[Larry S. evans ii]

What your describing could have a number of causes. Please give me some additional information and I’ll see if I can suggest something:

1. What version of Premiere Pro are you using?
2. What are your computer specifications (hardware and operating system)?
3. How are you trying to render out this file?

There’s also always the basic questions of “is there enough space on your drive”, “did you try saving the file and rebooting” etc.

Please note that I work on Windows and haven’t touched a Mac in 15 years. I can give you some basic advice but if it’s a Mac platform I’m not going to be able to offer any specifics. -R

Larry S. Evans II
Executive Producer
Digital I Productions

[Larry S. evans ii]

It’s almost laughable how much time and energy are spent faking “old tech” artifacts to get that look in a film or video project.

There are a number of tutorials here and also at VideoCopilot.net, that express methods of creating “the film look” on video footage. Aside from frame rate, film look also includes factors like motion blur (simulatable with After Effects) grain (also in After Effects), depth of field – the phenomenon where only a portion of the image is in “prime focus” (which can be faked, but not as effectively), and color and contrast. Fortunately video color and contrast can be graded very powerfully with the Color Finesse product (which ships with CS3 and CS4 – not sure about CS5 ) to conform with the color dynamics of a particular film stock. However, it is worth noting that since the introduction of the idea of the Digital Intermediate (DI) – a digitally scanned version of the film that is electronically manipulated -including color grading- that the use of color as a story element is much more subjective than just the “film look” that came from a specific stock processed by the lab for x amount of time.

My favorite example is The Lord of the Rings, where the overall color tone of the first film gradually transitions from a warm yellow/red/green to the middle movie with it’s bleak grey/blue pallette, finally returning to the vibrancy of the first film only in the last few minutes of the last movie. Peter Jackson chose to use the digital color controls to subtly and almost subliminally influence the audience mood with this technique. It’s used fairly extensively now, but LOTR is an easy place to spot it.

Of course, there are a number of plug-ins for After Effects that generate film looks for you (most of them I think are available from Red Giant or Boris FX these days), but they are expensive, and you can, armed with a little information from tutorials here and at similar sites, achieve most of these manually. If you are in a production environment with deadlines to meet and don’t have the luxury of experimenting, then the cost of the pre-made film looks are certainly justifiable.

I hope that helps. I’m still not sure exactly what you are trying to duplicate, but good luck with it. -R

Larry S. Evans II
Executive Producer
Digital I Productions

[Larry S. evans ii]

You seem to be asking a number of semi-related things.

First, “standard” film speed is roughly 24 frames per second, and this standard was established many years ago as the one giving fluid motion to most filmed actions. High speed cameras can go much faster, and when played back at “normal” speed can slow down actions. Visual effects like explosions are frequently shot this way in order to enhance their dramatic presence on screen. Film cameras can also be run at lower frame rates, with the result being a speeding up of the action when played back at “normal” rate. This can be used to make a car chase or similar action appear faster than it actually occurred. Film frames are also “progressive”, meaning that each frame contains a complete picture.

Standard definition consumer video and NTSC broadcast video cameras record at 29.97 frames per second (roughly 30) and most do not reset to other speeds. They are also “interleaved” meaning that each picture is split into a series of even and odd lines of pixels that are played back in sequence on a cathode ray tube (CRT) display or older television.

Flat panel computer monitors, flat LCD TVs and HDTV monitors play back the complete images from top to bottom (at a much higher rate) so technically these are “progressive” frame formats. Likewise, HD cameras can capture progressive frames, and even on some consumer models the frame rate is selectable to 24 fps (“film look”).

In the computer, you can change the frame rates of a composition in After Effects and render it out to whatever rate you want. The software will interpolate frames down or up as required.

Now, where I’m a bit confused is your reference to fade in/out title effects with “jitter” in the 80s and 90s. I’ll try to describe some possible scenarios to see if this is what you mean. Once we narrow down what you are trying to create, I think there is probably a number of ways to create this with After Effects.

TV programs that were shot on video tape in the last century frequently had their titles created via technology like Chyron or Paintbox. These are inline systems that add imagery, titles, etc. to the live video feed as it is broadcast, rather than a post production technique that is commonly used with film (even today). In the early days the resolution these systems were capable of was significantly lower than the average computer monitor, so most superimposed titles tended to look jagged and flickery.

Bear in mind also that even though these were TV shows were probably shot on 3/4″ beta tape stock, the largely analog technology did not produce images of the kind of quality we get from a fairly new home camera.

Up until about the mid-60s, there actually wasn’t any reliable and affordable video tape method being employed for television, so if something was done live, and there was a record made of it, it was done with a process called kinescope. Kinescope basically consists of taking a film camera and pointing it at a TV monitor and filming a broadcast. Due to the fact that TV is interleaved and film is progressive, kinescopes can usually be spotted by the rolling bands moving from the top to the bottom of the image. It was only in the late 1980s and early 1990s that digitally controlled video monitors made it possible to shoot movies with TV or video screens that didn’t have some roll in them.

If that’s what you are talking about, the tutorial by Aharon Rabinowitz on “Old TV” will cover how to fake that. With some adjustment the methods might be used on your titles alone (instead of the whole comp)to simulate the effect of an old Paintbox or Chyron.

If it’s something else, I’m afraid you’ll have to describe it a bit more clearly or point me to an example before I can offer another suggestion.

Larry S. Evans II
Executive Producer
Digital I Productions

[Larry S. evans ii]

There are potentially a number of issues here, which I don’t think have to do with compression at all. Ideally I need to know more about how you are keying this footage before being able to give you a specific answer, because simply picking the wrong kind of key or key settings can cause these problems. However, here are some basic things you can try first.

1. Before you start to pull the key, apply the Effect>Color Correction> Broadcast Colors to your clip. This limits the colors in the clip to that which can be reproduced by NTSC or PAL televisions (which are fewer colors than are produced by computer monitors). This should address any issues of “weird blacks” to begin with.

2. If the problem appears to be that the key you applied is removing the black color -as you are describing it- then it may be helpful to try and set your key against a background solid rather than an image or other background. I would try to pick a solid color that is not featured in the foreground image. White is actually usually a good choice for this because true pure white rarely exists in taped footage. At any rate, if you set your key against this and see the bleed through on the blacks, then you are using some setting that is too broad.

Again, without knowing how you are creating this key, I can’t be more specific, but the Keylight plug-in has features that act like the Color Correction>Levels effect that allows you to expand or contract the range of the keyed out values (this is a significant oversimplification). If you expand the “bottom” black too much it can start to take out the blacks in the image.

Additionally you can get “fringing” or “spill” effects where colors appear to be clean but actually pick up enough reflected color off the background to start keying out. these all can be corrected to some degree but first you have to see them and then identify the source. Using a solid background instead of a background image may help do this.

3. Finally, if I have misunderstood and you are trying to compress a final MPEG-2 format directly out of After Effects or are trying to re-compress a Quicktime file to MPEG-2, then there could very well be some problem in the compression. First, you’d want to output uncompressed AVI or Quicktime as the final state and then use something like the Adobe Media Encoder to conform it to MPEG-2 for DVD. If you are using Encore for DVD creation, the application will actually select the Media Encoder and set the most standard requirements for you (these may not be the best, but let’s go with the basics). If you are creating your DVD using a different software and need to create the MPEG-2 file first, I would recommend finding something other than After Effects to do the compression. In any case, never re-compress a compressed file of any format.

In answer to your other question, the MPEG-2 DVD format is designed to have the audio as a separate channel. This facilitates multiple language editions of the DVD, the addition of audio commentaries, etc. I believe you can create an MPEG2 format out of Media Encoder that embeds the audio, but it is not the proper way to do it for making a DVD with a DVD authoring program. -R

Larry S. Evans II
Executive Producer
Digital I Productions

[Larry S. evans ii]

Sounds as though you were having Windows problems and not Master Collection Problems.

I had CS3 Master Collection, running on Windows XP Pro, and no issues with it. I upgraded to CS4 without removing CS3 and then later ended up having to remove and reinstall CS4 completely when I removed some of the CS3 components. Otherwise, I have had no problems, so it may be just your Windows installation.

As has been pointed out the “box sets” have some features you can’t get in single licenses, but if you are only looking to do video work, cross-grading to CS5 Production Premium from Master Collection may be the way to go. Production Premium includes the video production and editing tools along with the DVD creation system, but not any of the web or DTP stuff. As far as I know it does include Photoshop Extended.

Also note that from what I understand CS5 will only run in 64-bit OS and on the Windows platform it is 64-bit Vista or Windows 7. Xp64 is not supported.

Larry S. Evans II
Executive Producer
Digital I Productions

[Larry S. evans ii]

My general approach is perform at least basic color and lighting correction to any clip before I start addressing any kind of roto work.

Even if the director wants this sequence to look like it’s occurring in the night, it’s easier to use After Effects to take it back to that look once you’ve pulled the background out. In fact, if you are later substituting a CG or photo background, you will probably have to do a great deal of manipulation of the finished images to get them to “stick”, so there’s no harm in raising the levels here at least.

Once you’ve brightened the image up, you may be able to see specific areas for cleaner roto, and if you have a clean plate (i.e a frame of the space with no-one in it) you can often use that as a difference matte to allow in only the changed pixels. That can sometimes get you very close, particularly in shots where a greenscreen is impossible or impractical. Just rolling a few seconds of the space from the same angle can save hours in roto. (It’s not as direct if you have a moving camera, but it can still be done). -R

Larry S. Evans II
Executive Producer
Digital I Productions

[Larry S. evans ii]

If I understand you correctly, what you’d want to do is put the clip with the graffiti underneath the clip where you’ve removed it, then use a mask on the upper layer which animates over time to make the upper layer disappear. The property to key frame is Mask Shape. I’d also suggest that you draw the mask in the first frame of the clip using the pen tool and create a number of points so that you can adjust the mask tightly to the figure as it moves along. If you are not as interested in making the reveal look like the figure is the cause of it, you might be able to get away with a standard square mask and a bit of feathering. -R

Larry S. Evans II
Executive Producer
Digital I Productions

[Larry S. evans ii]

Probably the best way to handle that is to use Effects>Adjust Colors> Curves on the layer, and bring the lower end of the main curve upward just a bit. You can also try adjusting each of the Red, Green, and Blue curves independently until your color seems to work best with the “white void”. Based on what I’m seeing in your sample pulling the green out just a bit (i.e. raising the upper to middle end of the green curve)may give you a more neutral image, as you appear to be getting a lot of green spill on the subject. -R

Larry S. Evans II
Executive Producer
Digital I Productions

[Larry S. evans ii]

I think you’ll find some assistance going through the tutorials at VideoCopilot.net as well. There is an excellent one on creating a page turning effect that would work between your “pages” and with the “sure target” tutorial I think you’ll find a good basis for controlling the pan and zoom camera you are looking for. -R

Larry S. Evans II
Executive Producer
Digital I Productions

[Larry S. evans ii]

There are a number of approaches to this, but as most folks have said, it’s not really that complicated. All the other advice is valid and I think you’ll find some combination of what everyone has suggested will solve your problem. I’ll add that to avoid these issues in the future, you should make the following adjustments or changes to your greenscreen rig.

1. Light the rig separate from your talent. I have two sets of lights when I shoot greenscreen, one is either even or behind the talent when practical, and lights the screen as flatly as possible. The other is used for dramatic lighting of the subject to include the creation of ground shadows if required. You’ll find this minimizes spill (particularly on white wardrobes) and makes pulling the key a lot simpler. This isn’t perfect, mind you, and you may still have to create a faux shadow. But it will be better than what you’ve put together

2. Eliminate wrinkles and seams in the background where possible. The most egregious one you have is the one between the wall drape and floor. Unless you intend to create a “wall” space in the key, the conventional method of hanging these screens is to have them curve gently on the bottom and form part or all of the floor drape. If you need a wider space, consider using two drapes with their long sides running vertically to eliminate the wall seam.

As for wrinkles, if you are mounting over a frame you can stretch out the majority by wrapping the fabric and securing it with simple spring clamps (I bought mine at a 99-cent discount place-nothing fancy and if they break or get lost, you aren’t out a lot of cash). If you’re mounting up against a wall, some double stick tape will do similar service, just make sure you’re careful taking it off to not harm the wall finish. You don’t have to make the screen drum-head tight (you can if your rig supports that), you just need to eliminate any larger sags and wrinkles.

3. Frame your shot to minimize the amount of keying, and use a mask to “chop” off unneeded areas. Based on the idea of this being like the Mac commercials, we can presume two people in the space and standing withing the green area on the floor. So you’ve got this framed fairly tightly for that, and that’s good. Just remember that with greenscreen work, a shot as tight on your actors as possible will give you a better master to composite, because you are getting more useful pixels on the tape or hard drive. If your actors are filling 80% of the frame, that’s twice as many pixels as if they are only on 40%. Even if you know in the final composite that they’ll be roughly 40% of frame, you will benefit from the extra data of having them close in frame to start with. You can’t create that data if you don’t have it, but you can always “throw it away” to make the figures appear smaller or more distant.

Otherwise if there are areas of the studio, rig, lights, mic booms, etc. that are in shot but never get crossed by an actor, the easiest way to handle them is just to create a static mask or series of masks in After Effects to clip them off completely before you even start the keying process. The less you have to eliminate with the key, the tighter (and hopefully cleaner) you key’s color/luminance range becomes.

Good luck with your project. Greenscreen and keying open up enormous vistas for creative work. There are some simple essentials that are required, and after that it’s a matter of practice in setting up lights, camera, and getting the actors to work in the space. -R

Larry S. Evans II
Executive Producer
Digital I Productions