Maybe I'm projecting
March 24, 2009 10:15 PM Subscribe
I want to project images onto people and photograph them.
The images would be digital images. The people may or may not be clothed. This would happen in a studio which I do not own, so I need a fairly portable setup. I guess I need a portable projector, right? Whats a good one? (And if you have done something like this, feel free to offer any advice).
The images would be digital images. The people may or may not be clothed. This would happen in a studio which I do not own, so I need a fairly portable setup. I guess I need a portable projector, right? Whats a good one? (And if you have done something like this, feel free to offer any advice).
You probably don't need a real good one (not in the home cinema sense), but you will need a bright one. My suggestion would be to look for a used one that supports 1024x768 thats 1500 lumens or better.
posted by doctor_negative at 10:27 PM on March 24, 2009
posted by doctor_negative at 10:27 PM on March 24, 2009
I did just that with a regular slide projector. We checked out a bunch of slides from the university library and we borrowed an old projector. It was pretty easy and the results were nice.
posted by clearlydemon at 11:15 PM on March 24, 2009
posted by clearlydemon at 11:15 PM on March 24, 2009
You should check out Craig Neilson, however he seems to have removed most of his art from deviantart at the moment, but he does this with a projector the size of a large briefcase to project transparencies onto people. I don't think he would mind you contacting him from the email address on that link to ask him directly.
posted by chrisbucks at 1:20 AM on March 25, 2009
posted by chrisbucks at 1:20 AM on March 25, 2009
Uh, deviantart was broken when I first checked his page, his stuff is actually all there. He even posted a tutorial a while ago on how he does it. You will need to register to see any of his nude art, due to the way dA restricts access to that content. But here's the tutorial anyway:
http://exquire.deviantart.com/art/Projection-nude-art-35056163
posted by chrisbucks at 1:23 AM on March 25, 2009
http://exquire.deviantart.com/art/Projection-nude-art-35056163
posted by chrisbucks at 1:23 AM on March 25, 2009
You need to keep in mind that if you use a digital projector (especially DLP) the projector will be refreshing the image as you photograph. If your shutterspeed is too short, you will get weird color problem as each part of the frame (R, G, and B) are drawn across time.
The transparency and slide projector routes are immune to this problem. For your purposes LCD projectors will have less artifacts than DLP. LCoS even less.
Doctor Negative is right about brightness.
posted by fake at 5:59 AM on March 25, 2009
The transparency and slide projector routes are immune to this problem. For your purposes LCD projectors will have less artifacts than DLP. LCoS even less.
Doctor Negative is right about brightness.
posted by fake at 5:59 AM on March 25, 2009
The DLP is easily detected... if you are looking at the front of the projector (not in its beam) and see a smear of red, green, and blue when you move your eyes around, it's DLP.
Not to say that this aspect of DLP couldn't have some interesting effects.
posted by kindall at 7:02 AM on March 25, 2009
Not to say that this aspect of DLP couldn't have some interesting effects.
posted by kindall at 7:02 AM on March 25, 2009
are they protected under generic copyrights?
Oh, please.
This (sfw) was shot with a cheap (~$200) opaque projector. You can get away with it if you can a) darken the rest of the room completely, b) use a tripod and a long exposure, and c) your model can hold still long enough to stay in focus. If you can't control the room lighting, or want in-motion shots that can't be done with a long exposure time, you'll need a much brighter (and costlier) projector to make it work.
I wanted to be able to project digital images directly, but those projectors tend to be much more expensive; I just couldn't justify it. So I print the photos out and put them in an opaque projector, works well enough. Traditional overhead projectors aren't very good for this; they spill too much extraneous light into the room. You want something like one of these. (In fact, now that I look, this is the one I have. I started out with an even cheaper one but it wasn't bright enough to be practical... 500w is probably the minimum you want to be looking at.)
posted by ook at 9:04 AM on March 25, 2009
Oh, please.
This (sfw) was shot with a cheap (~$200) opaque projector. You can get away with it if you can a) darken the rest of the room completely, b) use a tripod and a long exposure, and c) your model can hold still long enough to stay in focus. If you can't control the room lighting, or want in-motion shots that can't be done with a long exposure time, you'll need a much brighter (and costlier) projector to make it work.
I wanted to be able to project digital images directly, but those projectors tend to be much more expensive; I just couldn't justify it. So I print the photos out and put them in an opaque projector, works well enough. Traditional overhead projectors aren't very good for this; they spill too much extraneous light into the room. You want something like one of these. (In fact, now that I look, this is the one I have. I started out with an even cheaper one but it wasn't bright enough to be practical... 500w is probably the minimum you want to be looking at.)
posted by ook at 9:04 AM on March 25, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by forrestal at 10:26 PM on March 24, 2009