Grade does not affect plane layer below

I was following along with the tutorial here:

and noticed that when I added the grade + gamma, the glow layers all remained white.

HF3 pro:

  1. Add a plane
  2. Add a circular mask to the plane
  3. Add a blur effect to the plane and set the radius to 30
  4. Add a Grade layer
  5. Add a Gamma effect to the grade layer
  6. Change R, G or B
  7. Note no effect on blurred plane




  • aarondc

    Sorry, I'm not familiar with the tutorial, but gamma won't affect white planes if that is what you are trying to do?

  • Can @Axel help me out with what I must be doing wrong? He created the white planes and then later added a grade layer that turned them all red, so hopefully he can tell me what I've done wrong here.


  • Gamma won't effect a solid white plane, but it will definitely affect any grey areas, which is why it works nicely to colorize the effects in that tutorial. The reason you aren't seeing any color change is probably because you don't have a background plane in place.  Add a black plane behind your white plane, so that where the white plane feathers out a grey area is created, and then the Gamma will colorize that grey area.

    Also, its worth noting that the new Color Vibrance effect in HitFilm 3 Pro can effectively replace all the colorizing techniques shown in that video. I would skip the Gamma stuff, and just use a Color Vibrance to create the final coloring.

  •  Thanks Axel, very much appreciated!

  • Or Curves....

  • This is using bonfire for the edge rather than Simon's vertically moving fractal noise.

  • This is an even closer version - I really need to watch that tutorial again and get my head around the 4k composite embedded in the 1080 video. So much is going on for this muddle headed wombat that I miss the details and just want to get the vid up and running haha.

  • Triem23Triem23 Moderator
    edited February 2015

    Think of it this way--since you can scale layers around, putting a 4k comp into a 1080 comp gives it a lot more info that in needed. But, it also means you can blow up that 4k comp to where you're only seeing a quarter of it at 100%. Fir the sun, this means you can get close to it--if I do the same star, but it's way off in space, I can turn that 4K composite into a 500x500 composite and it renders faster. If you are doing a projector shot, you can get a lot closer to a virtual set and still have it be sharp. Knowing when an embedded comp is going to be big or small on-screen, when to go high-res or low res is one of the arts of fx work. 

    By the way,stars look nice, especially that second one, which has a nice "sucking motion" on the surface noise. I think my take on the star used a fire sim and polar warp for the corona. Don't remember.  I would have to look at the file.  

  • Yes I understand why you would do it, but on screen I was getting anomalies of clipped blur from the glow layers (straight edges appearing way off to the RHS that disappeared when I turned off one of the glow layers) and some weird red mist extending all the way from the top of the composite to the sun (that disappeared after turning off the same glow layer).

    ie what I was not following up was the order in which things were done, and I was asserting ma authoratah in terms of how I wanted to construct the final shot also. Deviating from the demonstrated path, as it were.

    I need a video card, this is taking 21 minutes to render a 10 second video.

  • See edit above. 

    For clipping glows,try turning off Clamp to edge in one or more glows.

    Btw, rendering to Hitfilm if you intend to upload, it's actually best to do it as a PNG sequence, then bring it to a new timeline for export. PNG renders twice as fast,  or more,than MP4, and gives you a lossless master that you can then encode to the format of your choice. Usually saves enough render time to be worth the extra step for an effects test.

    I have had renders take 9-12 hours for 30 seconds...  I work my machine hard while I sleep. 20 min renders are great! 

  • Amazing what a change to the blend mode can do - for me this one is much nicer, with a better balance of hot spots on the front of the star:

  • It's just an experiment - more in embedding composites in other composites etc. Like embedding instances of classes in parent classes in OOP programming :D

  • Triem23Triem23 Moderator
    edited February 2015

    Incidentally, looking back at my star, I see I did use fractal noise for my coronal layers. Using a bonfire is a good variation--besides, that what you're supposed to do with a tutorial. Follow it, then change it! Simon and Axel took Andrew Kramer's tutorial and changed some things for theirs, and I made ore changes from what all three of them said for mine! Some of my best tricks came from watching someone's tutorial, then adding several things to it.

    Anyway, if you want to take a look at it, I'd uploaded my own version of the "Andrew Kramer Star" as a template last year. This was built in HFU2, but opens up just fine in HFP3. When you open the project, it goes to a "notes" screen that kinda lists how I put it together. Template- 3DStar.hfp?dl=0


  • There are some really cool effects in Red Giant Universe (currently in beta for HitFilm 3 Pro) for creating planetary textures. 'Billowed background' works very nicely indeed.

  • Wow, that looks awesome, Simon. My main project is going to be a sci-fi space movie, so being able to construct planets, etc, would be ideal.

  • Sounds perfect. I've only played very briefly with Universe, but was able to use 'billowed background' to create a superb gas giant texture in no time at all.

  • That 20 minute (motherboard GPU) render just took 1:44 with the new graphics card.


  • Money well spent. 

  • Nice! I upgraded my home machine to a top end i5 and a 970 GPU and it made a big difference across the board.

Sign in to comment

Leave a Comment