[David Bogie]

Interesting. Two completely opposing workflow paradigms.

I say, edit native and export to any non-native formats using Compressor or other encoding tools.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

QT Player and the Browser merely display the media. FCP’s canvas displays your media after it has been modified to fit the specification s of the sequence. If your sequence settings do not precisely match the media, there can be sync issues.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

[Christopher Tay] “Has anyone encountered problems where one day the Quicktime clips in the RAID storage is no longer recognized as Quicktime movie and when you try to open it in Quicktime Player, it says “This is not a movie clip”.”

We have seen this on our remote servers which may or may not be RAIDs.
The issue was user-caused. We told the Mac OS not to include the .mov file extension when the clips were copied form or local drives to the servers. Worked fine in older versions of FCP and OS9.

Can you see the .mov extension or, more likely, not see it at all? If you do not have it as part of the filename, you can use an Automator script to add “.mov” to selected files.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

[John Pale] “you can play it out to tape, then crash record it. Capture the tape and make your DVD. “

[Tiffany Chung] “so, there’s probably not a simpler way, then?

“

This is funny. There really isn’t anything simpler than going to tape. What you do after you have the tape might get complicated but tape is still the lowest common denominator.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

but that still requires building or obtaining the 3D model of the plane. You are therefore limited to the types of aircraft already modeled (and the expense of obtaining or modifying it to suit your needs) or building one from scratch.

And I maintain it’s not going to be realistic at all, it will will always have the CGI look to it.

I’d shoot an articulated and practical model airplane against green screen. Move the model instead of the camera.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

[Jeremy Kemp] “I have an NHL logo that i want to rotate on the y-axis but I do not want the logo to be backwards when it spins.”

In the olden days, we simply changed the y scale from 100 to 0 and back to 100. The illusion is that the object is rotating on its y axis.

You could also create a 3D precomp that has your logo rotating from 0 to 90 degrees and the switch to a copy of it that rotates from 270 to 360 degrees.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

We see similar posts often, people using AE as a transcoder to create a delivery file. It’s just not something I’d ever bother doing. Render your effects sequences and movies, assemble them in a video editor, output a reference or compiled movie, bring that into an encoder and process.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

None whatsoever. I just would not have thought of using Fernando’s method.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

[lukasz wiecz] “whats difference between [faux] progressive and field rendering? was watching a video and they say you dont want to edit stretch field if you field rendered. if this is true how would you resize and why cant you edit this in field rendered mode?
any tutorials on this would be great, currentl im going through lynda.com ones.”

could be a translation issue here. “By “field stretching” do you mean time stretching or or do you mean attempting to change a progressive clip into an interlaced clip?

If you put a 30 frame progressive clip into a 30 frame interlaced comp, the objects that get rendered as interlaced will appear different—smoother—than the progressive clips because they have twice the temporal data (but the same spatial data). that is, the intlerlaced objects will render in 1/60 second slices but the progressive items will render two identical fields for each 1/30th second slice.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

Fernando’s method is interesting and, if I understand his methods, it should work.

I would have approached this differently, though, and perhpas my method would require a redesign of the effect you are seeking. But AE often requires new conceptual approaches to accommodate its limitations—which aren’t limitations at all, they’re just how it works.

I use Shatter often, it is one of my favorite effects.

I’d create the Shatter layer you want and render it as a movie. Bring the movie back into your comp. Since Shatter cannot interact with your 3D objects anyway, replacing it with a movie accomplishes the same thing as far as the comp’s camera is concerned. You can program you comp’s camera moves and apply those to the Shatter precomp’s internal camera.

You Shatter camera will see the edges of the Shattered 3D pieces but, of course, the movie is completely flat and requires that it be auto-oriented toward the camera in your main comp. it will likely require some had-drawn masking.

I hope you get additional advice and I invite you to tell us how you solved this interesting challenge.

bogiesan