Graymotion's Production Zone



  • @NormanPCN error in memory. I don't know why I thought 14 mpbs, since for 60fps, 1080p they recommend 12. Mea culpa.

  • edited February 2016

    Onward and upward - I found an easy AE tut that I thought I'd try out in HF 4.

    The AE tutorial author created a reflection of the smoke and meteor on the water by duplicating the layers and flipping them (mirror). I couldn't flesh out how to do that just yet...

    Back on page one of this thread I mentioned a gl_invalid_operation error when dissecting @Triem23 Just the Photons project. During my attempts to add camera shake on a grade and motion blur to the particle simulator (the meteor tail) in this test I ran into the exact same error. Remove the motion blur the error goes away. Guess the two don't mix?

  • Triem23Triem23 Moderator
    edited February 2016

    Are you using the motion blur effect or the motion blur property of the particle layer? Since the particle layer has a direct toggle for motion blur I can see the effect causing an issue.

    I only ask because I'm currently proxying a shot that has motion blur on the particle systems and it's not crashing.

    Comp looks good btw. I think I'd move the meteor to an embedded comp shot and proxy it--then you can bring it back as an embed for an easy flip and opacity change.

  • Motion blur property of the layer. I also noticed that WITH shake I cannot make a proxy of the main comp. Take the shake away..proxy works

  • That's strange! Again, the shot I am proxying now has camera shake on it!


    Always wanted to try this since the first days but I didn't know the particle simulator all that well (still don't).

    My alpha adjustment on the field clouds is in the 20's but still looks blown out. Picked a color from one of the asteroid textures, a dark brown,  but didn't blend to well for me. Work on that.

    Of course the original idea for my shot came from  the Master;

    January 2014

    Looked for "gimble" tips around here to get at animating 3D model asteroids later on but can't put my eyes upon them.

    Anywhoo.... on to week 3 of Guerrilla Filmmakers. 

  • Looks great, how much time have you put into this one? 

  • Well... it took me a half a day to figure out how to animate the asteroid field around the planet so with that.. I think I spent 2 days on it. Most of that was lighting and textures.  

    One thing - I have several preset saved now (space clouds, planet and stars) that makes the work quicker. Not to mention the new camera upgrades saved me probably another 2 days. I didn't have to fight with the moves. Loving that upgrade for sure.


  • Looks great! You're getting this neat haloing around some of the asteroids, which reads like light refracting through the dust. 

  • Yep.  The camera upgrades are worth the price of admission.  I feel like I can be back to animating without fighting with the rig.


  • @Stargazer54 don't forget Bezier keyframing! That was worth the price of upgrading too! ;-) 

    Grey, for thinking of gimbal and/or advanced camera rigs study up on camera cranes and jibs. Look at how they work, then think about how you would build one with a point rig. A gimbal camera is similar to a jib if you put the base of the jib inside the target object and pointed the camera at it. 

    This is an old Hitfilm 2 Ultimate test--the render is mediocre (although with 3D unified space and new mapping and material options in 4 Pro I could make this look a lot better) but I built a full virtual crane rig on a virtual dolly, and the camera move is very nice.

  • edited May 2016

    I have a "sliding" sun

    [video removed]

    I used white plane with atomic particles for the stars and slapped a environment map viewer on the layer referencing "no layer" with a scale of 50% and a ratio of 1, wrap x and y to reflect.

    The sun flare hotspot is fixed to a point off in the distance.

    The camera starts front and above and moves to back and slightly below.

    Is the sun sliding or is the background fixed and with the up to down camera move giving the illusion my point is moving?

  • Triem23Triem23 Moderator
    edited March 2016

    I've had the same issue. Without looking at your video I can say your sun IS sliding--because the Environment Wrap is treated as a sphere of infinite distance and your sun point is a finite difference.

    Here's the fix--you can have multiple environment map layers. Do something similar to how Simon Jones set up his blue planet in his x-wing fleet tutorial, but use a white circle instead of a planet and give it a black background ("Sun Comp"). Now bring Sun Comp in as an embedded composite shot on the layer above the Atomic Stars. Set Sun Comp's blend mode to ADD, then stick an Auto Flares effect on it. Your sun will now be at the "same distance" as your stars, and the Auto Flares will work nicely as it comes in and out of frame.

    Took my dumb ass almost three years to realize this....

  • When you or someone else can create text intros like the ones I have in my videos, that were created in After Effects, please post your work and tutorials in this thread:

  • @Yeremyah I have no plans to use Hitfilm to create Titles. I use Motion 5 which is much more adapt to creating stunning titles IMHO.

    Hitfilm (for me) is a VFX machine.  You know...particle systems, emitters, 3D models, etc. If I do see any good title tuts I'll be sure and pass along to you.

  • edited March 2016

    Yeah I hear ya @GrayMotion

    I will stick with After Effects myself for stunning text Titles / Intros as they have some beautiful stunning free templates for people.

    And I will stick with Blender to create some nice animations.

    And I will just use HitFilm to put together the videos.

  • @Yeremyah To be clear though... In my opinion Hitfilm is much better than the pay-as-you-go AE.

    I'm sure Triem23 will be along to mention that anything that can be done in AE can be done in Hitfilm... and from my few breakdowns of AE tuts to Hitfilm I'd say he's's just different terminology between softwares.

    I imagine HF can really kick out some great 3D (motion) backgrounds - I simply haven't really tried yet.

    About templates - HF has never mentioned one time ever that I have seen that they produce title templates. That's not their business model I don't think. Just guessing though :-)

  • edited April 2016

    You said, "In my opinion Hitfilm is much better than the pay-as-you-go AE. "

    Well opinions are relative and subjective to the individual and their personal objectives.

    As for me, AE is better than HitFilm when wanting to get some text titles/intros done because of the large amount of free awesome looking templates we can use.

    And for me, HitFilm is better than AE in putting together videos.

  • edited April 2016

    "your sun will now be at the "same distance" as your stars, and the Auto Flares will work nicely as it comes in and out of frame." - @Triem23

    Thanks a ton for clarifying the sun comp. I had tried something similar with my Helicopter over the Canyon shot but at the time my thick skull couldn't comprehend what you were saying. You could say I was  was stuck like Chuck.

    Well now - as per your instructions and a refresher of Simon's tut on planets the Auto Flare stuck like glue! Thanks sir!

  • Triem23Triem23 Moderator

    On your canyon shot I wouldn't have explained it well. I was still struggling with the issue myself. Really, Simon's tutorial where he put the blue planet in the environment map was the last puzzle piece. :-) If you were to browse back in my YouTube channel at space shots you'll see sliding suns all over the place. Like I said before, "Took my dumb ass almost three years to realize this...."

  • Working on matte painting skills.

  • Triem23Triem23 Moderator

    Looking good, man! The matte paintings look really good. Camera move on the first shot needs refinement, but, setting up the environment is the hard part. 

    How did you do the grass in the second shot? 

  • edited July 2016

    Thanks @Triem23

    The camera moves come from the original plates. In both shot I used a large x spline (Mocha) right in the middle of the shot(s) just to orientate the camera view. Then parented everything to the center point of the spline. No key frames or movement were transferred to a point/camera. Worked better than I thought for holding all the elements (sky, trees, buildings, etc) in place to the movement of the plate.

    The cloud shadows on the grass -  I used quad warp on the sky background and animated top left and top right 1000px to the right thru the duration of the shot.  Then I made two copies of the sky and  flipped them down to the floor plane inline with the grass.... then used curves, chroma key (keyed out the blue in the sky plates), exposure and blur on both layers. Dropped the opacity to around 25. Worked fairly well.

    Toughest part -

    Those damn birds gave me a fit until I figured out which particle sim  emitter shape to use to make them look like they were flying from point a to point b  instead of some of them spawning mid shot/flight.

    I tried like crazy to get those 3D buildings from the metropolitan pack to look good...but truly the textures are not that great...IMHO that is. Should have just went with pre-prepped 2D photos of real buildings.

  • Ok. I thought I'd put Hitfilm 4 Pro's editor to the test... since I've never used it. It was a bit clunky but I was super impressed that a 6gig Prores file rendered  in under 3 minutes! Nice

    Just having some fun with my pathetic attempts at making great space comps.

  • That was amazing! 

  • Very nice.


  • Nice video, although I disagree profoundly with the lyrics of the song 

  • edited August 2016

    @JMcAllister -

    Tune has a good beat and fit the way I feel about my "Hollywood Basement"....  flat Earth...not so much. 

    Edit: BUT.... I'm a show me kinda guy and I do wonder why there are no stars in realtime videos/photos in space. It is only after they have been edited do stars show up. Bit strange 

  • Apollo 11 Conspiracy Theory Debunked

    I almost believe it except I'm pretty sure this guy:

    Is really Colin Mochrie of Whose Line is it Anyway? fame.

    Anyway the missing stars are covered starting @5:48 or so.


  • Triem23Triem23 Moderator
    edited August 2016

    @GrayMotion you can't see stars in real time on your camera either. ;-) stars are faint and, in most cases, a camera is less sensitive than an eye. This is starting to change, but it's just the limits of optics and sensor. This is starting to change, but not yet. 

    NASA processes everything! A nebula photo will combine luma channels for Red, Green, Blur, Infrared, Ultraviolet, and maybe X, Gamma and/or Radio spectra with different color filters to produce a final image, and anything from a space probe is sending a line at a time! Imagine correcting rolling shutter on that angular velocity! 

    I missed this vid. Back in a bit. 

Sign In or Register to comment.