Steve Roberts
Forum Replies Created
-
Geeeeez …. just make a gobo! Using the pen tool with rotobezier on, just draw a bunch of goopy shapes on a solid.
Or
Google: “royalty-free” + leaves + stock + eps
… which led to: https://www.fotosearch.com/SUE116/slbw0569/SR 🙂
-
Fractal noise would do it, or how about a blurry video?
Reflection maps
in 3D apps
are often simple shots,
so shoot some vid
and hey, you kid,
you’ll make some nifty spots.In other words (preferably) ref maps can be simple desert-sky-horizon images, possibly distorted to account for warps in the material. If you use fractal noise, lower the complexity and increase the scale to make it less regular. Maybe apply colorama and tweak. Shoot some chrome to see what it looks like … but you know it’ll just be a reflection of its surroundings, yes?
SR
-
-
Upgrade to 6.5. You can ContRas and apply effects too!
Unless I’ve misunderstood the question …
SR
-
[Dario] “It seems to me that both the ‘interpret fields’ and what I do when rendering should match up (IE- be the same)? “
Not necessarily. AE gives you the choice to interpret and render differently. There are times when you want to:
-interpret field sep off and render with fields: when the interlaced clip just sits there in a same-sized comp, but you’ve animated other stuff flying around.
– interpret field sep off, render no fields: when the interlaced clip just sits there in a same-sized comp, and you didn’t create any animated motion. Maybe for colour-correction. The clip is just reproduced as it is: a series of combed frames that other apps can interpret as fields.
– interpret field sep on, render no fields: when you want to move/distort an interlaced clip, but don’t like the look of interlacing for your render.
– interpret field sep on, render fields: as above, but you like the look of fields.Remember: an interlaced clip is a series of comb-like frames. It’s up to the application to decide how to use that information: to split the clip (separate fields on) or just leave it as is (sep off).
Hope that helps. Consider the Meyers’ Videosyncrasies tape .. if they still offer it.
Steve
-
Umm … more memory is good, but I’m not sure what you mean regarding OpenGL and the disk cache.
Back to the plan: did you trash your prefs and relaunch?
Steve
-
You should always separate fields if you expect to scale or distort a clip in any way. If however, you expect to leave the clip alone in a same-sized comp, then you should not separate fields on import or interpretation. Ignore the combing — it will look fine on TV.
You should separate fields for rendering to web, though, otherwise you’ll get combing. Try importing the clip twice into different folders in the project window, with different interpretations: fields on, or off.
If you render a “left alone” static clip as “fields off” that has not had fields separated (it looks comb-like), AE just reproduces each comb-like frame. It does the same thing when you render fields. Field rendering (or not) is only relevant for motion created within AE.
You don’t have to render fields, but if you do, the field order (lower first for DV) should be correct for your output hardware. I rarely render fields. Personal preference.
You should figure out a way to do a number of tests of field interpretation and rendering to gain a better understanding of fields.
Hope that helps — I’m rather tired. You should get the Meyers’ Creating Motion Graphics Books for more info.
Steve
-
Are you rendering with fields? You’ll see a comb-like effect in areas of motion if you render with fields. However, on a TV (not a computer) it will look fine if you’ve rendered with the proper field order.
Or … did you render with Best Settings?
Steve
-
Ah — my bad. Not being at the AE machine, I forgot about Cylinder Lite.
SR
-
Ah — my bad. Not being at the AE machine, I forgot about Cylinder Lite.
SR