-
Promote multiple PIPs to 3DWarp
Is there a way to promote multiple PIPs to 3DWarps?
I have MC 6.5.4 and 7.04 systems on Macs.
.
Neil. -
9 Replies
-
Not at an Avid, but when you go into Effect Mode on the clip, in that window at the bottom corner, do you see a “3D” “3D Warp” button symbol you can click? If you see something like that, click it. Otherwise, don’t know if the top of my head.
-
No, you need to open the effect editor and click the button. No way to do it in a batch, as far as I know,
Trying to see a scenario where it would be all that necessary. There is no visual difference that I am aware of between the PIP and promoted 3D Warp version, so there is no reason to promote unless additional parameters are needed. If you need to tweak the parameters that are available in 3D Warp, you have to open the Effect Editor anyway, and promoting takes only an extra nanosecond or two.
-
A pseudo workaround would be to promote one of them, save it out as effect in the bin, then select all other events that have a 3D on them, and do a double-click apply to all – this will will replace them with the promoted one.
-
[John Pale] “There is no visual difference that I am aware of between the PIP and promoted 3D Warp version”
I’m trying to find when/where I can see a difference, but the manual says:
“The additional quality that you achieve using the HQ rendering option depends on the effect and the footage you use to create the effect. For example, HQ rendering can often improve the quality of an effect that dynamically resizes an image or an effect on a clip with a lot of motion.”I’m working on some sequences that came from FCP7. Automatic Duck converts Motion tab parameters into a PIP effect for Avid. I’ll simply promote the ones where I need the extra parameters.
Begs the question; is PIP irrelevant, today? ‘3D warp’ originally only worked with extra hardware and without that hardware, one was limited to PIP as a 2D DVE. I’m assuming – but don’t know – that 3D warp works on all Avid edit systems…
-
Michael would probably know better than anyone, but I believe PIP and the other similar old school DVE effects are pretty irrelevant these days and probably still exist to maintain backward compatibility with sequences created on old Meridien and ABVB hardware.
I rarely use the HQ button, as the render time is much longer and the payoff in quality is usually barely, if at all, noticeable. Your mileage may vary.
Didn’t realize AutoDuck converts to PIP. Maybe that was the simplest way Wes could come up with to translate the effect. I’ll have to see what the Boris Translate plugin does.
-
3D Warp is on all MC systems and you are correct than when it was first implemented, it was hardware dependent. That no longer being the case, PIP is somewhat deprecated, but is useful as a quick preset and quick setup compared to setting up the same in 3D Warp. But 3D Warp has pretty much become the first tool most reach to for doing most anything as it combined a variety (as well as redundant such as scale) of parameters to control the image.
I suspect third parties have an easier time mapping to PIP than to the parameters within the 3D Warp effect. It’s only be very recently, that some of those parameters are supported when conforming in tools like Resolve, Pablo, Smoke, etc.
As far as quality, I wish Avid would give a little more detail as to when that HQ kicks in… I suspect it when an image gets resized, it is using a higher quality scaler (which one exactly?). It used to be, in earlier versions of Media Composer, a user could type in commands to the console to change the algorithm used to “polyphase interpolation” from whatever the default was (bicubic?). I believe that polyphase became the default in some past version so the console command is no longer needed. I don’t believe it does anything to edge or moves as that is already subpixel. I guess I need to do some HQ ON and OFF tests to see if that is improving anything. Other applications allow you to choose different algorithms as some are better for resizing up and others are better for resizing down.
And we all wonder what scaler is being used for FrameFlex as it does not have an HQ button…
If you want to really dig into what these scalers do, and are really good at math you can take a gander at:
https://www.ti.com/lit/an/spraai7b/spraai7b.pdf
Michael
-
Another thing that “might” be happening, is some additional filtering for interlace material and DVE moves… but I am rarely or ever in an interlace project, so I don’t know for sure.
Michael
-
I did a very quick scaling test in progressive project with progressive material using the 3DWArp in both HD and non HD modes for a 150% scale on a test chart image as well as a 4K R3D file with a variety of detail in it. In both cases, I see NO difference between the two renders and even doing a difference matte in Photoshop and zooming in 3200% showed no difference. So for scaling operations in a progressive project there is no additional value. Again, there may be something going on with interlace footage, but that is a test for another day… maybe.
You can download my test image exports here as TIFF as I did not want to introduce additional compression going out as JPEG here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_ZaNEoEqulkSWYzWmJsbzNaa0U/edit?usp=sharing
The quick side by side in Photoshop are:
Michael
-
Thanks a LOT! You save my life! The question for me was not about what is the best result, but what wouldn’t Davinci grasp out offline. The only PIP, scale, whatever resize effect Davinci likes is 3DWarp. If you are going to export AAF to Davinci from Avid, 3DWarp is the only way you can do it with almost no pain. God bless you!
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up