Forum Replies Created

Page 1 of 2
  • Thanks for the response – I would use Color except the sequence has a lot of animated transforms and some transitions. Also the files are not quite 4K, but really 2x HD (3840 x 2160) and seem to work fine in FCP when used to conform a new native sequence for example. So that’s why I was asking about staying in FCP. With that in mind do you have any comments on my original question? Or else given that there are things that won’t transfer to Color, how else?would I convert this to full resolution?

  • Devin Earthman

    November 12, 2008 at 11:35 pm in reply to: wire removal

    If the length of the shot isn’t too bad, you can always healing-tool it frame by frame in photoshop, which is really not as bad as it sounds with PS’s animation features these days, and is the best quality way of doing it anyways, and free.

  • Devin Earthman

    November 12, 2008 at 9:58 pm in reply to: CS4 multiprocessing issues

    Doesn’t surprise me, I’d go with the faster cs3 + nucleo setup for now until you can get that installed on your faster machine. Just because Adobe says cs4 is multi-anything doesn’t mean it works as well or as fast as nucleo. In fact Adobe says a lot of stuff about AFX that’s never quite what they say…

  • Devin Earthman

    November 12, 2008 at 8:39 pm in reply to: What Am I Not Understanding

    Dunno I haven’t worked with prores in AFX, but I do know there’s plenty of gamma problems abound in general especially related to QT in AFX. I’d try rendering to a different output just to see what happens. Or opening your ProRes render in QT and stripping the gamma data to see if that helps. I haven’t done it in a while and forget what the option is for that, but also if you google quicktime gamma stripper there are little programs out there to do it. Though in any case I’ve never had the “flicker” or temporary gamma problems, if I do it’s at least consistently wrong 🙂

  • Actually, after a little process of elimination I was at a brand new project with an empty comp and it was still not finishing a render. So I disabled Nucleo again and that seems to be the problem, which I thought I had already tried disabling with the same result. So now it’s working (but oh so slowly!). It’s just strange I haven’t had any problems with it lately, I wonder if it has to do with the HD resolution.

  • Devin Earthman

    January 16, 2008 at 6:55 pm in reply to: plugins and 64 bit

    Thanks!

  • Devin Earthman

    October 3, 2007 at 9:12 pm in reply to: Drawing lines

    Thanks a lot for the in-depth help! It’s disappointing to me that you have to do it that way, but that’s life I suppose

  • Devin Earthman

    April 6, 2007 at 11:52 pm in reply to: Pbs using clock/keframe for grainy effect

    Make sure you’re at a new point in time, and use the diamond between the two arrows to make a new key. If you hit clock again it just toggles between animated and erases your keys. Other than that I dont know what’s going on

  • Devin Earthman

    April 6, 2007 at 11:50 pm in reply to: Breaking chains that bind me..

    That’s our point i suppose. There shouldn’t be any “set” way you approach something. AFX is just a tool for your vision, not an art form, if you want to get touchy-feely about it! Don’t think in terms of how do I “set up a template” so that it’s like all the pro’s. Just as there’s no magic “pro setup” for 3 camera angles for every scene and set you film. You have to know what you’re after for any kind of a starting point, and anything short of uploading a storyboard, I or anyone can’t really help you. Nor can you know what to do without planning things out that explicitly. Are you sending a message with this sequence, is there text, are you using footage, particles, just making a layered, moving background element, is an intro, transition, etc? Each of these takes radically different approaches even in planning–Especially AFX, since it’s layer based, I think is far less conducive to “noodling” around than a node-based system like Shake or Flame, and requires more planning and knowledge of the program’s limitations/exploitations.

    The point is there’s very basically two edges to the sword: exploit what exists–taking layers of footage and adding effects to them like photoshop (in your case probably to extract and exploit abstract elements from them) or creating elements from gradients, text, shapes, etc. It’s all about the context and your preference when and where you lean towards either.

  • Devin Earthman

    April 6, 2007 at 10:38 pm in reply to: Breaking chains that bind me..

    You have to be more specific than that 😀 Are you talking about creating a sequence of abstract stuff from scratch? Or later in your post it sounds like you want to do this from clips, two very different beasts. The whole catch to this stuff is there’s a 1000 different ways of achieving something, let alone not knowing what you’re trying to achieve! So either you start with a technique that you’ve learned (or want to, lord knows theres 687,324 AFX tutorials a google search away) and see what you can do with it, or you have an idea of what you want and experiment with how to get it…

    Having the music already is a great way to start what you’re after. Timing some basic elements to the beat and important changes to the music will get you 2/3 of the way there, if not at least provide some inspiration.

Page 1 of 2

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