Blaise Douros
Forum Replies Created
-
Particular (a particle plugin) will allow you to point it at a folder of images and use them as particles. That’s probably how they did it.
-
If they’re really on the ball, that could be a C700. Otherwise, Canon has never been too into the shoulder-mount space–with a few exceptions, most of their previous HD cameras have been in that prosumer all-in-one format. Maybe an old XLH1? You sure it wasn’t something like a Sony FS7 or F5 with Canon glass?
-
Kevin is 100% right–you can absolutely have effects tied into audio with the expression he’s shown. However, the only parameter that can be used as an input is the amplitude (volume) of the audio file; I.E. when a drum hits, the volume is louder, so you set up the expression to do something once a certain volume threshold is hit, so the drum hit trigers a reaction from your VFX. Splitting the frequency range as Kevin suggested is one way to go about making it more interesting, but certain sounds, especially percussion and complex, noise-rich bass lines, will extend across multiple bandwidths. So you will not get quite the desired result when some of those sounds are present. (I’m a composer and musician in addition to working in video)
But I believe Benjamin was ultimately asking about tying the visuals into aesthetic and perceptual changes in the music, like doubling the overall effect speed when the drum track goes into double time (as in the ear-splitting example piece). In that case, you have to do it manually.
-
Wow, this song is really, abjectly terrible, and I completely regret clicking on the video example. Damn it.
They did this by keyframing the effect speed. The speed is obviously not tied into the audio volume, or it would fluctuate with every single hit, and there’s no metric for musical intensity (which is an entirely perceptual concept–there’s no way for After Effects to measure it to write an expression that could use it to affect the speed). So the person editing built the particle effects, and then sped it up or slowed it down by keyframing the speed to match the beat.
Sometimes there’s not a plugin or expression to make something magical happen–you have to build it yourself, by hand!
-
Jon’s not quite steering you right. You can absolutely apply a monitor LUT (MLUT) to your SDI-outs, as well as the HDMI out, individually. However, one of them will burn the LUT into your footage–I think it’s the Viewfinder one, and don’t have the camera in front of me to check–so you need to be careful as to which outputs the MLUT is applied. You also can’t apply different LUTs to different ouputs; you select a LUT, and then turn it on or off for each output.
This is pretty basic stuff with FS7–I highly recommend that you check out Alister Chapman’s many, many forum posts, as well as his (paid) guide to the FS7. He’s got his own views as to the best workflow, but it’s well worth it to get a solid introduction to the FS7.
I also recommend making a cup of tea, snuggling up by the fire, and reading that manual cover to cover. This, plus your previous post, suggests that you’re trying to just figure this stuff out on the fly, and you shouldn’t. The FS7 is a stunningly versatile little camera, but only if you know how to use it…and I don’t recommend learning how on the day of the shoot!
-
If you buy the upgraded WiFi module, CBK-WA100, you can monitor via WiFi. Otherwise, it’s just camera control.
https://nofilmschool.com/2015/10/heres-how-wirelessly-control-sony-camera
This is in your FS7 user manual, looks like page 47.
https://www.manualslib.com/manual/860623/Sony-Pxw-Fs7.html?page=47
You also need the FS7 Extension Unit so you can get a 12v tap from a V-mount-type battery to power this module.
I’ve never done this, but some reports say it’s a bit buggy. Definitely a clunky process to get it set up. You might have an easier time running a wireless SDI connection, though it will probably be more expensive…unless you don’t already own the extension unit, in which case, go with a third party Teradek solution (or similar).
-
The link isn’t clickable, but a quick copy into the url bar does the trick.
Try the clone brush tool in AE.
Or mask it off, and put a second copy of the footage underneath, moving the lower layer over by a few pixels.
-
There’s no need to do a feature request–Warp Stabilizer already does exactly what you want to do. It analyzes the entire scene (not just tracking points that you specify), and adjusts the entire image to compensate.
-
No. The 3D Camera Tracker is designed to track the movement of the camera. AE then generates a virtual camera that replicates the movement of the real one, so that you can place objects within a scene that exactly match the motion of the real camera. AE’s virtual camera has no ability to affect the position, scale, rotation, warping, etc of the image it’s tracking–all it does is provide a frame of reference for objects in AE’s 3D environment.
Warp Stabilizer is probably what you’re looking for–it’s more automated and affects the whole image.
Finally, if you’re not getting a good track from the point trackers in After Effects (and thus, bad results on the motion stabilization generated from those tracked points), it’s possible that you need to learn better how to use them, and how to clean up the track data when the automated tracking is just not cutting the mustard. There are a million tutorials out there that Google can find for you. Don’t watch some random 13-year-old YouTuber’s tutorial. Try to find one by a professional like Brian Maffit–some of them are old, and (gasp) not HD, but they are still 100% relevant today.
-
Yep, welcome to high-level color work.
There’s a featurette out there about the movie Birdman that shows them enhancing the lighting on just about every scene with roto-ed and tracked masks. Look it up–it will make you feel both better and worse.
You also need to adjust your expectations about what’s possible with compressed vs uncompressed codecs. You want to be able to control every aspect of color from your DJI footage? Tough. You can’t. The color information just isn’t present. You push it a little bit, and it will band and pixelate, because it’s a highly compressed codec. There’s more latitude there when shooting ProResHQ, but is your white balance correct? Exposure? What camera settings are you missing that might allow you to get an image in-camera that’s closer to your vision? The closer you get in-camera, the less you have to futz with it in post. That’s the thing about Hollywood productions–they spend a TON of money to have a whole crew there lighting a scene. It results in a better image because they started with a better image.
Just because it “makes sense” to you that it should be possible doesn’t mean that it is, at least, not without spending money on a camera that can capture all that information, a crew to light the scene to make a perfect input to the camera, and having the skills in post to know exactly what is and is not possible so you can push the image to its limit without making it look over-processed.
Yes, most things that appear green to us are actually in the yellow spectrum. Grass, for example, is actually quite yellow when seen through the camera. You learn something new every day!
TLDR: Adjust your expectations of what you should be able to do with media shot on cameras that are not capturing 16-bit RAW.