[Austin Reeves]

Dave,

Question for you, and I ask because I have no idea, but first, isn’t film 2k height 1556, not 1536 (1556 x 2.35 = 3656). Thus giving you a frame of 3656 x 1556 (sq pix)?

The second part of my question is, is is possible the client would handle the anamorphic squeeze down on film out? My assumption is that you would work natively at your 3656 x 1556 and that the anamorphic transfer occurs with the film out conversion or am I wrong?

[Austin Reeves]

Well I would venture a guess that ILM is using more than a casio calculator watch to render their 4k’s off with.

That said, you try rending a frame with close to 40,000 3D objects and the best volumetric and raytraced lighting you can come up with (don’t forget the *&^%load of chrome and reflective metal those things had on them), and then composite it all and see how long it takes your system to do haha…

—
Austin Reeves
AR&C
Production & Post Production Services

[Austin Reeves]

Here’s my 1.5 cents:

AE can do wonders with the built in grain tools. Andrew Kramer (homesite: http://www.videocopilot.net) has some great presets available, one of which is a grain addition via a noise filter.

AE’s tools work very very well, but the grain tools can be EXTREMELY time consuming to render. Kramer’s tool *I BELIEVE* uses a fractal noise filter (very fast) and randomizes the seed… again, if I had to guess. I have the preset, though I have not used it yet. In tests it looked very good and much faster than AE’s built in tools.

I would recommend trying a trial film out of your project as Dave suggested above. Say a test reel of a few minutes of film. Most of the time when you are adding grain you are simulating film for another medium (video) or matching grain for composited objects that you want to look like they belong. If you film out everything to 35mm, you get the real (pun intended) deal. IF you’re unhappy with the results of the test, THEN you can drive yourself crazy trying to add in some grain prior to film out. I will warn you though, trying to “add” grain and then sending to film which has its own grain, may be more difficult to match and look natural than you think….

—
Austin Reeves
AR&C
Production & Post Production Services

[Austin Reeves]

I assume your “vibrating” scroll is only visable on a NTSC monitor…

Try this:

Add a FAST BLUR set at 0.5 to your scroll (the text is what I assume is vibrating).

See if that fixes things.

Austin
AR&C

[Austin Reeves]

Traditionally this is the way I moved renders back and forth as well. If you’re seeing some compression loss you might try re-importing your quicktime ref. back to AVID and to a side by side comparision of the same frame and shot (say w/ a 50% wipe). I would also open your QT REF in AE and export that clip right back out as a ANIMATION clip and as a AVI or QT Uncompressed clip. Pull those back into AVID and side by side them again w/ the original.

I suggest this because this should give you a good idea of where your loss is coming from. Though I have to admit, Anim & Uncompressed should both look perfect.

Not sure what version of AE you’re on, but 7 will open OMF files directly. While I haven’t researched it much, you might also try openning them directly in AE and comparing to the QTREF exports.

If you find where you’re loss is, please let us know. I’m curious to hear.

atreeves
Washington, DC