12
\$\begingroup\$

I had an idea that will require suspending a small household object (a flashlight, in this case) off the ground. It weighs only a few pounds but will be part of the shot so I can't put it on top of anything.

My questions: 1. Will fishing line work for this? I'm on a budget so if it will work, that would be perfect. 2. What is the best way to light it to ensure the camera won't pick up the wire? (Best angle, color of light?)

Another way to do it would be to cut a hole in the background and run a bar through the hole to the subject, in effect using the subject to hide the support bar. Not only does this sound like a lot more work, it isn't an option because I'm trying to hide the shadows as well.

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$

6 Answers 6

Reset to default
6
\$\begingroup\$

I'd probably do it with fishing line (or other strong string) and then clone it out after the fact if any is visible in the final shot. As for lighting, I think clear stuff may actually reflect it more and so may be more visible. If you can get a matt finish, similar to the background, that's probably best.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks for the answer John. I'll see how visible the fishing line is and report back. \$\endgroup\$
    – HiredMind
    Dec 6, 2010 at 22:14
  • \$\begingroup\$ You could try a spool of cotton, matching either the colour of the object being suspended or the background. That'd be fairly matt and probably thinner than fishing line. \$\endgroup\$
    – drfrogsplat
    Dec 8, 2010 at 0:48
10
\$\begingroup\$

I think most of the time these days, lines uses to hang objects in a scene are edited out during post processing. In particular, it is very easy to remove such undesirable content with features such as Content Aware Fill in Photoshop CS5 (or the GIMP equivalent if you can't afford CS5.)

I would recommend against fishing line, however. It is translucent, and will likely catch and refract light, making it more visible than something else. I would say use a dark line if your scene background is darker, or a lighter line if your scene background is lighter...preferably something similar to the primary colors of your scene. It may be that you do not need to do any post-process editing to remove it from your shots, but if you do, having something that naturally blends into the scene will make it easier to get rid of.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
4
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ The Gimp equivalent is Resynthesizer (logarithmic.net/pfh/resynthesizer) which works fine and in fact has been available for way longer than the Photoshop feature. However, it's also pretty stagnant, so the Photoshop version both is more slick and more advanced in effectiveness. It'd be cool if someone picked it up again and polished it up. Still, even as is, it's available in Fedora with yum install gimp-resynthesizer, and probably also in Ubuntu via apt-get. \$\endgroup\$
    – mattdm
    Dec 6, 2010 at 22:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks for the answer jrista. I was afraid the answer was "clone it out in post," and it looks like that's the case. I'm actually fairly decent at photo editing (it's taking the photos that I'm fairly new at), but I can always tell even if others can't. So I'll try a few different types of line/wires in different colors and let you all know the results. \$\endgroup\$
    – HiredMind
    Dec 6, 2010 at 22:51
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ That's good to know matt. I'm a long time Gimp user and didn't even know about Resynthesizer (I always clone by hand using the clone brush). \$\endgroup\$
    – HiredMind
    Dec 6, 2010 at 22:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ The major film studios do this all the time -- granted they can afford a couple hundred SGI screaming powerful workstations. \$\endgroup\$
    – Carl Witthoft
    Jun 23, 2016 at 12:02
4
\$\begingroup\$

Magicians usually use black threads of the requisite strength and then a black background.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
3
\$\begingroup\$

An alternative is a thin stick placed behind the object in the opposite direction of the camera, such that it is fully hidden by the object.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
2
\$\begingroup\$

Fishing line would be easier, large sheet of glass is another option, though you have to be careful with the lighting direction to avoid picking up a reflection from the glass.

If you go the fishing line approach if you light it correctly it wont show up strongly in the images, though it might require minor retouching! The line will produce a strong specular reflection, so if you use a large soft lightsource you can light up your subject whilst avoiding the line lighting up by shining a direct light through it.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\begingroup\$ The glass is an interesting variation - thanks. Seems like fishing line is basically a cylinder, so if I light it from the top it should reflect away to the bottom, and vice versa. \$\endgroup\$
    – HiredMind
    Dec 6, 2010 at 22:55
2
\$\begingroup\$

An alternative that I believe the pros used to use in the days before CGI was to rotate everything, subject camera and background, so that the camera was pointing directly up. Now the lines from which the model is hanging are completely hidden by the model, but because they are wires and not rods there is no (noticeable) shadow. Of course this relies on not having any kind of natural background.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.