Conrad Olson
Forum Replies Created
-
Sounds like a legitimate technique. Personally I would have taken a frame of the grass itself, with the matte already applied, and put that in 3D space, that way the matte is less likely to slip against the original image. But if your way worked, then fair enough.
CLEARLY this is all an approximation, an illusion.
That’s all we are ever doing.
—
-
Here is a making of article:
https://www.fxguide.com/quicktakes/behind-the-scenes-of-jcvds-epic-volvo-split/
It’s just rig-removal.
—
-
Sorry for the delay replying Alex. Work has been crazy.
I wouldn’t bother trying to use 3D lights to relight the effect. It could work but I would usually just used masks and colour correction effects. It’s much faster and easier to get the result you want.
If you can use the plate itself to try and get the lighting then that is the best way. Try un-premultiplying your effect, experimenting with different blending modes between your effect and your plate, and then premultiplying your effect again with the original alpha channel. This will allow you to get effect the colours without changing the transparency.
—
-
The only ones I can think about off the top of my head are the ones from the Foundry themselves. They are more about how the tools work, and less about good technique, but they will give you a few ideas. There are quite a few about the planar tracker.
—
-
I can see one big issue with that workflow. By undistorting your whole plate, and then re-distorting it after you add the effect, you add two stages of filtering to your plate, which will cause it to soften.
In general you should always try to avoid transforming your original plate, just match any other elements to it. Sometime this is unavoidable though, in which case you should try to limit the area you are effecting.
If you can render your effect out without the plate in the background, then track it back in in Nuke and add it to over original plate, it would be better. If you can’t do that, just try and limit the area that you are working with, and keep as much of the original plate as possible.
The roto paint tools in Nuke are decent enough to create clean still frames. You can then use your existing tracking data to track those clean frames in. We do this sort of stuff all the time.
—
-
I’m in the middle of stuff right now, but if you can’t figure it out let me know and I will try and help you with the expression later.
—
-
I use Nuke a lot more than After Effect and it definitely works in Nuke. But I think Mocha has the inverse option for Nuke.
I know that if you do the planar track in Nuke X, with the native planar tracker, it gives you the option to stabilize when you create the corner pin node.
—
-
I wasn’t quite clear, you would need to write the expressions inside a corner pin effect. The basic idea would be to pick the frame you want to use as your reference frame, then subtract the corner pin data, for every other frame, from that initial value, it should produce a reverse corner pin effect. You would need the same expression in each of the 4 points.
So something like this (this isn’t correct syntax)
cornerpin.point1.x.(reference frame)-cornerpin.point1.x.(currentframe)
—
-
I think I know what you want to do. Are you basically trying to stablize your footage based on the planar track, so that the area of the wall stays rectangular in the same place all the time?
If that’s what you are trying to achieve then you need to create a reverse corner pin effect. The last time I tried to do this in After Effects I couldn’t find a simple solution, and I had to use expressions. But you should look in the export options of Mocha, to see if there is a stabilize or invert option.
—
-
Pulling the key is only ever the start.
Be sure to slap some gratuitous lens flare in there with the flashes 🙂
—