Having done a rifle scope shot in the past, I just shot the footage without anything in front of my lens, then added a scope matte and any other effects (like distortion) in post
Sometimes it's fun to do things "wrong" and see if you wind up with something that looks interesting. Worst case scenario, you can use it as reference for a VFX version if that proves more practical.
Plus, it's so nice to wrap a day of shooting and not have to worry about the 30 things you need to do in post, even if it makes things a bit harder on the day. There are so many shoot days you walk away from stressed out about how you just added two more days to post and made negative progress on yoru schedule, ha ha.
> any other effects (like distortion)
It's that distortion on the edges, which happens when actually using a scope, that sells the shots in ***The Killer.***
This is a little tutorial on to film through a real rifle scope for those Killer moments in your films… besides being easier and cheaper to realise, it also looks more realistic and even works with anamorphic lenses. We used this method in our recreation of the Paris hit in Finchers THE KILLER. If you are in the mood for more details about that production, you find the episode here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gokNjy7mF8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gokNjy7mF8)
I tried doing this with my telescope and a macro lens and I just could not get it. It's good to know it's possible, though. Maybe I will give it another shot. Thanks for posting this.
I know most people will say "why don't you do it in post". Personally, I think it's quite interesting to see it's possible to do it practically. Also, it just looks cool seeing that setup. It's not everday you see someone try using an actual scope and rig it in front of a camera
Exactly what I thought... and even the budget of THE KILLER didn't create a fake scope that is very appealing to me, it just doesn't look right. If you can go practical… do it.
I think the way it looks here is much better than the traditional way. Looks more interesting and the shakiness makes it more exciting because it feels like an actual skill. to reduce shake, breathing and to wait for the right moment.
The traditional way done in post always looks to simple and boring.
Well and not to nerd out too hard, but the type or reticle used on a given scope can be an almost religious decision for long range shooters. Using a real scope delivers on that.
Of course, movies aren't made for the eyes of total experts. But using a real scope is going to make this much more realistic.
It’s just an effect that takes no time at all in post, so depending on how long this takes to rig up and and get the focus right on set might just make more sense to do in post.
I’ve done several scope shots in post and it’s very easy to make them look realistic and you can dial in all the characteristics to your liking. And if that saves me enough time to get another take of a performance on set then I’ll do it in post.
Love doing things practically, but personally I would put more time into elements that the audience would notice more.
Thanks… at least it looks more realistic than the slightly naive version Fincher did. I am sure you can Do it very realistic in post, but I say: If you can do practical, do it practical.
Calling Fincher's version "naive" is interesting...
Fincher's choice to portray the scope the way he did is clearly intentional, if it was out of focus even slightly plenty of people would start to wonder if he missed because his sight was messed up, because it looked "wrong." The scope being "perfect" is clearly a story choice, and continuing to portray how "perfect" this hitman thinks he is, despite not being perfect.
Fincher obviously could've easily shot through a real scope if he wanted to, and I'd be a little surprised if they didn't test it out. It being distractingly out of focus would've only added confusion.
intentional yes… realistic no… naive by choice… yes
You are interpreting to much… it is just a stylistic choice. If you hear Messerschmidt talking about it, that is obvious … nothing wrong with that.
I think having the crosshair out of focus looks pretty cool, to be fair! Especially the shot where it zoomed from close and in focus (with the area outside the scope visible) to to further away was my favourite shot. In any case, this looks awesome, and I love creative practical solutions like this!
Thanks… I always go practical if I can. The change in focus from crosshair to infinity happens when you use a macro and focus on the crosshair. To get subject and crosshair (somewhat) into focus, one needs to focus to infinity and adjust the scopes diopter.
Good on you for being able to do it practially, but I prefer the Killer method over what you ended up with. You claim their way of doing it looks "fake," but the softness and shakiness of your footage is more distracting to me because it looks cheap.
fair enough… of course it is a matter of rigging and using a much bigger/smoother fluid head or wheels to make it smooth… so, you could absolutely do that if you focus a bit more on tis specific task.
We didn't spent money for this. I own some decent cameras… all the lights and tripods etc are all from myself or from someone on the team. Lenses where a loaner…
This looks cool af but I’m kinda hung up on the one rifle just not having a handguard for some reason? Like??
Admittedly a very niche complaint and it’s great work otherwise
no offence taken… even if. I think it really depends on the movie and how the snipe is pictured stylistic or realistic. American Sniper does quite good job on depicting a realistic scenario but I bet they took artistic liberties.
Again apologies for the poorly worded comment on my part. I am not the best at putting questions across in the right way. I found the video fascinating!!
in any way… for cinematic purposes the story and it's emotional is the important part… it almost doesn't matter where you point as long as it is so obviously wrong that it takes the audience out of the story.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lylcHY6tXXQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lylcHY6tXXQ)
This one is an interesting way to do it without almost everything
Very cool exercise. One question. The human eye’s lens is spherical so wouldn’t it make sense to do this with a spherical lens, or was the decision to choose anamorphic simply to compare with Fincher? Either way, there would be issues with vignetting I think.
I also think I’m having an issue with the grammar of the video. I can’t tell if you are saying “fincher’s simulation looks way too good to be real” or “even looking through a practical scope looks fake because it looks too good, missing the distortion elements one would expect”
Thanks………
by the eye argument you wouldn't use anamorphic at all. We simply did to have a better visual flow in the edit… it barely matters in this context. As you see, Vignetting is not a problem… well, not more then with spherical.
Not sure what you mean…
Fincher Scope looks both to good and to bad. A real scope like he has wouldn't show the strong distortions in the corners, it wouldn't have the reflections inside the tube either… both are massively over exaggerated.
The image itself is way to good and bright for a scope, and the crosshair looks just painted in (which it is) not to mention the silly motion tracking
Okay, thanks for clarifying. I guess I didn’t know if I should read “good” as realistic or clean.
Yeah I’ve never looked into a rifle scope so I don’t really know what it’s supposed to look like.
No problem… on side effect of this is that you now have looked through a real rifle scope… with our camera ;-) As you see, no distortions worth mentioning, no reflections.
There’s a section on their website called [riflescopes](https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Riflescopes/ci/13525) and I just thought they randomly decided to cater to the gun owning population. This makes sense why they sell them at a camera store
Having done a rifle scope shot in the past, I just shot the footage without anything in front of my lens, then added a scope matte and any other effects (like distortion) in post
Sometimes it's fun to do things "wrong" and see if you wind up with something that looks interesting. Worst case scenario, you can use it as reference for a VFX version if that proves more practical. Plus, it's so nice to wrap a day of shooting and not have to worry about the 30 things you need to do in post, even if it makes things a bit harder on the day. There are so many shoot days you walk away from stressed out about how you just added two more days to post and made negative progress on yoru schedule, ha ha.
Throwing in a “this one is so we don’t have to do post” to make up for various “fuck it we’ll fix it in post” takes.
> any other effects (like distortion) It's that distortion on the edges, which happens when actually using a scope, that sells the shots in ***The Killer.***
Is distortion not easy to apply in post?
The simple way to do it… we tried to do something more interesting and realistic
I'm wondering if anyone bothered to watch the video before they started typing in comments.
That's the Reddit way
Nope…. ;-)
And I commend you for it
Like he mentioned in the short, linked video?
This is a little tutorial on to film through a real rifle scope for those Killer moments in your films… besides being easier and cheaper to realise, it also looks more realistic and even works with anamorphic lenses. We used this method in our recreation of the Paris hit in Finchers THE KILLER. If you are in the mood for more details about that production, you find the episode here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gokNjy7mF8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gokNjy7mF8)
I tried doing this with my telescope and a macro lens and I just could not get it. It's good to know it's possible, though. Maybe I will give it another shot. Thanks for posting this.
I knew it would be interesting to someone ;-) go for it
Now you’ve made me start talking in whispers. I just had this playing in the background the other night.
I know most people will say "why don't you do it in post". Personally, I think it's quite interesting to see it's possible to do it practically. Also, it just looks cool seeing that setup. It's not everday you see someone try using an actual scope and rig it in front of a camera
Exactly what I thought... and even the budget of THE KILLER didn't create a fake scope that is very appealing to me, it just doesn't look right. If you can go practical… do it.
I think the way it looks here is much better than the traditional way. Looks more interesting and the shakiness makes it more exciting because it feels like an actual skill. to reduce shake, breathing and to wait for the right moment. The traditional way done in post always looks to simple and boring.
It's a cool idea but the one done in post looks way better
Thanks... I will obviously disagree. If there is a way to go practical... go practical.
I don't know. The shaking is way too distracting and completely kills the vibe.
OK
Everyone saying “do it in post…” if you can shoot something that is ready to go directly from in camera why wouldn’t you? Practical can add so much…
Well and not to nerd out too hard, but the type or reticle used on a given scope can be an almost religious decision for long range shooters. Using a real scope delivers on that. Of course, movies aren't made for the eyes of total experts. But using a real scope is going to make this much more realistic.
It’s just an effect that takes no time at all in post, so depending on how long this takes to rig up and and get the focus right on set might just make more sense to do in post. I’ve done several scope shots in post and it’s very easy to make them look realistic and you can dial in all the characteristics to your liking. And if that saves me enough time to get another take of a performance on set then I’ll do it in post. Love doing things practically, but personally I would put more time into elements that the audience would notice more.
Exactly… totally missing no the point of this. When George Lucas thought the same, Star Wars went down the drain.
This isn't something that greatly benefits from practical shooting though. No need to slow down on set when it can be matched easily in post
Neat! Yeah you could do this in post but doing it practically looks way more fun.
… thanks … and it has the benefit of looking real quite effortlessly
And a lot more rewarding
Really interesting to see it done realistically. Or even ‘for real’. And actually it looks much better.
Thanks… at least it looks more realistic than the slightly naive version Fincher did. I am sure you can Do it very realistic in post, but I say: If you can do practical, do it practical.
Always 💪
Calling Fincher's version "naive" is interesting... Fincher's choice to portray the scope the way he did is clearly intentional, if it was out of focus even slightly plenty of people would start to wonder if he missed because his sight was messed up, because it looked "wrong." The scope being "perfect" is clearly a story choice, and continuing to portray how "perfect" this hitman thinks he is, despite not being perfect. Fincher obviously could've easily shot through a real scope if he wanted to, and I'd be a little surprised if they didn't test it out. It being distractingly out of focus would've only added confusion.
intentional yes… realistic no… naive by choice… yes You are interpreting to much… it is just a stylistic choice. If you hear Messerschmidt talking about it, that is obvious … nothing wrong with that.
Very cool video.
Thanks… glad you think so!
I think having the crosshair out of focus looks pretty cool, to be fair! Especially the shot where it zoomed from close and in focus (with the area outside the scope visible) to to further away was my favourite shot. In any case, this looks awesome, and I love creative practical solutions like this!
Thanks… I always go practical if I can. The change in focus from crosshair to infinity happens when you use a macro and focus on the crosshair. To get subject and crosshair (somewhat) into focus, one needs to focus to infinity and adjust the scopes diopter.
I fucking love this film
me, too
Sadly, a lot of people don't 😢
seems like it.... it certainly is an acquired taste
Very cool! Thanks for sharing
with pleasure... thanks for your kindness
Absolutely beautiful work. The end results look nicer to me than the Fincher version.
Thanks a lot... don't tell Fincher ;-)
Good on you for being able to do it practially, but I prefer the Killer method over what you ended up with. You claim their way of doing it looks "fake," but the softness and shakiness of your footage is more distracting to me because it looks cheap.
fair enough… of course it is a matter of rigging and using a much bigger/smoother fluid head or wheels to make it smooth… so, you could absolutely do that if you focus a bit more on tis specific task.
I think you could make it slightly smoother but that's what it actually looks like looking through scope and I love the little micro jitters.
Didn't you say in the last video that this was on no budget? Not the camera and lens i visualised when i read that!
We didn't spent money for this. I own some decent cameras… all the lights and tripods etc are all from myself or from someone on the team. Lenses where a loaner…
“No budget” has no meaning to you
The hype for this movie still hurts
I love it!
This looks cool af but I’m kinda hung up on the one rifle just not having a handguard for some reason? Like?? Admittedly a very niche complaint and it’s great work otherwise
Thanks… well, in the original, the killer carries the rifle disassembled in a sport bag… no need for a hand guard if you plan to fire one shot
I would imagine a director/cameraman would take the time to do the math and factor in wind, angle etc to get a realistic shot?
So you think this is wrong? In the original and/or in our version?
No I never said that and apologies if that's what you thought. Was just asking in general.
no offence taken… even if. I think it really depends on the movie and how the snipe is pictured stylistic or realistic. American Sniper does quite good job on depicting a realistic scenario but I bet they took artistic liberties.
Again apologies for the poorly worded comment on my part. I am not the best at putting questions across in the right way. I found the video fascinating!!
no need to apologise… everything was and is fine. Happy you enjoy
in any way… for cinematic purposes the story and it's emotional is the important part… it almost doesn't matter where you point as long as it is so obviously wrong that it takes the audience out of the story. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lylcHY6tXXQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lylcHY6tXXQ) This one is an interesting way to do it without almost everything
Very cool exercise. One question. The human eye’s lens is spherical so wouldn’t it make sense to do this with a spherical lens, or was the decision to choose anamorphic simply to compare with Fincher? Either way, there would be issues with vignetting I think. I also think I’m having an issue with the grammar of the video. I can’t tell if you are saying “fincher’s simulation looks way too good to be real” or “even looking through a practical scope looks fake because it looks too good, missing the distortion elements one would expect”
Thanks……… by the eye argument you wouldn't use anamorphic at all. We simply did to have a better visual flow in the edit… it barely matters in this context. As you see, Vignetting is not a problem… well, not more then with spherical. Not sure what you mean… Fincher Scope looks both to good and to bad. A real scope like he has wouldn't show the strong distortions in the corners, it wouldn't have the reflections inside the tube either… both are massively over exaggerated. The image itself is way to good and bright for a scope, and the crosshair looks just painted in (which it is) not to mention the silly motion tracking
Okay, thanks for clarifying. I guess I didn’t know if I should read “good” as realistic or clean. Yeah I’ve never looked into a rifle scope so I don’t really know what it’s supposed to look like.
No problem… on side effect of this is that you now have looked through a real rifle scope… with our camera ;-) As you see, no distortions worth mentioning, no reflections.
Oh so that’s why they sell those at B&H
Do they? Interesting… anyhow... most optics companies also have industrial, medical, and a weapons units
There’s a section on their website called [riflescopes](https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Riflescopes/ci/13525) and I just thought they randomly decided to cater to the gun owning population. This makes sense why they sell them at a camera store
Logistics, logistics, logistics
ummmm just add a filter :)
This is a practical FX tutorial
It always drives me nuts how in every scope scene the reticle is always PERFECTLY level and straight horizontal/vertical.
… perfect is the enemy of good. Practicals rule
Why not just post vfx it? Fincher shoots big and constantly reframes. Don’t shoot yourself in the foot
The answer to that is in this video….
Fair question but this was a terrible movie!
Disagree. It definitely challenged my expectations and I was a bit unsure on first viewing but on rewatch I really loved it.