top | item 8662593

How We Did It: SNL Title Sequence

470 points| shakes | 11 years ago |alex-buono.com

56 comments

order
[+] brokentone|11 years ago|reply
This is incredible. Normally just one or two of these techniques would represent a pretty impressive feat. This used 3d printing, freelensing, pixelstick lightwriting, and a custom bokeh cutout -- in addition to the cool, but more common helicopter shots, timelapse, tilt-shift, and steady cam work.

Being willing to (or maybe having the budget to) use all these techniques AND getting a consistent result is SUPER impressive.

[+] fragmede|11 years ago|reply
> cool, but more common helicopter shots,

I'm glad they pointed out that a similar shot could have been done via drone. I've been told that drones have made cool aerial sequences available to directors who don't have the budget of SNL's 40th though I'd be interested in learning more.

[+] ejdyksen|11 years ago|reply
If you think this is interesting, there's an entire site dedicated to title sequences in film and television:

http://www.artofthetitle.com/titles/

[+] incision|11 years ago|reply
Thanks for this.

Lots of great sequences from the 80s presented there along with on my of my all-time favorite openings - Ghost in the Shell [0].

I've always felt failing to put together a compelling opening is a missed opportunity, particularly for a series. It's a hook, a primer to put the audience in mind of the best eras and episodes every time.

0: http://www.artofthetitle.com/title/ghost-in-the-shell/

[+] RyanCooley|11 years ago|reply
As someone who enjoys both programming and video production, this is great to see on HN. In my experience, there is a lot of overlap between both skillsets. As the article makes clear, a lot of time goes into finding cool "hacks" to trick the lens into conveying a particular look via lighting, optical effects and more.

Post-production is also a very technical process that takes a lot of time and effort to get right and involves exploring the particular quirks of your editing software and tricking it to get it to do what you want. There are often little moments of discovery where you do something you weren't even sure was possible. Then there are those serendipitous moments where visuals and audio come together better than you were anticipating or could have ever planned. It's a great feeling.

I encourage any programmers out there who have even a modicum of interest in the subject to go out there and experiment. Video production can be a great creative outlet that uses a lot of the same talents and opens up new artistic pathways.

[+] HorizonXP|11 years ago|reply
This is a fantastic blog post. I love that we can get this behind-the-scenes look behind something so iconic.

The light painting and lens-whacking details were awesome to read about. I'll definitely have to give the lens whacking a try.

[+] wgx|11 years ago|reply
I got one of these as a gift a while back - lets you experiment with the 'moving lens' technique without as much potential for sensor damage:

http://lensbaby.com/lenses-spark

[+] npinguy|11 years ago|reply
Is it just me or is stuff like this way harder to appreciate these days (with the ubiquity of CGI), unless you work in the industry, or see a behind-the-scenes look like this?

This is simply incredible, and yet I don't normally pay the title sequence any attention at all...

[+] jcl|11 years ago|reply
A personal favorite: the motion graphics in this "making-of" video for a 1983 HBO intro:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqzihgR_-SI#t=309

This is the pre-Tron era, where the easiest way to get a picture of a chrome logo is to build one out of brass. The starburst and light ribbon effects later in the video are similarly brilliant examples of pre-CG CG.

[+] joezydeco|11 years ago|reply
How many shows have opening credits this long anymore?

You have some shows, like The Good Wife, that use a five-second title card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rOhzdWZS7E

Some have more elaborate titles, but still only go 15 seconds (e.g. The Mindy Project)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HarfyFwRfhA

Compare with an 80's show like Dallas, where the credits went a whole 1:10! That's like lost real estate for two or three commercials!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iYjgMygIag

And Twin Peaks, which went 2:36:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lkvrMa27c

[+] kyro|11 years ago|reply
The most impressive things are often the hardest to appreciate because they seem so effortless and don't stand in the way of an overall experience.
[+] marcuskaz|11 years ago|reply
Great post, really interesting to see how they did the shots and glad to see they opted for real footage and techniques most of the time rather than just post processing everything.

I used to shoot free form lenses, it was difficult to get a still from, shooting video would be a challenge. My (old) post on free lens shooting: https://mkaz.com/2005/01/08/homemade-lenses/

[+] jianshen|11 years ago|reply
I'm really happy to see a post like this on HN. Pulling off creative in-camera shots like these are a million times more rewarding for some reason than creating/editing them in post. There's something visceral about getting the shot right in the moment.
[+] jarnix|11 years ago|reply
Wow that's incredible how they combine so many techniques. The use of lenses is really innovative, I mean, people would think it's made only with special effects and it's 3D printed or done entirely manually ! Congrats.
[+] function_seven|11 years ago|reply
I usually fast-forward through the title sequence. Now I feel bad for doing so. Will take the time to watch it next SNL.
[+] krschultz|11 years ago|reply
Honestly the title sequence is one of the best parts. I get nostalgic for NYC, while I'm watching it in NYC.
[+] diggum|11 years ago|reply
This summer I attended one of the editing workshops put on by Adam Epstein who edits all of the film unit productions. It's incredible how fast they write, produce, edit, and turn around these projects. They are literally working from Thursday afternoon until Saturday evening to build these from scratch.
[+] dwynings|11 years ago|reply
Now I feel bad for always fast-forwarding through this part of SNL.
[+] jarnix|11 years ago|reply

[deleted]

[+] joezydeco|11 years ago|reply
What to Submit

On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.

It's really cool to see filmmakers doing their thing, even moreso if they're using really recent tech (3D printing, pixelbars, new camera stabilizers). Is that sufficient?

[+] tizzdogg|11 years ago|reply
Perhaps they should have written the title sequence in Haskell.
[+] notastartup|11 years ago|reply
this was a really cool effect...but I never found SNL to be funny. I've never even laughed at it once. I don't understand why people laugh...that and jimmy fallon/kimmel
[+] marincounty|11 years ago|reply
It used to be hilarious. I'm talking Bill Murry era. Maybe I was young and usually stoned, but if the Saturday night was unfruitful(meaning no women); I'd rush home and watch SNL and really got a kick out of it. Just thinking about that "Miss Loupner" thing has me smiling.