• READ BEFORE POSTING!
    • If posting a video, please post HERE, unless it is a video as part of an advertisement and then post it in this section.
    • If replying to threads please remember this is the Promotion area and the person posting may not be open to feedback.

watch Relationship Card



RELATIONSHIP CARD - 4 min
http://www.vimeo.com/4620796

a troubled couple tries to work out their emotional credit with the new Relationship Card ™ ® ©


starring George Caleodis and Amanda Howell

written by Joanne Fromes and Peter John Ross

directed by Peter John Ross

produced by John Fromes

cinematography by Scott Spears

assistant director - Rachel Hanna

key grip - Derek Rimelspach

art director - Leyna Haller

graphic design - TJ Cooley

special thanks to
Andrew Kramer & www.videocopilot.net

© Copyright 2009 Sonnyboo Productions
 
Excellent!

I thought it was great. Especially the CGI graphical interface.

How did you do that, by the way?

Michael
 
haha... that was a very fun film.... i really enjoyed it... a fun short film for both men and women...
well done...

and as bourne said... very well done on the CG interface... very well executed...
great concept, very well executed... and the actors were perfect for it. :)
 
How did you do that, by the way?

Almost entirely in Adobe After Effects. TJ Cooley designed the pictures, but I animated them in 3D space in After Effects with the glow, transparency, and the lens blurs.

The tutorials on www.videocopilot.net can be adapted to almost anything if you open your mind up and use deductive reasoning. I love it. I had always wanted to do something with this concept of emotional "credit", but until I saw a way to represent it with graphics, I had no idea what to do with it.
 
Very nice...did you steadicam that opening shot?

Nope, that is a tripod on a real doorway dolly. We dolly in, pan over, then pan back and dolly backwards. That was trick shot #1.

trick shot #2 is the first animated shot. That was done on my crane and the motion tracking in 3D space was a bear, but worth it.
 
I have a slightly shorter edit going up tomorrow. I had some good notes from around the web, and I took some cuts out of this to speed it up about 15% and lost about 25 seconds from the version linked above.

It will be uploaded on Sunday sometimes.
 
Thanks to TUBEMOGUL.COM, here are various links to the short for those whose internet and computer abilities can't play VIMEO's quality...

Yahoo:
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/5117358/13565895

MySpace:
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=57663994

Metacafe:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2850301/

Revver:
http://one.revver.com/watch/1672083

Blip.tv:
http://www.blip.tv/file/2137678

Veoh:
http://www.veoh.com/videos/v18493053XytAary9

eBaums World:
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/80640608/

StupidVideos:
http://www.stupidvideos.com/video/just_plain_stupid/Relationship_Card/


But VIMEO now has an updated video that is a bit tighter of an edit.
http://vimeo.com/4620796
 
I really liked this. It was quite clever, and all the framing was effective without being overly flashy. The CG, as said before, was a really nice touch. How long did the whole process take, from conception (or at least, the begininng of the writing) to the completed product?
 
I really liked this. It was quite clever, and all the framing was effective without being overly flashy. The CG, as said before, was a really nice touch.


Thanks. I wish I could take more credit for the "originality" of it. After seeing IRON MAN with the HUD (Head's Up Display) inside the helmet, and then the tutorial on how to do that on www.videocopilot.net, the graphics became much easier. I had a rudimentary idea of a virtual screen with the monotone colors, IE like the 2 tone GREEN style of old computers from the late 1980's. Then these things came along and changed the idea of the look I went for. My original intent was for the screens to be a lot busier and with a lot more going on, moving around, etc. In the end I went for simple.

How long did the whole process take, from conception (or at least, the begininng of the writing) to the completed product?

This is a complex answer to what should be a simple answer, but it never is for me. This can also be viewed as a text director's commentary.

I have had an idea for this basic story for over a year. I had no payoff for the graphics. Originally I wanted a 3rd party "collection agency" guy to be there when he hasn't paid off his "debt". That was not goingt o equal the graphics. So I sat on this concept for a year until a conversation with George Caleodis, the actor in the piece. He's from the Second City (teaches improv in Hollywood right now), and also the Improv Olympic where he directs live shows for them. He mentioned something about sex and had an idea, but all I fixated on was sex and then I had a breakthrough with the ** SPOILER ALERT** orgasm calendars.

I shot my other movie, REFRACTORY on a Sunday, and I had over 3 months to prep for that shoot. George was flying in from California and I had 3 days to prep for RELATIONSHIP CARD, which was shot 4 days later. I wrote it, cast it (I had never worked with Amanda before), and we had to light it, shoot it, and clean up and be out of the location inside of 4 hours. This was a rush job. I had no idea what the graphics were going to look like or even where to have them place their hands, or eyelines, etc. There was no prep and I paid for it later. I would NOT shoot this without George and there was an extremely limited window of time with him.

I was so rushed, I completely missed shooting coverage of Amanda during the first 3rd of the piece. I tried in the edit to cover this up with "reaction" shots from later in the piece immediately after she spoke, but without seeing her say SOME of the lines, it was just a rocky, bumpy edit. I knew I'd have to pickup those shots later. The basic picture edit sans any effects took about 3-4 hours.

Then the idea of the graphics was a bear. Just getting the right "look" down took me weeks and weeks (approx 2 months). Having too many options, and then having several of them good all conspired to make me wishy-washy on which one to use. TJ Cooley designed the elements, but I animated them in After Effects. The first shot of the screen turning on was a crane shot and it wasn't 100% steady, so I had to motion track it all in 3D space. That was not that bad, but I still had to commit to colors, screen sizes, types, etc. and I had to make them match where the actors put their hands.

I also went back and nearly 3 months later, I did pickup shots with Amanda to get her re-shot. She had just gotten back from Hawaii and was about 4 shades darker from a tan. She forgot her tank top and her hair was 4 inches longer. No one can tell which shots of her were shot 3 months later. I love it. She acted against me and all the shots we did had dialogue between her and George and it seamlessly cuts in. IT took about 30 minutes to cut in the new footage into the edit.

Once I settled on the look, it was about 2 weeks after hours and on weekends from my day-job as an editor to finish the first draft of the effects. Looking at them on a 42" LCD screen in full 1080P, I realized every single FX shot had to be re-done because there is no cheating in HD. You could read every single word, so I had to write out my own 12 page terms of service agreement and re-type every little word in every single box on screen.

Now I have already done a re-edit for about an hour this past weekend tightening up the piece, losing some dialogue, removing some gaps and spaces, and re-arranging some jokes, etc.

So total time - from writing, over a year, from the shoot, 4 months.
 
Last edited:
I thought it was great, I laughed at the end pretty good.

I was a bit disapointed in some technical aspects; Sound wasn't that good, and lighting was pretty poor. The CGI was great though.

This is one of those few times where I forgive some bad technical things for a good concept.
 
I would have to agree with CDCosta, especially on the technical aspects. It sounds like it is doing well though, good job.
 
I was a bit disapointed in some technical aspects; Sound wasn't that good, and lighting was pretty poor. The CGI was great though.

This is one of those few times where I forgive some bad technical things for a good concept.


I have no problem with the audio at all. I'm not sure what "wasn't that good" means. As in the levels were too low, too much noise, dialogue unclear, not enough in the sound design for the made up elements, etc. as I don't think I have any of those as problems, but I would like to know specifically more of what you meant.

My only regret is that this piece isn't as "cinematic" as I would have liked it to be. It needed a shallow depth of field, more camera movement (motivated though), and basically a little more UMPH to the look. We didn't have the time, especially for the post production, to motion track every single shot to moving camera, so it was made to be what it is.

All things considered, I'm pretty happy with the piece as is. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, so I thank you for taking the time to watch and appreciate your honest feedback.
 
I can't speak for CDCosta, but I think what he means and what I think is that the sounds quality as far as dialogue wasn't that great. In the beginning scenes when you were switching back and forth between the two shots (And a little throughout the piece) one could hear a big ambient shift in the sound. She had far less then he did. It was almost like an echo. Perhaps the boom mic didn't get as close to him as it did to her? Again later in *SPOILER* the bathroom, there was so much echo and ambient level. All of it kind of sucked me out of the piece, but again the concept was great.

As far as a bigger UMPH, I think your right, the shot does look a little flat but not super awful. You say you didn't have enough time? Were you on a time crunch? Was this a 48-hour piece? I probably would have tried to push it back in order to get that Cinematic touch to it. It is such a great story it would be even better to have the super polished look to back it up. Again though great job, it looks like it is working for you.
 
The begining shot with the cups was very loud compared to her speaking.

Her dialouge was pretty crisp, but the males was very echoy, and sounded like it was far away.

It got better when they were both by the counter, and then got bad when he was in the bathroom.

It was only bad at begining, end, and when she yelled too loud, the levels peaked.

Sorry for being unclear on my words. Bad, as in, echoy, and uncrisp.


Lighting was only poor in the wides and bathroom shots.
 
Back
Top