMaster00:
WOW, just a dab of rubber cement? How long does the flame last and does it melt and start dripping fire everywhere??? I'd like to learn from others' mistakes and not burn the place down. :) |
The flame last about a minute or so. 30 seconds for good photo op. Gives a good color to the flame too.
Doesn't drip and just burns itself out. Leaves a dark residue.
Be sure you're in an open area. Fire is fire, but we never felt like it was getting overly dangerous. Have water or a fire extinguiser nearby, and don't do this near anything particularly flamable.
Try a little at first to see how it burns
I doubt it was a hole in the bat. Looks like they coated the end of the bat with rubbber cement. A sports photogapher told me about the technique. |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 11:19:34 AM · #8 |
I think it's interesting that everyone assumes there was real fire when they took the shot. We live in a Photoshopped world. Wouldn't it be easier and safer to take a bunch of different shots at different angles, choose the one you like, and add fire later?
|
|
|
|
07/28/2007 11:19:42 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by Man_Called_Horse:
A couple of things you have to ask your self.
This is Albert Pujols, 1st base player for the St. Louis Cardinals.
HOW would they make a flame on a bat so that a highly paid, highly talented athlete like Pujols won't get burned?
The bat has to be held in a way to be convincing, without any combustible liquids dripping down the length of the bat, burning Pujols.
There are a lot of things that can combust. Gas, oil, Sterno, propane, the list goes on.
Now, ask your self, what is it that you don't see? You don't see the top of the bat, right?
Also, ask your self why is that flame so high? And why is it in one place and not all over like your example is?
I would have to guess, I would say, they drilled a hole in the bat for starters.
What ever combustible that was used had to have height when burning. Sterno doesn't give height.
Knowing some SPFX tricks due to my career, there might be a hose that you don't see, hidden along the bat, and in the cloths of Pujols, that is feeding propane. That would give you the height, but seem like a lot of rigging to get this effect.
Any way, these are my observations.
Good luck. |
I agree with the idea of rigging the bat but why would you have to drill a hole in it you could have the tubing on the backside that is not visible. |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 11:24:04 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
I think it's interesting that everyone assumes there was real fire when they took the shot. We live in a Photoshopped world. Wouldn't it be easier and safer to take a bunch of different shots at different angles, choose the one you like, and add fire later? |
Because real fire is better and easier. |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 11:29:12 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
I think it's interesting that everyone assumes there was real fire when they took the shot. We live in a Photoshopped world. Wouldn't it be easier and safer to take a bunch of different shots at different angles, choose the one you like, and add fire later? |
Photos don't lie! But liars can photograph...or something like that LOL
|
|
|
|
07/28/2007 12:13:15 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by levyj413:
I think it's interesting that everyone assumes there was real fire when they took the shot. We live in a Photoshopped world. Wouldn't it be easier and safer to take a bunch of different shots at different angles, choose the one you like, and add fire later? |
Because real fire is better and easier. |
Shrug. Color me unconvinced. But just to be clear, I don't mean digital fire, I mean compositing a shot of real fire onto the other shot.
|
|
|
|
07/28/2007 12:19:11 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by CalamitysMaster00:
WOW, just a dab of rubber cement? How long does the flame last and does it melt and start dripping fire everywhere??? I'd like to learn from others' mistakes and not burn the place down. :) |
The flame last about a minute or so. 30 seconds for good photo op. Gives a good color to the flame too.
Doesn't drip and just burns itself out. Leaves a dark residue.
Be sure you're in an open area. Fire is fire, but we never felt like it was getting overly dangerous. Have water or a fire extinguiser nearby, and don't do this near anything particularly flamable.
Try a little at first to see how it burns
I doubt it was a hole in the bat. Looks like they coated the end of the bat with rubbber cement. A sports photogapher told me about the technique. |
Wow, that's some cool info! |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 12:28:40 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by electrolost:
I agree with the idea of rigging the bat but why would you have to drill a hole in it you could have the tubing on the backside that is not visible. |
I would if I had the chance to do the rigging correctly.
You may, or may not, see the tubing. Why take a chance when the photo shoot prolly cost upwards of $30K, or more, per day.
|
|
|
|
07/28/2007 01:13:07 PM · #15 |
+1 for the rubber cement trick.
Being younger, I was capt. Pyro. We used to purchase cans of the rubber cement and have a field day. It burns itself out without harm to anything else.
I would certainly try the flaming bat with it. Once applied, it shouldn't really run. You may have to try several times, so you might want to have an extra set of hands. One to do all the setupwork, and the other to click the shutter.
|
|
|
|
07/28/2007 01:15:07 PM · #16 |
Try a BLACK background for better contrast, like is done in the original.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/29/2025 06:10:59 PM EDT.
