quote:

---

Originally posted by jdom
however I need to cover a large area of ground. Is there a better/cheaper way.

---

I'm thinking that on a low budget (I assume you mean no
budget, am I right?) CG is the only way to do this. Covering
a large area of ground is not reasonable on no budget. Are
you sure you need to see the large area of ground?

I know you can do a light snowfall in AE. Perhaps with creative
camera angles and sound effects and some good acting you
can get the idea of cold. Clothing and acting will go a long
way - actors stomping their feet, rubbing their arms, shivering.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jdom
I looked into artificial snow and It is do-able

---

If you can some artificial snow, you can carefully choose camera
angles to show only what you want to show. I know you said
you need to cover a large area of ground, but maybe you can
cheat. Use as much artificial snow as you can afford and use it
creatively.

I don't know about breath - the few times I see the CG breath
I find it distracting - but I think you can by breath condensation
layers to use in AE.

For "snow" that is relatively inexpensive, won't melt and looks the part, try SOAP FLAKES. More often than not, that's what the Special Effects guys use on the big sets. For piles of snow on the ground, you simply spread it around in enough quantity to sell it. Then you can blow a lot into the air from offscreen if you need it to fall. The best part is that it is biodegradable so you won't have to clean up every bit of it when you're done.

The breath is harder. Typically, when scenes are shot in warm weather, the Visual Effects people add the visible breath.

IF you can manage it, assuming the shots allow it, you could shoot all of your wide exteriors as you would, but then shoot extreme closeups in a very cold interior and use long lenses to dump the depth-of-field down so that you can't tell what's really behind the talent. That would "sell" the cold weather aspect when intercut with the snowy wider exteriors.

Brian Dzyak
Cameraman/Author
IATSE Local 600, SOC
http://www.whatireallywanttodo.com
http://www.realfilmcareer.com

Where could a filmmaker get enough soap flakes to cover a
enough to sell it? Is this something that can be done on a
low budget?

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

http://www.natlallergy.com/prod/1855/dri-pak-pure-soap-flakes-delicate-laundry-sensitive-skin.html?eid=froogle&tid=froogle&sid=froogle&ci_src=14110944&ci_sku=201-1001

And, it should be noted, that a set decorator only needs enough flakes to sell the idea that the ground is covered in snow. For instance, if hills/mounds of snow are required, virtually anything can be used to create the hill (like a pile of wood covered with sheets), but then just cover the hill with a layer of soap flakes.

It's all an illusion! 🙂

Brian Dzyak
Cameraman/Author
IATSE Local 600, SOC
http://www.whatireallywanttodo.com
http://www.realfilmcareer.com

Cool.

I wonder how many pounds of those soap flakes it would take to cover,
say, five square feet of ground in the woods. And how long that stuff
would stay on the ground.

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

quote:

---

Originally posted by certified instigator

Cool.

I wonder how many pounds of those soap flakes it would take to cover,
say, five square feet of ground in the woods. And how long that stuff
would stay on the ground.

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

---

Soap flakes won't go anywhere until the wind blows or it rains. 🙂

As far as how much? Well, that depends on the shot, doesn't it?

Look, movies cost money. Plain and simple. If someone doesn't want to put in the time, energy and money to FAKE something, then they have to do it for real, which has its own cost involved (like flights, hotels, food, etc). But if you want to fake it, then that costs money too in different ways. A SERIOUS "Filmmaker" has to come to grips with the realities of what it takes to create ILLUSIONS on screen. Those realities include real costs as well as dealing with people, egos, schedules, etc.

Snow and cold can be achieved by shooting your movie in a snowy and cold location. If you refuse to shoot in a real location like that for any reason (logistics, finances, etc), then you are left with faking it which incurs its own costs. One can choose to spend money ON SET (ie, soap flakes, etc.) or in post-production with digital visual effects.

The only questions are, at which part of "production" do you want to spend the time and money and what will you potentially LOSE (for your movie) by the choices you make?

Maybe it'll cost $500 bucks to cover the ground in soap flakes for the shots needed. Or maybe it would be $5,000. Is that worth it if the VFX would cost more than that? What if VFX cost less? BUT, the actors deliver crappy performances because there ISN'T "snow" on the ground? It's all about weighing priorities relative to what you can afford. If you can afford to fly the cast and crew to a snowy and cold location to be authentic, then have at it. But if you can't, will your movie be served by faking it and hoping that your crew can "sell it" well enough on screen?

Brian Dzyak
Cameraman/Author
IATSE Local 600, SOC
http://www.whatireallywanttodo.com
http://www.realfilmcareer.com

Brian, I know movies cost money. I was wondering about the use of
this product - not if it would cost money.

I understand that most of this post is directed at jdom who has not
returned to comment on the answers, but now I wonder why in response
to my curiosity you explained the process of movie making.

I don't get it. I have never used anything like the product you linked
to. It peaked my curiosity. It made me wonder if you had any experience
using this. If you don't, that's cool. Just attempting to have a discussion.

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

quote:

---

Originally posted by certified instigator

Brian, I know movies cost money. I was wondering about the use of
this product - not if it would cost money.

I understand that most of this post is directed at jdom who has not
returned to comment on the answers, but now I wonder why in response
to my curiosity you explained the process of movie making.

I don't get it. I have never used anything like the product you linked
to. It peaked my curiosity. It made me wonder if you had any experience
using this. If you don't, that's cool. Just attempting to have a discussion.

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

---

Yes, sorry, it was directed toward others. 🙂

And yes, I've been "subjected" to soap flakes as well as plastic flakes at one time or another. This stuff gets everywhere and into everything, but it is quite authentic. The flakes are big enough to read on camera and light enough to appear like big fluffy flakes. Trying to use "real" snow from a snow machine wouldn't be cost effective nor practical for a number of reasons.

Brian Dzyak
Cameraman/Author
IATSE Local 600, SOC
http://www.whatireallywanttodo.com
http://www.realfilmcareer.com