Page Summary
Active Entries
- 1: Interesting Links for 19-08-2025
- 2: Photo cross-post
- 3: Interesting Links for 15-08-2025
- 4: Interesting Links for 16-08-2025
- 5: Interesting Links for 12-08-2025
- 6: Interesting Links for 17-08-2025
- 7: Interesting Links for 13-08-2025
- 8: What I'm looking for in art.
- 9: Interesting Links for 11-08-2025
- 10: Photo cross-post
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2009-02-21 10:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-21 10:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-21 10:37 pm (UTC)(Unless, of course, they got copyright clearance)
no subject
Date: 2009-02-21 11:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-21 11:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-21 11:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-22 08:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-22 09:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-22 11:56 am (UTC)Having said that, I do wish they'd (erm, you'd, since I believe that the person who made it might be reading this) varied the camera angles a bit more. The original music video for the piece works well partially because of the careful shot setup. I can appreciate that's difficult for something like this, though, which is either being shot in a hurry or on a webcam or similar (I wasn't sure - could be wrong).
Not a "this was awful", just a "this could have been more awesome!".
no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 11:23 pm (UTC)If you can be bothered to click through to the "response" video you'll see what I put together by taking the main footage they got and a couple of short "behind the scenes" shots. The latter were recorded on my pocket stills camera (a Sony W35) and the quality of it was WAY higher.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-26 12:46 am (UTC)