[Andrew Shanks]

We’re still unsure of what the issue was, …the only thing we can think of that was different in that project was that the editor had tried using the send to motion – send to FCP to round trip a motion graphic, even with rendering a new clip (and importing it as a stand alone animation) into that project (and replacing the motion project link) it still was weird.

The Solution: exported quicktime reference of timeline from dodgy project, created fresh new project, imported clip, dropped into new timeline, output to tape. That new project we did previews out with numerous times as well as a couple of test outputs to tape with, worked fine, no sign of the random sound muting issue, …very strange, but at least that work around seems to work.

Cheers,

andrew

🙂

[Andrew Shanks]

Thanks Michael, that was a great summary of benefits. We did end up upgrading in the end. We just had constant crashes with 5.2.4 (and cool things like it deciding it really didn’t like playing backwards), ..real random things, but annoying compared to the other avid we have on the show. We’re having a few teething problems with some P2 media that had been downsized then brought in from the Mac via the wrong codec, …avid thinking it was using interlaced in our progressive project, …on the Mac and the old PC version it complained but was cool with it, this version is good until you try to render a title over it, …freakout time, ….but it’s cool, we’ve got the assistants to re-export in the correct progressive codec and we think its now behaving okay (touch wood!).

Cheers,

andrew

🙂

[Andrew Shanks]

thanks for the advice guys, yes the moving the texture halfway up the precomp did the trick (having the cylinder effectively be half transparent), moving the cylinder is SOOO much easier now that its apparent anchor point is at the end of the tube rather than the middle.

Thanks for the help!

andrew

🙂

[Andrew Shanks]

That’s awesome they have sorted out the motion blur!!!…that one has been on the wish lists forever!! …yes, colour management is good, …I’m guessing we’re finally talking about some form of decent LUT’s? …bring that on!! Sorry, I didn’t mean to dis AE, …I’ve been a longtime user since the CoSA days, and still love it to bits, …but yeah, I am finding myself within shake more and more, …AE is great, and I still use it 50/50 with Shake, …but for raw brute compositing workflow and tools, there is a lot to be said about Shake’s/Nuke’s approach (and I’m just frustrated that Adobe have been sitting on the roto goodies they got from the curious gfx purchase, for 2 version revisions).
Still, I am amped to see the AECS3 public beta, and can’t wait to see what other tweaks they have done under the hood.

Bring it on!!

andrew

🙂

[Andrew Shanks]

I confess when news first came out about the featureset I was a little disappointed (coming from a compositing perspective, I was hoping curious gfx’s feature set would have well and truly been integrated this time round (better rotosplines, variable feathering, tracking of rotoshapes and points, to name a few)). But I have come round and am looking forward to whats on offer (Universal code of Mac and support for Vista are huge things for a start). Remember it is but a limited feature list at this point that they are marketing, so I suspect more goodies in store that aren’t being hyped.

AE7 saw the interface overhauled and a number of features that benefitted compositing, at the time the motion graphics folks weren’t buzzing so much. This time round its probably only fair there are more mograph enhancements. I can see why Adobe is doing the workflow thing (they’ve been moving that way for years and in a way are chasing Apple in that regard), …but likewise I agree that it’s only can be concidered a feature if you are using 100% macromedia/adobe CS3 products for your workflow, …all my clients cut on Avid or FCP, …so although I do a lot of work in photoshop (and am drooling over the new enhanced version of PSCS3) the integration is not going to benefit me from the import/export side of things (and i feel i am not alone here, being that those two edit platforms still handle the lions share of editing for film and TV).

I am looking forward to the new release, but I am starting to wonder of Adobe is starting to pigeon-hole after effects firmly into the mograph world, leaving compositing aside (Shake may be EOL but i tend to be using it more and more for my complex comps, it just has so many basics that AE lacks when I need to treat a problem comp, …I’d love if AE beefed up its flowchart and allowed us to edit using nodes, …its under the hood, why not write an interface that allows us to tweak in that way if we wish to?). Then again, maybe they are doing a bit of an Apple, and building a new application, purely for compositing (would make sense), nodally based but with after effects timeline (and other AE features, including plugin compatibility), leavering the roto of curious gfx, the painterly interface of Photoshop, and maybe with a GPU accelerated true 3d environment…
…well, a guy can dream can’t he? 😀

But enough of my natterings, I can’t wait for the public beta and this release once again cements AE as the top dog in the mograph world.

Cheers,

andrew

🙂

[Andrew Shanks]

Yes, get them as LOG space, to preserve the dynamic range, if you get them to scan the footage and provide it as linear you can end up with having all sorts of problems in regards to a greenscreen shot (it ranges from the screen being over or under exposed, to the helpful people that scanned the film doing a bit of color correction before saving the clip, …not great when you want pure well exposed green for the key).

So yes, you get a log dpx sequence, you then will convert that to linear within after effects.
The beauty of doing it this way is that you can drop it straight into float colorspace (meaning you have more dynamic range to play with compared to a 16bit (or worse, an 8bit) linear scan they might have provided you), and if it is a problem key, you can do custom log-linear conversions to build up a better exposed plate for pulling the key, then another more straight linear conversion (a beauty version if you will) to which the matte we have just pulled can be applied to. I am guessing with the fact this is going out to digibeta, that it will be getting a full grade after its cut back into the sequence, but it might pay to see if you can get a reference frame from clips either side of your effects shot(s), as converted for the edit, just to make sure your colors match on a basic level for when your fx shot is cut back into the scene.

Goodluck,

andrew

[Andrew Shanks]

Nice, yes I’d say the CS3 launch is going to be interesting, ….even if a new version of AE is still a while off being released I’m excited about the new extended version of photoshop (the prospect of being able to do roto and possibly 3d texture painting in it). All will be revealed in a couple of days i guess. Can’t wait! 🙂

[Andrew Shanks]

Totally doable in AE

– use a channel combiner filter (in channels tab) to switch from RGB to YUV
– use channel blur filter (in blur/sharpen tab) to blur green and blue (U and V), don’t go crazy, you just want a bit
– use another channel combiner to go back from YUV to RGB

Pull key and work as usual

Goodluck,

andrew

🙂

[Andrew Shanks]

Hey dude,
how’s it going? I saw your post over on the Shake forum so will probably echo my views over there as well. It really depends what you want.
After Effects is the best Motion Graphics app on the globe, hands down, forget any of the rest, they are but pretenders (…ask anyone who does a serious amount of desktop based motion graphics and they’ll agree there).
In regards to compositing, AE is okay, but I prefer Shake.

As for combustion, ….yeeeeuck, …I used to use AE and Combustion, …but haven’t touched combustion in years, …I used to love its keyer, colour corrector, particles and tracker, but AE has surpassed it in recent years (and in regards to particles, I have particle illusion 3, which is the next generation particle generator that combustion has in it, …and it works far better as a stand alone, integrating well with AE). Combustion doesn’t know if it wants to be a nodal compositor, a layer/timeline compositor or a baby Inferno, …in the end its UI is a dogs breakfast compared to other desktop compositing systems around.

I use both Shake and After Effects pretty heavily, both have their strengths and weaknesses, ..I generally use After Effects for fast turn around work (such as TV series) and anything requiring timing of lots of layers (even if I do it as a guide then recreate it in Shake later on, …I did it with a recent film involving a crowd of a few hundred chimps, timing of each character was critical, and in Shake it would have taken me a lot longer to finesse and time everything out). Shake I generally use for Feature Film work or when I want to get down and dirty with my keying and compositing (due to the under the hood power shake has, …much more tweakability than in AE), …likewise sometimes I will produce mattes (or keyed elements) in Shake that go back into a comp I’ll be finishing in AE.

So there you go. If you have a large budget maybe concider Digital Fusion, …but for me the combination of AE and Shake fits very well in my freelance bag of tricks (I also use Silhouette Roto in AE for all but my most basic roto work, …it totally kicks arse, …if it’s good enough for WETA it is good enough for me 🙂

Hope that helps,

Cheers,

andrew

🙂

[Andrew Shanks]

I’m a VFX Compositor living in New Zealand but I did a couple of months work for a Canadian facility last year. Vancouver would be my pick of places to go to (that is where i was based, but I have travelled a lot in Canada over the past few years), …it is known as Hollywood north as so many US productions shoot and do post there (as it is cheaper than shooting or doing post in LA). Toronto would be next in line (as it is big with Canadian productions), followed by Montreal. Vancouver has great scenery and the mildest winter, so yeah, thats my recommendation. In regards to getting permanent work there, editors and compositors are highly sort after, there seems to be a bit of a shortage of compositors (at least) for the number of jobs going there (I may go back there later this year after my NZ work commitments end), …and due to this Immigration has a special expedited work visa program for Editors and VFX artists, all you need to do is make sure you get a company there to sponsor you and you should get a visa no problems (after your current one expires). One of my kiwi friends has just become a landed imigrant there (the step between work visa and residency), he started out on a working holiday visa, then got sponsored for a work visa, then got landed imigrant. So yeah, you should have no problem. Just google production companies in the city you wish to live.

goodluck,

andrew