Alan Okey
5
COW Coins
2
DaVinci Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
[Tom Wolsky] “It doesn’t anger me. It does seem pretty silly to me.”
But you can’t deny its entertainment value…
🙂
-
This forum was created to annoy and anger you, specifically.
Looks like it’s working…
-
The process works like this:
– The live action shot is analyzed in 3D matchmove software (PFTrack, SynthEyes, PFHoe, etc.) and 3D scene data is exported to a compositing application (if 2D text) or a 3D application (if 3D text)
– (if 3D text) The 3D scene data is imported into a 3D application (Maya, Cinema4D, etc.). 3D text is created and rendered in the 3D application and exported on an alpha channel, possibly using multiple passes for different layers. The 3D text layer(s) is/are then composited into the shot in a compositing application (AE, Shake, Combustion, etc.)
– (if 2D text) The 3D scene data is imported into the compositing application. In a 3D composite, a 2D text layer is added and composited into the shot.
For some simple shots with no parallax or perspective change, this can be done with 2D tracking, but it’s usually done with 3D matchmove software.
SynthEyes and PFHoe (or PFHoe Pro) are relatively affordable entry-level 3D matchmove applications.
Here’s an example done using PFHoe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suO7CbFAKLY
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
In addition to what others have said, make sure you’re on a gigabit network or the network speed will be a major bottleneck. If your network is only 100 megabits, you won’t get adequate performance from Qmaster/Compressor.
-
[Shane Ross] “What is an “auto tune” plugin? What do you want it to do?”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-Tune
Excerpt:
“Auto-Tune was used to produce the prominent altered vocal effect on Cher’s “Believe”, recorded in 1998, the first major hit song to employ the software for this purpose.”
Two of the most popular software tools used for autotuning are Antares Autotune and Celemony Melodyne.
Used to great comic effect in the Autotune the News series of viral videos – search YouTube for examples.
-
[Dave LaRonde] “If you don’t have codec specs, you could always upload the ProRes HQ version and let them deal with it.”
A 75-minute 1080i ProRes HQ file is around 140GB. I don’t think he’s going to be uploading that anywhere – more likely, he’d be shipping them a hard drive.
-
What codec does the Ninja record to? If it’s a long GOP MPEG-based/interframe codec, you will first need to convert it to an intraframe codec like Apple Pro Res 422 before you can remove the pulldown in Cinema Tools.
In Cinema Tools, you can open a 1080i/29.97 clip with 3:2 pulldown, then specify the A frame and remove the 3:2 pulldown.
-
Your graphics card likely has nothing to do with it. My guess is that there’s a mismatch between your sequence settings and the source footage, or in the export settings.
Your system specs list an AJA IO HD. Do you have an HD broadcast monitor capable of displaying interlaced video? Field issues can really only be spotted on monitors that properly display interlaced video. Computer monitors are useless for this.
-
[Johnny Dedly] “I’m looking for the quickest way to create de-interlaced MPEG2 files from Apple ProRes 422 files with 3:2 pulldown.”
Are the ProRes files single shots with an unbroken 3:2 cadence, or edited sequences?
If they are single shots with an unbroken 3:2 cadence, make duplicates of the master clips and open the copies in Cinema Tools. Use Cinema Tools to remove the pulldown – you’ll need to manually specify the A frame. Read the manual if you’re not familiar with the procedure. Once you’ve removed the pulldown, you’ll end up with 24p (23.98) native ProRes files, which you can then compress to MPEG-2.
Again, don’t try this on your source clips – duplicate them first. Cinema Tools is destructive, and will irreversibly change the clips on which it operates.
-
[Walter Soyka] “A professional application should not sacrifice control, nuance, flexibility, or capability for simplicity.”
I agree wholeheartedly. I’d also add functionality to the list.
Why was it necessary to remove the ability to customize the GUI in FCP X and Motion 5 as was possible in FCP 7 and Motion 4? Why must we be restricted to what is ostensibly a single monitor interface? While it’s possible to use a second monitor in FCP X, it’s a far cry from being able to organize workspaces for particular tasks as is possible in FCP 7. I like to have my bins (browser) and scopes on the secondary display. Why was that ability removed? What purpose does it serve?
Why was it necessary to remove support for broadcast monitoring, or why was it deemed a feature unnecessary for the first release? Why was it necessary to dumb down the color correction interface and create a completely non-standard GUI that has nothing in common with any other industry standard video CC tool? Are color wheels really that difficult for new editors to fathom?
Why was it necessary to change the terminology of bins/sequences/projects to events, etc.? Despite the merits of metadata, I don’t understand why Apple needed to arbitrarily rewrite the established lexicon of NLE terminology. It’s almost as if they went out of their way to create something as foreign and perplexing to established editors as possible. Even if the new system works well and has advantages, what was the need to invent a new language? Who was asking for this? What purpose does it serve?
It’s clear from listening to Larry Jordan’s interviews that Apple did not create FCP X in a vacuum without input from the film/broadcast industry. They actively chose to ignore the advice they received. Knowing that, it’s understandable why those who work in film/broadcast might feel slighted as a result. That makes Apple’s decision to preview FCP X at the NAB supermeet even more perplexing. Why would they go out of their way to address a film/broadcast audience if their plan was to ignore them as a user base? It seems that the poorly handled release of FCP X and the immediate EOL of FCP 7 has helped to foster an environment in which an antagonistic false dichotomy of “high end” pros vs. non-broadcast pros (“new media” pros, DSLR pros, etc.) is played out daily in this forum. It didn’t have to be this way, and it is not constructive. Apple could easily have created a more inclusive application without sacrificing functionality or alienating its legacy user base. Why it chose not to remains a mystery.