Answers.Body: <p>@Dr Mayhem actually there might be 150 cameras! This video at 2:32 happen to show the behind the scenes. I think maybe many producers these days still prefer to use a method as direct as possible than rely on post processing manipulation.</p>
  
  <p><div class="youtube-embed"><div>
                  <iframe width="640px" height="395px" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/awoeT0mf2P0?start=0"></iframe>
              </div></div></p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2011-11-01T14:27:30.393Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2011-11-01T14:27:30.393Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Jake
Answers.Body: <p>I think you partially answered your own question - the dark background actually makes it easier to hide cameras. In saying that, these days a lot of the heavy work is done by interpolation software (as @romkyns mentioned), so I wouldn't think 150 cameras would be required here.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2011-10-23T19:33:00.227Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2011-10-23T19:33:00.227Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Dr Mayhem
Answers.Body: <p>A simple explanation of how they achieved this effect in The Matrix: <a href="http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/question295.htm" rel="nofollow">http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/question295.htm</a></p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2011-10-24T09:54:19.860Z
Answers.Text: I think this effect is different from The Matrix because it is simpler in Matrix's case. I do not even need to read up to guess it correctly. Mostly because it involves a subject (bullet, dodging man) in the foreground and then the background rotates around the subject. In this case however, the falling petals "interacts" with the foreground (girls) so I thought this is much complicated.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Jake
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2011-10-25T10:54:48.720Z
Answers.Text: FWIW, I don't see the petals moving during the orbit effect.
Answers.UserDisplayName: mghicks
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2011-10-26T15:17:30.053Z
Answers.Text: I see the foreground petals scrolling side to side. Looks like they were added later.
Answers.UserDisplayName: horatio
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2011-10-23T22:14:49.373Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2011-10-23T22:14:49.373Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Richard
Body: <p>As in title, what is the technique involved for this scene:</p>
  
  <p><div class="youtube-embed"><div>
                  <iframe width="640px" height="395px" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6pA_Tou-DPI?start=0"></iframe>
              </div></div></p>
  
  <p>Scene starting from 0.43 to 0.48 secs, orbiting camera view with subjects at standstill.</p>
  
  <p>My best guess is they had many cameras all taking a still shot all at once. Post processing stitch the still frames together. But the scene lasted for 5 seconds. In a 30 FPS video, we will need 150 still shots or 150 cameras!! How did they hide the cameras so well in the dark background? Not practical at all?</p>
  
  <p>Hope someone can shed some light? Thank you all.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2011-10-23T16:45:55.997Z
Comments.Text: I believe this works by using only a small number of cameras, together with some really clever software which reconstructs a 3D model using stereoscopy and infers textures from the shots. It can then be re-rendered at any angle as slow as necessary.
Comments.UserDisplayName: RomanSt
Tags: <camera>
Title: What is the orbiting technique involved for this scene [youtube]?
UserDisplayName: Jake
ThreadText: # What is the orbiting technique involved for this scene [youtube]?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2011-10-23)
  
  As in title, what is the technique involved for this scene:
  
  Scene starting from 0.43 to 0.48 secs, orbiting camera view with subjects at standstill.
  
  My best guess is they had many cameras all taking a still shot all at once. Post processing stitch the still frames together. But the scene lasted for 5 seconds. In a 30 FPS video, we will need 150 still shots or 150 cameras!! How did they hide the cameras so well in the dark background? Not practical at all?
  
  Hope someone can shed some light? Thank you all.
  
  **Tags:** camera
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: I believe this works by using only a small number of cameras, together with some really clever software which reconstructs a 3D model using stereoscopy and infers textures from the shots. It can then be re-rendered at any angle as slow as necessary.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 3 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_0 on 2011-11-01. Score: 0 | Accepted answer
  
  @username_2 actually there might be 150 cameras! This video at 2:32 happen to show the behind the scenes. I think maybe many producers these days still prefer to use a method as direct as possible than rely on post processing manipulation.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2011-10-23. Score: 1
  
  I think you partially answered your own question - the dark background actually makes it easier to hide cameras. In saying that, these days a lot of the heavy work is done by interpolation software (as @romkyns mentioned), so I wouldn't think 150 cameras would be required here.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2011-10-23. Score: 0
  
  A simple explanation of how they achieved this effect in The Matrix: <http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/question295.htm>
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: I think this effect is different from The Matrix because it is simpler in Matrix's case. I do not even need to read up to guess it correctly. Mostly because it involves a subject (bullet, dodging man) in the foreground and then the background rotates around the subject. In this case however, the falling petals "interacts" with the foreground (girls) so I thought this is much complicated.  
  > **username_4**: FWIW, I don't see the petals moving during the orbit effect.  
  > **username_5**: I see the foreground petals scrolling side to side. Looks like they were added later.  
  
  ---
  
  