I’m curious if anyone knows the history of “ramping” in cinematography. This is when the camera speed changes, and the ensuing speed change is compensated for via a change in the iris, or with a change in the shutter angle. The first use of it to great effect I can think of is in “Raging Bull”. Lately it has appeared in all kinds of films and commercials. Is anyone aware of who came up with this technique? What is the first example you can think of? What is (are) the best example(s) you can think of?
did you make that movie called “Coven”?
Sounds too much like oven.
What do you mean by “change in shutter angle”?
Did you make the movie called “ramping”?
Oh wait… that was “Rambo”.
Exposure is increased or decreased when the camera speed is decreased or increased. To maintain proper exposure less or more light must be let in to reach the film. Usually this is controlled by the aperture; when the camera is slowed, the aperture must be made smaller to let in less light and vice versa. More advanced cameras (and Cartooniverse would know more about them than I, since my camera was built in the late-'70s) have shutters whose opening angles can be changed while the camera is running to allow a greater or lesser amount of light to hit the film.
The first time I remember ramping shots in films was in The Gods Must Be Crazy. The technique is used throughout the movie.
Who originated it? I have no idea. I think it might have originated when cameras were hand cranked and the speed was controlled by how fast the operator cranked.
Johnny L.A., are you sure that the effects in TGMBC weren’t done in post by removing frames? They have a severe jerky quality.
Wes Anderson uses speed change in at least a couple of scenes in The Royal Tennenbaums and IMDB says it’s a trademark of his. The ending scene where everyone is walking out of the cemetery has a noticeable speed change as well as when Margot meets Richie at the terminal. The effect is very different from TGMBC as there is no abrupt change when motion slows. Sorry I don’t know who started it but certainly not Wes Anderson.
Two of my favorite movies BTW
Padeye: I’ll have to see it again, but I’m pretty sure that’s what they did. It was a low-budget film after all, and it would be cheaper to do the effect in the camera instead of in post.
TGMBC is finally out on DVD, and I’m sitting here without a job! Bugger.
I’m in holding pattern at work so what the hell.
A typical cine shutter is a rotating disk with with a big pie shaped slice taken out of it. The shutter rotates one revolution for every frame of film. The angle of the shutter opening along with the frame rate determines how long each frame is exposed. Say for 24fps and a 180º shutter angle (completely arbitrary as I’m a still camera maven) you’ll get an exposure of 1/48 second. If you speed up the shutter for slow motion the time that the shutter is open for each frame decreases. To keep exposure constant you need to open the lens iris or increase the angle of the shutter.
Out on DVD you say, thanks. Yeah, the effect were special in a short school bus kind of way but the movie was hilarious. It played in San Diego at one theater for months on end.
I’ll do a frame by frame analysys if I get the DVD and report back here. I stil think it was done in post as that effect is more scissors and tape than ILM. I think the effect was too abrupt to have done in camera without buggering up the exposure.
180° is pretty much standard. My Eclair NPR has an adjustable shutter (5° to 180°, with 10° increments between 10° and 180°) and for a long time it was unique in that respect. (I think Arriflex finally introduced a variable shutter on the SRIII, but I’m not sure about that.) I think most Bolex H16s have a 170° shutter, which would be about 1/50 second. I remember that super-8 “XL” cameras had 220° shutters (1/30 second at 18fps or 1/40 second at 18fps).
Assuming you don’t have a nice computer-controlled shutter (my NPR shutter is only adjustable while the camera is stopped), then you would need to adjust the aperture at the same time you’re ramping. This is where your 1st AC comes in handy. While the camera operator is concentrating on the shot (framing, camera movements, etc.) the 1AC can vary the motor speed and the aperture. I’ve never tried it, but I presume it would be similar to racking focus or zooming. That is, you would mark your starting and stopping points by putting bits of tape on the lens (or marking the follow-focus or zoom knob, if so equipped) and rehearsing the timing before the take.
I’d really like to know what camera they used on TGMBC. IIRC, it appeared to be shot MOS and looped later. If that’s the case, then they might have used an Arri 16S which has a variable motor and tachometer accessable from the rear of the camera. (I like seeing what cameras are used in films, such as the wind-up Bolex in Kon Tiki and the Arri SRIIIs they use at football games.)
Of course, that should have been “1/40 second 24fps”.
OK, so so far we have two old examples in “Raging Bull” and “The Gods Must be Crazy”, both of which came out at roughly the same time. As far as films of the hand cranked era are concerned, this certainly makes sense, but if you can think of any examples that would be great. Before the advent of sound many exciting techniques were used as the Cinematographer wasn’t married to 24fps. I’m pretty sure some of the old hand cranked Mitchell’s had a shutter which was adjustable from the rear of the camera while shooting, so ramping was clearly possible by shutter or iris. I’m curious about the first example of a speed change for effect (emotional in RB, comic in TGMBC) with shutter or iris compensation that you can think of. Sort of like the creation of the OED, when the origins of words were sought. I think the technique was used in the matador scene in “Fail-Safe”, but I’d have to watch it again to be sure. C’mon Johnny L.A., you seem to have a pretty extensive knowledge of film technique and history (do you like your butter heavy?), I’ve always been curious about a chronology of this technique- dig deep.