-
And the first major Hollywood feature to be edited in FCPX and released is…
-
[Oliver Peters] “[Bill Davis] “170 effect shots in Focus – far more than I would have suspected”
That’s nothing these days. So many directors add set extensions, use stabilization and use “invisible” split screens for two shots, the 170 sounds quite low to me. Depending on how long or how cutty the film is, that’s 10% or less of the shots in the film. In that virtual user group, Mike mentioned having assistants working with Nuke in the next room. I suspect that was a similar workflow to the “GG”, just less intense.”
Television is that way, too. You should see a rough cut of Person of Interest; there’s a whole lot of green.
-
[Oliver Peters] “The reason Premiere Pro made the cut for “Gone Girl” was largely because of its tight After Effects integration, which was used extensively on “GG”.”
Which I find to be a rather odd reason actually, since I know of extremely few people (including myself) that actually even use “Dynamic Link” all the way to PPro after maybe the first or second try. IOW AE and CINEWARE, sure. But no one in their right mind (or anyone wants to stay it) actually leaves it all “live” in Premiere for speed reasons alone. And if you’re rendering out, it’s really rather irrelevant which NLE you’re using after that.
[Oliver Peters] “the new “render and replace” feature”
THAT on the other hand I hadn’t yet heard of, which of course sounds pretty cool if it works as advertised.
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
-
[David Howard] “The link dont work.”
It will, only fcp.co seems to be down at the moment. Simply wait a bit and try again.
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Oliver Peters] “The reason Premiere Pro made the cut for “Gone Girl” was largely because of its tight After Effects integration, which was used extensively on “GG”. Far more that any other film I can recall. So, while the NLE is a more familiar paradigm, the reason it was chosen was also because of a unique workflow.”
While certainly true to a point, I think that this isn’t the entire story. For any A+ list director and any academy award winning editor to use any tool, it must be competent in its own right. Premiere Pro meets that criteria as do other NLEs. I am confident that you will see other films that do not utilize After Effects as much as Gone Girl does in the future.
-
[Robin S. Kurz] “Which I find to be a rather odd reason actually, since I know of extremely few people (including myself) that actually even use “Dynamic Link” all the way to PPro after maybe the first or second try. IOW AE and CINEWARE, sure. But no one in their right mind (or anyone wants to stay it) actually leaves it all “live” in Premiere for speed reasons alone. And if you’re rendering out, it’s really rather irrelevant which NLE you’re using after that.”
Dynamic Link has great performance when you cache your Ae comps, and even with rendered media, Ae’s “Project Link” feature (which stores the path to the AEP that generated a piece of media, allowing you to open the project file from the asset in Pr, and which has been supported for years) is a very nice workflow.
I’m surprised that you are happy with the speed of CINEWARE but not DL. Most video-oriented folks I know are staggered by the render times that ray-tracing requires.
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[Walter Soyka] “I’m surprised that you are happy with the speed of CINEWARE”
I never said or meant that I was. I was merely saying that I can see the advantages and allure of CW more than that of DL. My personal experiences with DL have been anything but “nice”. But then I haven’t used it in the most recent incarnation, so it may well have gotten to a point where even I would consider it. I’ll have to check, should the need actually come up again. But I’ve opted to do the vast majority of things that I need in terms of motion graphics and general visual effects in Motion in the last years, for speed reasons alone.
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Walter Soyka] “when you cache your Ae comps”
How do you cache the comps?
Here’s what I have been doing: mak an AE comp which may have many precomps, and then making a FINAL Comp and then a DL Comp. The DL comp is then render-replaced in AE and that is linked to Premiere. This matters when for example the AE DL Comp is a top-level track containing lower thirds or just the mograph text stuff, and video is underneath (like a title sequence). Once the names are all spelled right, there is no reason to re-render them while doing tweaks to picture. This save some time.
PP CS6 does not have render and replace in PP.
Thanks!
Richard -
[Richard Herd] “How do you cache the comps? “
With the “Cache work area in background” command:
https://helpx.adobe.com/after-effects/using/memory-storage1.html#id_95051But the project link feature is quite cool, too. By default, Ae injects some XMP metadata into the rendered output, including what’s called a “project link.” (This is configurable in your output module.)
That means that you can render a file from Ae, import the render into Premiere, and then right-click the asset at any time in Premiere and choose “Edit original” to re-open the AEP project that created the output. Make a change, then re-render back over the original, and you’ve got a faux-DL workflow with a manageable intermediate.
(Cache work area in background is new in CS6, but Project Link metadata has been around for ages.)
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
Thank you!
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up