Forum Replies Created

  • Just to add my two cents to this whole Rigamorale, 60p is different than 59.94i. 59.94i is closest to 30p. So 60p would still yield a slow mow effect just not as noticible if you were conforming 60p to 23.98fps or 24fps. So far I have had to alter the metadata of the 60p clips using a program like cinema tools. Is like changing the speed of a record player( I’m not sure if this analogy will work any more lol). In the mid 2000’s I worked on a show where we would take 59.94i footage (30fps) and export each field as a frame giving us 60fps. We would then import the frames as an image sequence. The amount of the frames were the same but they were being told to play at the rate of 23.98fps. This is typical of how the timeless art of over cranking a film camera worked. At the time of me writing this, Avid media composer still can’t do 60p or 48p. Which will change when those formats will become more mainstream. When this happens the issue of Slo-mo will still be the same. Your camera will just be capable of shooting a hire frame rate. In the case of this project mentioned in this thread. The best choice would have been working in the common denominator of the framerate of 23.98. The 60p footage when handled properly would have had the greatest possible Slo-mo effect. Then the 23.98 final output would be converted to a 59.94i for air master through a tape dub or file conversion adding a pull down but keeping all the desired Slo-mo at a the same speed. I’ve been finding Affter effects and the Twixtor plug-in very handy in adjusting frame rates and re-timing them.

  • Brandon Balin

    January 21, 2008 at 7:16 am in reply to: Plugin Better than Animatte??

    Ok, additional updadte. The animate on the black title conflicted with the title’s alpha matte. To solve this, nest the submaster effect on the title then your animatte. Now you have a toataly recreatable effect.

    Brandon

  • Brandon Balin

    January 16, 2008 at 7:16 pm in reply to: Animatte Question

    I just experimented with this and got close, there is one limitation which I’ll list below with a work around.

    First do your cut out with animate, then nest the 3d warp on top and do your animated move you’ll notice how everything will shrink or blow-up do to lack of layer separation(which you think they’d add by now.) time it out even if its rough. Save your animatte and 3d warp templates to your bin.

    Then make a new sequence, cut in a white title on v1 and a black title to v2 the sequence needs to be timed to the length of your effect.(you can use plain black and white video if you have it, or an imported file.)
    next on v2 the black title track nest your animate template, then nest on top the 3d warp template. You now have a matte that follows the size and motion of your effect. Next collapse the tracks and cut it in the videotrack above your effect, nest the matte key on top and your hold out matte is complete.(you don’t have to make a separate sequence, but it’s easier to stay organized.)

    Now for the best part!!!! If you have to change for any reason the shape of the animatte or speed/motion of the 3d warp, do it to your video elements, save the animatte and 3d warp templates, then step in to your matte and replace the old effects with the new ones. Instant update.

    When you recreate the sequence for uprez you just recreate title media and you

  • Brandon Balin

    January 16, 2008 at 6:19 am in reply to: Plugin Better than Animatte??

    Update, you don’t have to remove the title effect, at the time the machine was giving me nesting problems. So you cand do all of the steps abouve minus removing the title effect. Then on uprez re-creat title media.

    B

  • Brandon Balin

    January 12, 2008 at 12:26 am in reply to: Plugin Better than Animatte??

    I just experimented with this and got close, there is one limitation which I’ll list below with a work around.

    First do your cut out with animate, then nest the 3d warp on top and do your animated move you’ll notice how everything will shrink or blow-up do to lack of layer separation(which you think they’d add by now.) time it out even if its rough. Save your animatte and 3d warp templates to your bin.

    Then make a new sequence cut in a white title on v1 and a black title to v2 the sequence needs to be timed to the length of your effect.(you can use plain black and white video if you have it, or an imported file, and skip the next step, plus then it can be batched captured for later uprezing) Select each track and press the remove effect. The title goes away and you’re left with the graphic fill, white and black.

    next on v2 the black track apply your animate template, then nest on top the 3d warp template. You now have a matte that follows the size and motion of your effect. Next collapse the tracks and cut it in the videotrack above your effect, nest the matte key and your hold out matte is complete.(you don’t have to make a separate sequence, but it’s easier to stay organized.)

    Now for the best part!!!! If you have to change for any reason the shape of the animatte or speed/motion of the 3d warp, do it to your video elements, save the animatte and 3d warp templates, then step in to your matte and replace the old effects with the new ones. Instant update.

    When you recreate the sequence for uprez you should note where these are since they’re not titles anymore you can step in mark into out and overcut the black and white segments.(you don’t need to do this if you layed it of to tape or exported it as a file and brought it back in, then it’s a batch capture or import away)

    As for limitations, it works great for making something small to big, big to small exposes the square frame. One workaround to try is to scale the black track bigger than the actual frame size with another 3d warp, I don’t know how bad it will pixelate but it’s a solid color and a matte so it shouldn’t matter.

    Hope this helps.
    Brandon

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy