frame by frame masking/alpha

(j) #1

Is there a basic way to do a frame by frame painting of masks/alphas
in blender or fusion ?

one more thing… now that I got 32gb ram on my windows, it would
be awesome to run shake in it through some box… I would pay
for the help… I tried myself , but I got amd processor :confused: and that
got intheway

(3pointEdit) #2

In Blender you create animated mask (spline shapes) in the UV image editor or in the Tracker tool. IN the Tracker you can assign the mask to a track marker, so that the mask can move with it.

(Hammers) #3

Are you sure you want to run Shake?

It was revolutionary and very powerful for its time, but I think these days you may as well stick with Fusion, or one of the other modern options.

(kesonmis) #4

Not sure how painting works exactly in Fusion, but in Blender you can’t afaik do frame by frame painting (with paint strokes) in a way comp artist would expect.

Animating spline masks works the same way almost everywhere: create a spline and add shape keyframes. In Blender you do it in UV Image editors Mask mode, later on you can use the masks in compositor using Mask node.

(Jason van Gumster) #5

Moved from “General Forums > Blender and CG Discussions” to “Support > Compositing and Post Processing”

(j) #6

I just got a used imac and installed my shake 4.1 on it, I love it.
I mean when you take a time to read all the manuals on a software,
it is a pal after that.
Ok, the Fusion has some nice features and from blender can be imported
fbx and alembic.

Shake has some features , I havent seen anywhere else, like a grain analyzer
and the ode that records color of a particular area, I have only had use for
the grain node.

But I still have no tool to do basic frame by frame alpha/compositing. Bezier
and interpolation has the problem of… well in some frames you need more
control points and in some frames less. Well, I am pretty sure there is no
good tool besides photoshop or filmgimp. In photoshop I could record tools
to make stuff happen , just painful making of masks. After Effects claims
its mask can follow a moving object, but I havent tried.

(3pointEdit) #7

Blenders mask tool allows you to segment masks into elements and will interpolate vert positions over time, which I guess Photoshop cannot? Maybe after effects does what you want?

(j) #8

Yeah, After Effects would do. It has somekind of tracker for the masks, tracker that is not separate from mask, but
incorporated(built with-in).

(3pointEdit) #9

Heres an example of Blenders tracker and mask at work

(kesonmis) #10

If it is a commercial project, it won’t do, but for personal stuff I would recommend Nuke non-commercial licence. The features you wrote about are all available in Nuke. The rotopaint node is pretty good once you get the hang of what is cloned from where and so on. Very easy to attach trackers to clone shapes/strokes etc. If you have any specific questions you can PM me, I use Nuke daily for different stuff.

(Mandalorian) #11

As kesonmis said, Nuke can do all of what you want and more. If you need it for professional work, but can’t afford a Nuke license, Fusion or Natron could also work, though I’m not sure if they have a grain analyzer or the color analyzer you want. For roto work, they’ll do just fine. And Blenders tools can work for that as well, as others have shown.

I would personally recommend staying away from the After Effects rotobrush. I’ve used it on personal and professional projects, as well as worked with others who used it, and it’s simply not that great of a tool. It can get you results fast, but if you want quality results (consistent edges, controllable blur, detail, etc.), save yourself the pain and just do proper rotoscoping. In the long run, normal methods of roto will get you much better results than the rotobrush in AE, and can be done faster if you know what you’re doing.

(j) #12

Fusion has crashed on me a lot. I wander if Intel processor is preferred more than amd.

(kesonmis) #13

Fusion is just buggy. I’m not sure what the logic of software development in BMD is, but the user forum seems to have the vibe of “if it doesn’t work, throw more hardware on it” instead of questioning why Fusion or Resolve is not behaving while other software works as expected in the same system with the same drivers. But ofcourse in the end it boils down to whether the price point weights down what you can and can’t do with what you get. For some it does, for others it doesn’t.

The best thing to do regarding hardware questions is to ask in Fusion forum or write BMD directly. Although official support for Fusion seems to be an interesting topic in its own.

(j) #14

That’s funny man. I am sure you are right.

Though must be nuisance for those that do professional work in Fusion. Indy stuff the same.