so this is a very general thread about timelapse films as i'm trying to gauge what people like to see to let that inform me of how i want to proceed in creating my first timelapse short film.
in my opinion, there are 3 ways i could take this:
1) "the city symphony," probably what we see most often. Tokyo, NYC, or this beautiful example from Vitoria: https://vimeo.com/112316435.
pros of this subgenre:
accessibility, beauty, easy to create a simple narrative about daily life, easy to focus on and explore technical creativity (see: https://vimeo.com/108792063)
cons:
done to death. harder to create any sort of original narrative. any narrative relies heavily on a majestic soundtrack
2) a "subject matter" timelapse film. generally finding natural beauty in one thing. common examples would be the northern lights or stars: https://vimeo.com/22439234. sometimes natural structures like lakes or mountains. sometimes more technically experimental even: https://vimeo.com/82038912
pros:
very similar to the city symphony. more impressive because these things are often less accessible than cities, and sometimes require more technique (it takes more practice to shoot stars than skylines IMO)
cons:
also, done to death and difficult to make any sort original narrative. both these subgenres really focus on technique and technical creativity rather than telling a story. the story becomes secondary and often falls back on majesty or beauty. it gets boring
3) a "narrative" based timelapse film. see Samsara or definitely the Qatsi trilogy. i rarely see anything like that in a short form. i'd really like to attempt this. i'll never make a Samsara or a Koyaanisqatsi, but i value a message more in my short films, and i think a story should still be of equal importance in a timelapse film
pros:
here i can explore anything, i can focus on daily life and routine in a way in which you don't really get the opportunity to in a city symphony. possibility to show movement in a different way than we see so often focused on in many timelapse films (i think i do this very well in this particular clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfqQMbVPBxE)
cons:
easy to be heavyhanded. also easy to be disconnected visually. takes much more care and consideration and production than solely focusing on the visual.
of course there is room for massive amounts of creativity and originality in each style, but i'm leaning toward attempting something narrative based. thematically, i'm leaning toward saying something about creation and destruction within routine. think a darkroom of grass growing contrasted with lawnmowing.
what do people think?
does the success of a timelapse film rely more on connective visuals?
how important is a story or message?
what are some other things that are overdone in timelapses that i should avoid?
have you seen anything particularly creative that worked well?
do you have any technical tips or tricks that you can share?
what is the role of music and how important is it?
any thoughts appreciated! and please share any of your timelapse work here, too!
in my opinion, there are 3 ways i could take this:
1) "the city symphony," probably what we see most often. Tokyo, NYC, or this beautiful example from Vitoria: https://vimeo.com/112316435.
pros of this subgenre:
accessibility, beauty, easy to create a simple narrative about daily life, easy to focus on and explore technical creativity (see: https://vimeo.com/108792063)
cons:
done to death. harder to create any sort of original narrative. any narrative relies heavily on a majestic soundtrack
2) a "subject matter" timelapse film. generally finding natural beauty in one thing. common examples would be the northern lights or stars: https://vimeo.com/22439234. sometimes natural structures like lakes or mountains. sometimes more technically experimental even: https://vimeo.com/82038912
pros:
very similar to the city symphony. more impressive because these things are often less accessible than cities, and sometimes require more technique (it takes more practice to shoot stars than skylines IMO)
cons:
also, done to death and difficult to make any sort original narrative. both these subgenres really focus on technique and technical creativity rather than telling a story. the story becomes secondary and often falls back on majesty or beauty. it gets boring
3) a "narrative" based timelapse film. see Samsara or definitely the Qatsi trilogy. i rarely see anything like that in a short form. i'd really like to attempt this. i'll never make a Samsara or a Koyaanisqatsi, but i value a message more in my short films, and i think a story should still be of equal importance in a timelapse film
pros:
here i can explore anything, i can focus on daily life and routine in a way in which you don't really get the opportunity to in a city symphony. possibility to show movement in a different way than we see so often focused on in many timelapse films (i think i do this very well in this particular clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfqQMbVPBxE)
cons:
easy to be heavyhanded. also easy to be disconnected visually. takes much more care and consideration and production than solely focusing on the visual.
of course there is room for massive amounts of creativity and originality in each style, but i'm leaning toward attempting something narrative based. thematically, i'm leaning toward saying something about creation and destruction within routine. think a darkroom of grass growing contrasted with lawnmowing.
what do people think?
does the success of a timelapse film rely more on connective visuals?
how important is a story or message?
what are some other things that are overdone in timelapses that i should avoid?
have you seen anything particularly creative that worked well?
do you have any technical tips or tricks that you can share?
what is the role of music and how important is it?
any thoughts appreciated! and please share any of your timelapse work here, too!
) as rocket trails (the fear of the cold war) or traces of airlanes