On a breakwater -- technically it's a groyne -- in Sheerness, we talk about lenses, lies, and why you can't always believe what you see on screen. MATT: / unnamedculprit - TOM: / tomscottgo
I only realised, after editing and uploading this video, that technically we're sitting on a "groyne", not a "breakwater". Please place all "kick in the groyne" jokes in this thread! -- Tom
+Matt and Tom I live in Liverpool so I'm quite familiar with the Wirral (The Wirral is near Liverpool for those who don't know the general location), so I'm curious as to why you hate it.
+Matt and Tom As soon as you said "breakwater" I realised that I'd have to sit through an entire video of you both not making the joke I wanted you to.
Not gonna lie, I spent the whole video waiting for the camera to pull back and reveal that you guys were sitting several hundred feet away to film this, just to mess with us all.
Abi Davis This is one of the hard things with dogs. My brother's dog is a few months old but quite big and likes to jump up at people and ignore the shouts of "Ava no" or "Ava come here" Took her for a walk and there was one poor fella she kept trying to go to but he wasn't so keen. In the end I just had to walk right beside her and grab her every time she made a break for it 😂
It would be fairer, with that pronunciation, not to say that Tom had gone French, but had accidentally gone Cornish! (Three examples from football, two of which were brothers - Mike Trebilcock, who scored two goals in the 1966 FA Cup final for Everton, and the Sandercock brothers Ken and Phil, mainstays of the mid 70's Torquay United team)
+KingCulta If you have ever been to the Wirral, you would understand. I'm not sure why Tom doesn't like it, but everyone I know who has been there, including myself, doesn't like the place.
in grade school, i got do join a little amateur film club where we learned how to do that Vertigo shot trick. of course, being a small grade school club, we did not have a dolly, so instead we had one of us sat in an office chair that the teacher then pushed at a steady rate. all things considered, the shots actually turned out pretty well.
Lmfao. At the moment, it's about 5 a.m. and I've been watching videos for quite a while(long day). When you added the .gif, showing the zoom/move effect, then removed it again, it leaves people(for a moment) staring at your crotches. I seriously had to pause the video for a moment, because I was laughing so hard(no pun intended) when I realized that. Yes, I might be a bit sleep deprived, but I thought that was hilarious. ^^
I know this is a old video but, Tom as a Scouser I share your passion for the Wirral. Come to Liverpool and you can stand under the liverbuilding while Matt uses his snooping lens to get the shot of the Wirral. Also they have benches there so you have all the equipment you need!
A little clarification: The lens doesn't compress distance, distance compresses distance. By moving the camera further, a longer lens is required to get similar framing.
9:40 - Out of one frame and into another caused a mouthful tea to explode from my face in laughter. Please film this! It's actually something I hadn't ever thought about being a problem! It would make a good video on the main channel!
This should've been called "The Lies of Eyes". It seems like your brain is fudging the information it gets from your eyes, while the camera shows you what's actually there. Plus, it rhymes.
theres another thing that interests me.... Sheerness is on the southbank.... on the NORTHbank though... is a town called SHOEBURYNESS..... how the heck did that name come about?! who buried what shoe and why was it important or significant enough of an event to name a town after?!?!
+IH8YH 'Bury' in old English means 'fortified place' 'ness' means a headland so shoeburyness means the fortified place at the shoe headland, the shoe may be a corruption of shore making it the fortifed place on the shore of the headland. it could also have been refering to the shape of the headland etc.
Lovely videos from you! :-) Just one point: telephoto lens compression is a myth, it does not happen. You can crop a wider angle image and it is the same as an identically framed telephoto shot,
This discussion made me want to watch VSauce's Moon Terminator Illusion video again. But thanks for this tip! I've been working with cameras for years and still never understood how to make get that foreground-background size effect. So thanks!
The entire VSauce team, their creativity and their dedication to their work blows me away. If I had half the drive or talent to make videos like they, or Tom, Matt and their friends, do, I'd have so much more out there already. Or I'd have been on RU-vid years ago to start with! But their stuff does inspire me to keep creating, and working harder with each go. So, yes, thanks Tom, Matt and the rest!
A few years ago I worked in the area and used to park my car at Minster, a couple of miles away to eat my lunch and watch the ships 'avoiding' the Montgomery. I think some of them did not know what side of the buoy they were meant to go!
I grew up in Sheerness. I knew that beach very well. Believe me, it is not lovely!! I would like to spend some time with these two, though, they look like fun.
Random question 4 months later, after having seen that video that you guys filmed using a drone - if you did decide to film on a boat, would a drone camera make it easier to get a stable shot? Or would you not risk flying such a valuable piece of kit over water?
Well, they do normally float, and are moderately waterproof... you'd need one of those which are semi autonomous though, which can hold a steady altitude and position by themselves. The bigger problem would be that the camera would hold steady, but they'd be bobbing up and down whilst trying to talk to it. Better to have a steadicam on deck instead, the pitching of the horizon would be less distracting.
You’d be incredibly surprised how much water can suppress an explosion like that. Not sure how deep it is there, but it doesn’t take much water to suppress an incredible amount of energy. If you actually run the math…. and even if using the worst case numbers… the entire blast wave would be contained, sure it might create a wave but that is doubtful you’ll probably just see some bubbles. The shots from below the surface looked like it was pretty deep, but it must not be that deep if it ran up on a sandbar, however that’s also move constantly. Would be really interested to see someone who specializes in that type of thing run the numbers….you might get wet… But I highly doubt that it would be much worse than that. All according to the waters depth
Still haven't told us why you hate the Wirral. I have lived there for all of my life and I still do. I'm not offended. I'm just really curious as to which "feature" ticked you off to badly😂
The Vertigo shot was the one that clicked to me what a focus puller is. You need one guy there to change the focus as the dolly moves, so that the actor stays in focus.
It would be interesting with some of those new shoot now/focus later cameras to see if you could composite different parts of one shot to bring one part of the shot closer. (Or maybe they would need a two lense option for that... maybe I just invented the next camera craze!) Focus both pieces, and then move and smooth the edges of one piece as you move it forward or backward in the photo. I'd imagine it could give you a similar effect to the moving dolly. Maybe.
Tom only apologizing when he benefits from it reminds me of the philosophical conundrum surrounding an apology. (Well - at least it seems a "standard" line of argument that it's a contradiction to apologize and really mean it. I never understood why.)
Well David Johnson had time to get on the radio and say "Vancouver Vancouver, this is it!" before the blast from Mt St Helens obliterated him. Of course by the time someone responded "What is what?" he was already gone... BTW He wasn't calling BC. he was calling Vancouver Washington, a city just north of Portland.
Shame you didnt venture a mile or 2 in the opposite direction your facing, you have a much nicer area in minster, cliffs a bit further on and an Abbey built in the 800's. Agree with you its worn down but most industrial parts of any town are, you just seemed to find the best of the worst part of the island! Also Warden / Warden Bay are nice filming areas and Harty and Elmley would be fantastic parts to film also. That mermaid also is very tongue in cheek humour, also causing controversy as people didn't see the joke, Eastchurch was where the Wright brothers tested there first planes and the bouncing bomb was also tested in the waters of that area.
6:25 Well, now that there has unfortunately been an explosion like that in Beirut in 2020, we know that it looked pretty much like that. People peaking their heads to see what's the deal with the big flash, then being blown away by the blast
Small correction. Depth of field is mostly down to aperture and not focal length. A shallow depth of field (background blurred) would be a large aperture and a deep depth of field (nearly everything in focus) would be a small aperture. Depth of field is less prominent at longer focal lengths, for example at 50mm f. 1.8 You can get really nice depth of field. but at say 100mm you won't be able to get as much depth of field because depth of field is getting part of the picture out of focus and with a smaller aperture mire is in focus
Small correction. Depth of field is down to aperture *and* focal length (and sensor size, and distance to subject at given focal length, and and and and and...)
As I was watching the other vid I expected the long still shot to be a set up to a cheesy special fx explosion out in the water behind you, not that you have a habit of cheesy fx or anything. ;)
Hmm, I must have got lucky with my flying visit to the place... I fetched up only in Parkgate and Hoylake. Well, that and Seacombe, but I was expecting it to be industrial dockland anyway so it wasn't exactly a disappointment. Just wanted the view across to Liverpool, which was slightly spoiled by the works around the drawbridge but still got some decent shots.
tom i'm sorry but if the worst case scenario did happen from a bit of research the explosion would be worth about 1.5 kilotons of TNT in terms of energy which would be massive but would be 1.4 kilotons short of having the record as the largest non nuclear man made explosion the tittle would still be held by a maritime disaster in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada in 1917 when a french cargo ship carrying high explosives collided with another ship setting the french ship afire then later it's cargo of high explosives detonated wiping out 2.5 kilometers of Halifax and a native american settlement in the process of both the explosion and the subsequent tsunami. that explosion was roughly 2.9 kilotons worth of TNT in terms of energy and would also be more devastating because it happened above water in the middle of a city
The Halifax Explosion is only the largest ACCIDENTAL man made explosion in history, intentional conventional explosions have been bigger. see: Minor Scale
