Rob Webster
Forum Replies Created
-
You know, I can’t even remember the project I was doing. My guess is, I never did quite master this, because I know I never completed anything like I described. I’m not sure what I did instead, but it wasn’t this. So, short answer, no. But I do a lot less with After Effects these days, and I imagine the capabilities have increased, so it may be much easier. Sorry I can’t be of more help!
-
Check aescripts.com/tracker2mask. It seems like this script would do what you’re looking for. Or check out aescripts.com/maskstolayers. It seems like this would move a mask to a layer (as a normal solid, I suppose?) and you could then parent that layer to a null that has the tracking data. This layer could then be used as a track matte to mask out your tracking points.
-
Yeah, I’m sure Syntheyes, PFHoe or any of those programs could get me where I want to go. (Boujou would be just a touch outside my budget, though!) I’m trying to save $400 by using what I have now. If it proves impossible, then maybe we go the 3D tracker route, or re-think the necessity of such a shot. I’m just a little surprised it hasn’t come up before, but I’ve searched and searched and can’t find anyone trying to do this. But it seems entirely plausible that this could be done, especially by someone with some good scripting or expressions skills. It’s just one of those things that I think, “You know, there should be a way to do this…”
And yes, I could just key out the talent and build a 3D camera rig and do all the handheld movement in post, but then I’m still dealing with a flat 2D layer, and if I’m moving in tighter on a face and need to move the camera down and look up someone’s nose, it just doesn’t look right with Flat Stanley. Not that I’m going to be doing that exactly, but my point is, doing the camera motion in post makes some things easier, but pushed to its limits reveals… well, its limits. But it’s a good suggestion, and probably the route I’ll end up taking if needed. The longer I look into this, the more academic the question becomes for me. I’d like the ability to do what I’m asking about, but it’s not going to make or break the project. But it would sure be nice.
-
Excellent questions. First, the reason I’m shooting hand-held is because I want to shoot hand-held. 🙂 Seriously. That’s the look I need. So of course it would be easier with a tripod. And I could absolutely stabilize the shot and then create the camera moves in AE, but that’s never going to quite have the hand-held look that I want for this shot. Think Cloverfield, though not nearly as frenetic or complex. Just a little bobbing and weaving, and stepping towards and away from the talent. I need someone outdoors in a field, and as they’re speaking, a circus tent rises behind them at a fairly far off distance, and then I need text floating in space between them and the circus tent. I appreciate you sharing Dave’s Stock Answer #2. The good news is, except for a minute of test footage I’ve been experimenting with, nothing’s been shot yet. That’s why I’m writing this. So I’ll know precisely how to do this in post. I’m in pre-production now, not production. And if it’s not possible, I’ll move on to another option.
So, if anyone knows if there’s a solution, that’d be great. Like I said, I think if one assumes a camera isn’t zooming but is physically moving towards and away from an object, couldn’t scale data be used to extrapolate Z position? (Wow. That’s my whole question in a much more concise format than my original post!) Thanks for the thoughts, Michael – I appreciate you taking the time to respond.
-
And, depending on the activities of the church, their large space may be more available during the week. A school’s gym would likely be used daily. Some churches have multi-use spaces that get tons of use, but others have a large auditorium or sanctuary that’s only used on Sunday mornings, so you might be able to leave your equipment up longer.
-
I must say, that’s the first time I’ve heard anybody suggest that AE would run faster with less RAM. With Vista being such a RAM hog anyway, are you sure about that? You might be right, but it certainly flies in the face of conventional wisdom around here. If there’s some 2GB limit with Vista, why would they even make 4GB computers? Please forgive my skepticism; I’ll admit I’m not the most knowledgeable in these areas.
-
Well, you can always just wipe it clean entirely and start over with a Windows XP install disk. You can always downgrade an OS as long as you’re willing to re-format and start over. And with a brand-new computer, that wouldn’t be hard to do, since you wouldn’t have tons of other apps and personal files on there already. And you probably wouldn’t be out any money, either, since you likely have the Windows XP disks that came with your current computer. The only money you’re out is the cost of the OEM install of Vista.
-
If you have pro, try re-installing. I had this problem, too, and couldn’t find a reference to it anywhere. At boot-up, a warning would tell me “tracker control palette is missing”, and I’d have the same symptoms as you. A re-install seemed to correct it for me.
-
Maybe try full frame uncompressed.
-
I’m with Dave – I’d do camera movements in the main comp. You could still have precomps of, for instance, layers with animation and movement within them, but it’s probably easiest to keep camera moves within the main comp. But it does make me wonder, although AE doesn’t choke on the number of layers, I have seen instances where it chokes on the size of a layer. If one were doing a long horizontal pan in 3D space, I wonder if layer size issues could come up. But even then, you could have precomps to resolve this and still animate one camera in the main comp.