[Andrew Somers]

First off, don’t rotate the layer. If you have to do that as a work around, then increase the layer’s size.

But you should not need to rotate the layer as Particular works in 3D space, you can move and rotate the particles however you want in 3D space.

If you production camera is moving, then create a 3D track, and use that comp with a 3D camera, and particular will move with the production camera.

Why are you rotating the layer that particular is on?

As for masks – Particular will not use any masks applied to the layer, you need to use an alpha matte.

[Andrew Somers]

That’s the one – it comes with simple bundled software, but IMO “BasICColor Display” is a much better application for accurate calibration and profiling.

https://www.basiccolor.de/english/Datenblaetter_E/squid_E/squid_E.htm

[Andrew Somers]

Mocha allows you to do this – if you want to use a Mocha mask with variable edge feathering, then you need to use the MOCHA SHAPE plug-in inside After Effects. Mocha shape is free with Mocha AE 2.6.

[Andrew Somers]

The XRite EyeOne Display 2 is a good calibration device, I like to use BasICColor Display software with it. I don’t like the spyder and never used the huey.

Your Laptop *will never* be calibrated correctly, and the laptop screen should not be used for color correcting. — you really need a good quality external monitor, calibrated with an XRite i1 for color critical work.

[Andrew Somers]

DSLRs do not use only the 1920×1080 central pixels.
Any camera with just one captor using just these 1920×1080 pixel could never compete in quality with a camera using three 1920×1080 captors

Most dSLRs use the entire imaging area of the sensor, and downconvert to 1920×1080. However, the D4 can use the full FX sensor area, or reduce down to the DX area, or reduce further to use only the 1920×1080 area in the center of the sensor. This is an important feature that allows for increasing or decreasing the depth of field and field of view with a given lens

I am assuming that by “captor” you means “sensor” – I’ll guess that some automatic translator mangled that word.

As far as if a 3 chip camera is “better” than a single chip camera – there is more to image fidelity than simply the methodology of capture and the number of pixels in a sensor. There are advantages and disadvantages to *both* methodologies – and it is a misconception that somehow a single-chip sensor with a bayer filter is inferior as this is certainly not the case.

The fact is that *every* high-end larger-format camera uses a single chip design. Hasselblad, PhaseOne, Canon and Nikon professional still cameras are all single chip designs, as are the Red, Sony F35, Arri, and the other major digital “film sized” cinema cameras. They all also have large imaging areas which is a key consideration.

The cameras that are using 3 chip designs are cameras with VERY SMALL SENSORS. 1/3rd” and 1/2″ sensors are so small that there is an advantage to using a “3 chip” design. But even so, don’t assume that all 3 chip cameras are in fact 3 chips at a native 1920×1080 res – many, including those from Panasonic are actually using lower res sensors, and using pixel shifting to increase the apparent resolution – well, LOL, this is essentially what a single chip bayer filter sensor does. But when you use three *small* chips, you can do it cheaper.

Now the Sony EX-3 you mention uses 3 chips at an “effective” native 1920×1080 res – but still, these are a tiny 1/2″ in size – no where near the imaging area of even a DX (APS-C) format dSLR which has nearly four times the imaging area.

Using 3 chips, you can have a larger pixel pitch for lower noise and better dynamic range – but with 3 chips you lose one or more stops of light due to the beamsplitter. With 3 chips you have more total pixels capturing light at a lower cost and with better noise dynamic range than if you were to increase the pixel density on a single chip of the same size. Plus the advantage that in a 3 chip design you don’t need the extra digital processing of the debayering stage.

HOWEVER

When you increase the total imaging area, to say the size of film, such as in a dSLR or a “Super 35” sized sensor, then you can have large pixel pitch *and* all three colors on a single chip. You no longer gain a “substantial” benefit from a 3 chip with beamsplitter design. Certainly not in terms of cost.

For instance take the new Nikon D4. It is a single chip sensor, but is full sized (FX) – and with 16 Megapixels, it still has larger pixels than the Sony EX-3, which only has 2 mega-pixels. The D4 has nearly 8 times the imaging area of the EX-3.

And at 16 megapixels, it is nearly exceeding the resolving power of most of the best lenses. This is partly why there is no “real” benefit to using a 3 chip design in *large* sized image sensors, while with tiny sensors, there is a significant benefit.

Also to be mentioned is the advancement of debayering algorithms which have had a significant impact on the image quality available from a single chip solution. Modern demosaicing algorithms avoid the problems that gave single chip cameras their “bad reputation” decades ago.

[Andrew Somers]

For best quality, you should *always* turn on “continuously rasterize” for layers using vector graphics, no matter if they are nested or not.

The “continuously rasterize” (aka collapse transformations) switch is the one that looks like a little gear, immediately to the left of the quality switch, in the layer switches pane in the comp’s timeline.

NOTE: If you are using nested comps, the rasterize button *must* be turned on for that layer in the main comp, AND for all the vector layers in the nested comp.

As far as if you should nest – nesting is very valuable way to keep multiple related elements together. If you are using Illustrator with multiple layers and groups, then bring them all in as a comp so you can keep them together, and yet still maintain independent control over the various groups/layers.

[Andrew Somers]

What you are trying to do is actually pretty easy – to emulate what they did in that video you posted:

1) Export from Sibelius two images of the same size – one with an empty staff, and the other with all your notes.

2) Bring both into a comp – make the empty staff the bottom image.

3) On the TOP image, add a MASK, then animate the MASK to reveal the notes.

[Andrew Somers]

Trapcode Particular is the method I’d suggest, along with a 3D motion tracker, such as PFtrack, which you indicated you have. Oddly enough I happen to be working some shots like this myself. We shot the scene “live” with the actors holding still (using C-stands or other props as needed to help them hold position, which then needed to be painted out)). 3D tracked the camera move, then added the dynamic elements of smoke, fire, water, etc.

If you are building “fake 2.5D” entirely from 2D elements, then skip to step 4:

STEPS:

1) 3D track the shot, and if possible in the software you are using place a tracking point at the tip of the gun barrel, then solve the 3D camera.

2) Export the track to after effects, selecting only the tracking point at the tip of the gun barrel for export so that point alone comes in as a null object.

3) Import the file into AE, and add your footage to the comp.

4) Create a comp sized solid, and add Particular to it.

5) Set the X,Y and Z of the Particular emitter to match that of the null object’s position (the gun barrel tip).

6) Adjust the emitter to shoot the particles in the appropriate direction, and then freeze:
6a) Set the number of particle per second fairly high at the first frame and set a key frame, then on the next frame set the particles per second to zero
6b) Set particle velocity high enough to get the particles out the desired length.
6c) Set the LIFE to enough seconds to fit the length of the video.
6d) On the first frame, keyframe “Physics Time factor” to number like 5, then on frame two or three, key frame it to zero.

7) Add a still image of a flame/smoke/whatnot to the comp, turn that layer off and use it as a sprite particle. Adjust size rotation, etc to get the right look. Also adjust the particles per second at frame one, and the emitter velocity as needed.

[Andrew Somers]

There are a couple of ways to go about this. You can’t just add an overall “whiteness” to the image as it will not take into account the geometry of any of the subjects relative to the light flash.

For either method, you’ll want to be working in 32 bit linear.

Method one (exposure with manual masks):

The most straight forward approach is simply to use masks and the exposure plug in, and some artistic judgement. If the flashes are short enough, this method works quite well.

Steps:

1) Duplicate your footage layer (or create an adjustment layer) and add the EXPOSURE plug in to the new layer.

2) Set the exposure to around up 3 stops or so (you will likely adjust this later to get the look and feel you want)

3) On the new layer, create masks around the areas of object surfaces that face the flash. Use plenty of individual masks so that you can adjust the opacity of each, depending on its distance and angle to the flash.

4) Feather and adjust the opacity of each mask to get the right look. Add additional masks over masks to subtract, or add more in areas of complex geometry (like faces). For instance, use a narrow mask for hair above the scalp to give it back-light glow.

This process will take the “flatness” out of the flashes, and give them a more natural feel.

Method two (3D track and scene build for lighting/shadow pass):

If the scene needs a lot of relighting effects, then a second (and more involved) method is to track the scene using a 3D tracker such as PF Track. In that tracker define the various objects, and track objects and export to a 3D program such as Maya.

Build a replica of the scene – but the level of detail is not that critical – no need for texture maps, everything can be a simple grey – though you will want to alter specularity for shiny objects vs dull ones. leave out distant objects or objects that won’t be affected by the re lighting effects.

Use the object tracking/mocap data from PFTrack to get all the subjects in the right place, moving correctly, etc.

Place lights in this scene where you want the relighting to occur, and animate the lights to flash (or whatever) over the period you want.

Render this scene out as a single pass using no ambient light, only the re-lighting lights(s).

Now you have a greyscale image of the scene’s relighting highlights and shadows. Do the frist two steps from method one above – duplicate the footage and add the exposure plug in etc – then use the new greyscale image of the relighting effect as a luma key on the layer with the boosted exposure.

While this second method is obviously more involved, if you need to add lighting effects after the actual shoot, and those effects are going to play for more than a few frames, then this method may be worth the extra time in setup.

An additional advantage is that this method allows you to add in atmospheric effects, like smoke or haze, to show the light rays and further integrate them into the scene. In this case you would do an additional haze pass, where a particle system smoke or haze was added to the scene, then all of the in-scene objects would be set to render as pure black, no reflectance, so they act only as obfuscation objects and shadow casters. In this case, ambient and source lights may need to be added to match the actual scene – in this case you may want to use channel lighting to have control in the final comp.

The resulting smoke/haze pass can then be dropped on top of the layer stack in additive mode (assuming you are doing all this work in 32 bit linear) to add in the light rays through smoke/haze.

[Andrew Somers]

The late great Ultimatte Advantedge was good at handling this kind of thing all by itself (sad that ultimatte discontinued support) – IMO Primatte and Keylight are less effective as “one click” plug ins. Instead, use Primatte or Keylight to generate mattes, and then use those mattes as alpha channels and/or in precomps using various transfer modes as needed for color suppression in transparent and soft objects.

For a non – roto approach, see this tutorial that is very useful for blurry and transparent objects:

https://www.videocopilot.net/tutorials/advanced_soft_keying/