Erik Lindahl
Forum Replies Created
-
This is just a few minutes work in AE but here goes:
In the above example I used Beauty Box on the image and created a matte to isolate the effect primarily on the highlights of his head. Maybe a little to aggressive but one would have to see how everything looks finally comped and with a grade on it to really appreciate the effect.
-
Hmm… tried to reply to this post but I think my answer is being moderated or some thing. We shall see if it appears soon.
-
This is just a few minutes work in AE but here goes:
BEFORE
AFTER
In the above example I used Beauty Box on the image and created a matte to isolate the effect primarily on the highlights of his head. Maybe a little to aggressive but one would have to see how everything looks finally comped and with a grade on it to really appreciate the effect.
-
Also, with some masking as mentioned above I beilive the “Beauty Box” filter combats skin shine quite well / naturally. We’ve used it for numerous shots for so called “post makeup” where it works brilliantly (even on dogs! :)).
-
I’m pretty sure you could set that up in a workable fashion. We hade a similar workflow a few years ago working with 3K RED plates that where killing system performance. I’ll get back to you exactly how we set things up.
-
Could be a bug. Can you share a screen shot of your grade? I’ve noticed quite a few filters in PrPro CC performing poorly.
-
You speak the truth. Sadly to an end-consumer it’s easier selling 4K vs 10-bit. I think that “craze” shines through into production. But I fully agree. 1080p 10-bit end to end is what we should be aiming for. I presume pumping the resolution is easier than the bit-depth or dynamic range? And / or I also think compressing 4K 4:2:0 8-bit might be an easier task than 1080p 4:2:2 10-bit? Heck I’d settle for 4:4:4 10-bit 1080p before going to 4K.
-
It’s working as intended. I might be able to digg up a handful poor experiences at some point.
Working all native is sometimes amazing, sometimes the worst thing you can do. Running into courupt media or a courupt PrPro project file is less than fun. But I guess that could happen to any NLE.
-
It all depends on what you do. Just cause an app CAN hog memory doesn’t make it necessarily more efficient. FCPX has been extremely un-efficient in the past, given 10.1 was a major boost in speed. That said certain workflows are virtually always realtime in FCP7. I’ve even encountered a lot of the scenarios in the past where X was way slower than 7 (file imports for example). Not sure how these are today however.
-
I’ve used AE since version 3.1, I think, and started testing PrPro as an FCP 7 replacement at, I think, CS 5 or 5.5. Even the latest CC-release had me quit un-impressed. Dynamic Link is virtually useless for us in general and the times I have stared an edit to later move to AE for final composite / effects work, well most of not all sketched effects aren’t transferred. PrPro is extensively buggy / renders out poor results with every project I’ve thrown at it the last few years.
I guess I was expecting AE inside of PrPro and / or complete transparency between the apps which isn’t the case. File management is also horrible with dynamic link since we often require the use of Mocha for tracking and masking work. On top of that, renders via dynamic link are way slower than a proper AE render to file since you’re stuck with ONE thread for the task. Also it’s not uncommon we want to break down a spot and send various elements to multiple compositors. Again, dynamic link to AE doesn’t do us any good what so ever.
I’ve had extensive talks about this with a Swedish Adobe-rep and all in all the hooks between the apps aren’t there for my so called advanced workflows.
