Chris Brett
Forum Replies Created
-
Hi Travis –
– I might be misunderstanding you here but I would have thought that if you go to the first frame / set up 3d layer / then parent that layer to the camera it will follow camera – therefore at what ever point you are the 3d layer will be correctly placed …..
….. then all you need to do if you want the 3d layer to show at a certain point is to fade it up at that point in the timeline
——chris brett//uk
-
Hi Mari –
– not completely sure about this as I’m new to this platform myself but try switching all the layers as ‘3D layers’ ( if not already ) and see if that makes any difference …..
…………… some things only work on 3D layers.
Sorry Ronn for erroneous reply — got the wires crossed …..
————————chris brett // uk
=========================================================
-
Hi Ronn –
– not completely sure about this as I’m new to this platform myself but try switching all the layers as ‘3D layers’ ( if not already ) and see if that makes any difference …..
…………… some things only work on 3D layers.
————————chris brett // uk
-
Teds idea sounds excellent to me as you can adjust transparency to allow as little or as much light as you want –
– sounds a lot easier to set up as well…………
—————————————-c–
====================================================
-
Hi there — I struggle with lights sometimes myself but I would try setting up separate lights for the ground plane maybe along the lines as below…
1 ) an ‘ambient light’ to give overall level ( if required ) after local lights are set up — adjust the intensity ( or opacity ) to get the level right ( you may only need a tiddly bit extra )
2 ) use a number of ‘spot lights’ lower down to get what you want shadow-wise etc on the books
3 ) set up light ( s ? ) coming in from the side to catch falling books as required …
This may not work of course but I think that it what I would try….
—————— chris brett // uk
-
PS from chris brett —
— on this shot if trying my method you will also need to artwork a patch ( from cloned bark ) to cover section of tre where hammock crosses so that you have a ‘clean’ tree to key new hammock over …..
———————- all the best ——c–
===================================================
-
Hi Keith –
— as you probably know you cant pull a decent key off absolutely anything and this one looks pretty much impossible to me unless you are trying to replace the bushes with something of similar colour and texture…
….however there is one wee trick I know of thats worth a try ….
You can use this on shots ( maybe like this one ?? ) where there is an essentially static element to a shot that will not key out properly.
Details as below :-
1 ) — select the frame with the best ref of the awkward subject and get it into photoshop.
2 ) — take your time doing an amazing cutout that will impress even your mates and will look totally perfect when comped back in….
3 ) — draw a mask that will completely key out hammock and replace with new background
4 ) — key nice clean hammock over the top and maybe animate slightly …. and with a bit of luck that will sort it..
Its not always that easy of course – it depends on the shot but as you see there are great advantages to this such as the ability to fiddle with the cutout and get all of the green out of it if the new background is ( say ) red …
Also things to watch for include matching camera moves and matching grain……..
This method might sound a fairly unlikely route to take but I’ve sorted ( at least ) 2 ‘impossible’ shots with this to a standard good enough for national TV work.
My guess is that if you try and key this the edges will be noisy even if you can get close…..
Personally I would be very nervous of this as a commercial job if I were committed to keying the moving footage and replacing background with something very different ……
Good luck – will be interesting to know how you solve it.
chris brett // uk
-
Hi Roger
Its always tricky offering advice but I’ll have a go …
…..starting to look pretty smart but now that the technical stuff is out of the way put your artistic hat on and maybe check over the general ‘look’ of the comp …..
For instance I’m assuming the talent is ‘central’ to what the job is about but he is a bit ‘flat’ when compared to the b/g piccies so I would try boosting the contrast and tweaking the chroma a bit — maybe also flatten the b/g piccies a wee bit so that they compliment him and do not compete.
Similarly the spot light — at the moment its straight down and ‘mimicks’ the talent so again I would try and adjusting things a bit so that it occupys a supporting role / maybe try and lose the hot spot at the narrow end / maybe try artisticly angling the beam / maybe try dropping the overall brightness / and maybe then try using 3 spots in a line to compliment the 3 photos on the r/h side ……
This could look rubbish of course — you have to try it to see ….
Also maybe take a look at the sharp edge on the plinth and the front face — its ok but not as convincing as the reflections on the top and the floor.
— anyway my tuppence worth …………
Chris Brett /// uk
-
Hi Bill – if the head rotates in 3D space then your new hair will need to do the same or it will look wrong.
I’ve done quite a bit of middle range FX work and would say that this is going to be tricky.
My instinct is to try and avoid the part of the shot where the head rotates or obscure it in some way.
I dont think there is an easy answer to this one and I’ll be veryinterested to see what the others say.
chris brett // uk
-
Hi–
— mostly when rotoscoping I leave fields interlaced but if the action is fast or close to the camera you may need to de-interlace to get a clean edge ——- if rotoing by hand I would avoid deinterlacing unless you have to because its twice the work however am not familiar with this particular format or the auto select thats in AE nowadays …. if the auto gives a pretty clean edge it might not matter if you have twice as many ‘frames’ to deal with.
… so my guess is that it depends on the footage a bit but will be very interested in what the others think as well……..
chris brett /// uk
================================