Latest post Thu, Oct 11 2018 4:49 PM by Telegram!. 11 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (12 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • Mon, Oct 1 2018 3:55 PM

    2018 Still image workflow?

    Hi,

    I'm working on a show that will have some fast-paced photo montages. For workflow reasons it seems like things will be kept within Avid - not going to After Effects, and not likely to be able to use plug-ins. I haven't had to deal with a lot of stills in Avid for awhile, so, just checking if there have been any improved workflows for working with high-resolution still images? 

    I found a couple of threads that gave some options but they date to 2013 and 2014:

    - http://community.avid.com/forums/p/131055/748436.aspx#748436

    - http://community.avid.com/forums/p/120727/695727.aspx#695727

    - A thread from 2017 indicated Pan & Zoom was buggy.

    Has Avid made any improvements to working with stills in the past 4-5 years? I'm sure this has been a requested feature going back 10-15 years but with the improvements to resoultion independence perhaps things have changed?

    I thought Frame Flex would be an option but from the thread above there are limitations in what can be done. 

    Hopefully, the situation has improved or will do so soon (less than another 5 years?). When stills are needed to a large extent I've found it a lot faster and easier to work in Premiere or After Effects but going to another program isn't an option for this project. It'd be nice to be able to work in Avid natively, without the need for plug-ins that online facilities may not have access to. 

    Current plan is to use 3D Warp and a nested resize, if needed. There will be video under the stills, so it is annoying having to crop the edges of the images every time. Also, we've had an issue where new versions have been provided and the images have to be replaced and if they are different crops the keyframes have to be adjusted - which is cumbersome.

    Thanks for any help that can be provided!

    Adam

     

     

    Filed under:
  • Mon, Oct 1 2018 4:36 PM In reply to

    • MattB
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on Tue, May 9 2006
    • Shepperton, UK
    • Posts 466
    • Points 6,340

    Re: 2018 Still image workflow?

    I would have thought Pan & Zoom would be your answer. I have never found it buggy. You can exploit the full resolution of the original image.

    I suppose the only thing you will need to make sure is theat you keep the original images with the projects somewhere so theat P&Z can refrence them at a different facilities house etc.

     

    Edit 1:- Intel Core i7 960 3.2 GHz (self build) Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R Mobo 24GB Corsair Vengance DDR3 1600Mhx memory NVIDIA Quadro P4000 (Nvidia driver... [view my complete system specs]

    Matt B

  • Tue, Oct 2 2018 3:44 AM In reply to

    • Martin Fox
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on Fri, Mar 14 2014
    • Sydney Australia
    • Posts 210
    • Points 2,190

    Re: 2018 Still image workflow?

    My approach is to import the stills and use the resize tool for moves, building a template bin as I go.

    Then once the picture cut is done I replace the resize tool where the enlargement is too great, with either 'Pan and zoom or AMA linked large dimension stills, using frame flex.

    This allows me to work quickly in the first instance, and quality in the second.

    Keep the file path for pan and zoom files consistant, very importtant.

    Apply the pan and zoom effect to an existing media clip of the same image, that way if the file path is lost you can still see what image was supposed to be there.

    iMac Retina27 late 2017 4.5Gz i7 40GB AMD 8GB with Sata Raid OS 10.13.4 MC 2018.3 BMD mini monitor with Eizo monitor [view my complete system specs]
  • Tue, Oct 2 2018 1:29 PM In reply to

    • LDV20
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on Fri, Nov 18 2011
    • Posts 158
    • Points 1,880

    Re: 2018 Still image workflow?

    Used avid pan and zoom extensively in some recent projects and all went well.

    L

    Symphony 2018.8 - Win 10 pro, Asus PrimeZ270 with i7 7700 cpu, Quadro P2000,32gig memory, 500gig SSD system drive, WD 5TB,and 2TB media drive,BM Intensity... [view my complete system specs]
  • Tue, Oct 2 2018 9:57 PM In reply to

    Re: 2018 Still image workflow?

    I’m starting to think I can be satisfied using 3D Warp for zooms as long as I flip my 1080project over to a higher resolution Project in order to re-import my image file at top Quality, after roughing it out. I also have realized it might be better to drop multiple 3D Warp FX on a clip so that for instance, I can apply a subtle Rotation and proceed to easily shift it in relation to a scale FX. It just feels a little easier, though strictly speaking it’s not necessary. Same with a crop to mask the black edges caused by the Rotate.

    I know that Pan Zoom offers a variety of filters to handle a variety of image files, so it could be that P&Z is still the best quality vs. 3D Warp— but warps can be combined with P&Zs.

    I never have much fun using Frameflex for zooms, so I avoid it.

     

     

    Windows7 Pro; HP 820z, 16GB ram; Composer Nitris DX, Squeeze v8.5 Pro _____ Windows10 Pro x64 Dell XPS 8930 Special Edition Tower i7-8700 3.2 Ghz; 32GB... [view my complete system specs]
  • Thu, Oct 4 2018 5:19 AM In reply to

    • luca.mg
    • Top 25 Contributor
    • Joined on Thu, Oct 13 2005
    • Roma - Italy
    • Posts 5,357
    • Points 62,830

    Re: 2018 Still image workflow?

    Telegram!:
    I never have much fun using Frameflex for zooms, so I avoid it.

    Yes FrameFlex is no fun at all.

    Telegram!:
    I’m starting to think I can be satisfied using 3D Warp for zooms as long as I flip my 1080project over to a higher resolution Project in order to re-import my image file at top Quality, after roughing it out.

    3D Warp (or Resize, PnP, and the like), will introduce a quality loss compared to P&Z, no matter if You switch to an higher resolution to do Your things and then back to 1080, which I seem to understand it's Your delivery size. 3D warp and the like are fine for little zoom ins, say from 100% to 110%, if You need to further blow up Your picts You better use P&Z, or Boris, or some other third party plugin or external app: MC does a pretty bad job at enlarging bitmaps, and footage too for that matter.

    Symphony 2018.5, BM Intensity Pro 4k, Windows 10, i7-5930K, 32 GB ram, Quadro K620 [view my complete system specs]

    peace luca

  • Thu, Oct 4 2018 7:30 AM In reply to

    Re: 2018 Still image workflow?

    luca.mg:

    Telegram!:
    I never have much fun using Frameflex for zooms, so I avoid it.

    Yes FrameFlex is no fun at all.

    Telegram!:
    I’m starting to think I can be satisfied using 3D Warp for zooms as long as I flip my 1080project over to a higher resolution Project in order to re-import my image file at top Quality, after roughing it out.

    3D Warp (or Resize, PnP, and the like), will introduce a quality loss compared to P&Z, no matter if You switch to an higher resolution to do Your things and then back to 1080, which I seem to understand it's Your delivery size. 3D warp and the like are fine for little zoom ins, say from 100% to 110%, if You need to further blow up Your picts You better use P&Z, or Boris, or some other third party plugin or external app: MC does a pretty bad job at enlarging bitmaps, and footage too for that matter.

    Hi Luca, I see what you mean...

     

    Windows7 Pro; HP 820z, 16GB ram; Composer Nitris DX, Squeeze v8.5 Pro _____ Windows10 Pro x64 Dell XPS 8930 Special Edition Tower i7-8700 3.2 Ghz; 32GB... [view my complete system specs]
  • Wed, Oct 10 2018 5:43 PM In reply to

    Re: 2018 Still image workflow?

    Yes, I see what you mean: inside the 1080 Project, the 3D Warp FX does look much softer even when I re-import file at 4K resolution in 4K Project. On the other hand, I learned that if I do a Video Mixdown inside the 4K Project, then switch over to 1080 Project, it looks much the same as the PZ of same file. Not sure I like that video mixdown workflow, but I suppose it could be a Sequential PNG or TIF hi-rez export/import instead.

     

    ORIG 68 MB TIF FILE = 4942 x 4851:

    3D WARP FX on HQX masterclip, rendered in 1080 Project:

    3D WARP done in 4K UHD, its MIXDOWN as seen in 1080 Project:

    PAN ZOOM using Original 68MB tif file:

     

    The 3D Warp on the Rabbit.tif (which was imported into a UHD Project at DNxHR HQX), was set to Max values of 400 Scale and 400 Target.

    The Pan Zoom used the same tif file and was eye-matched to the close-up shown. It looks a hair (hare?) sharper than the 3D Warp version. Used B-Spline Catmull PZ filter. Note: Pan Zoom FX was not maxed out, and could have gotten even closer.

    The Fuzzy shot is when I render the same 3D Warp FX, on the same UHD masterclip, but in a 1080 timeline.

     

    Windows7 Pro; HP 820z, 16GB ram; Composer Nitris DX, Squeeze v8.5 Pro _____ Windows10 Pro x64 Dell XPS 8930 Special Edition Tower i7-8700 3.2 Ghz; 32GB... [view my complete system specs]
  • Thu, Oct 11 2018 8:09 AM In reply to

    • luca.mg
    • Top 25 Contributor
    • Joined on Thu, Oct 13 2005
    • Roma - Italy
    • Posts 5,357
    • Points 62,830

    Re: 2018 Still image workflow?

    Hi Telegram!, I'm glad You took my word for this! ;-) Next is: what's the point of switching back and forth between project resolutions, videmixdown or export-import, just to tweak Your bitmaps, when You can comfortably handle them within Your project at the current resolution by using the Avid P&Z effect, or a third party plugin?

    Symphony 2018.5, BM Intensity Pro 4k, Windows 10, i7-5930K, 32 GB ram, Quadro K620 [view my complete system specs]

    peace luca

  • Thu, Oct 11 2018 12:37 PM In reply to

    Re: 2018 Still image workflow?

    Gg

    luca.mg:

    Hi Telegram!, I'm glad You took my word for this! ;-) Next is: what's the point of switching back and forth between project resolutions, videmixdown or export-import, just to tweak Your bitmaps, when You can comfortably handle them within Your project at the current resolution by using the Avid P&Z effect, or a third party plugin?

    i started with the original poster’s question about “what”s new in Pan Zoom?” and was mindful that the request was for an all-Avid, no Plug-in suggestion. As I see it, what’s new are higher resolution projects switchable in MC and FraneFlex, and soon uncompressed DNxHR... so I wanted to ponder the possibilities and open up the discussion to include taking another look at 3D Warp, with its ability to Crop, Scale, Position, Rotate, Tilt, Target, Resize/border etc. etc. all features that might be needed in an initial offline session, but now interestingly, useful competition for the high-quality (but limited FX) Avid Pan & Zoom FX. For my own needs, I am trying to come up with a workflow for final full-frame images as well as vertical (and cropped edges) images that will require a background graphic at some point. 

     

    Windows7 Pro; HP 820z, 16GB ram; Composer Nitris DX, Squeeze v8.5 Pro _____ Windows10 Pro x64 Dell XPS 8930 Special Edition Tower i7-8700 3.2 Ghz; 32GB... [view my complete system specs]
  • Thu, Oct 11 2018 1:28 PM In reply to

    Re: 2018 Still image workflow?

    Thanks everyone for taking the time and effort to reply. Apologies for the delay in my reply - been swamped with tight deadlines.

     

    For now we are importing the stills, adding 3D warp and letting Online deal with any issues. They were ok with that approach.

     

    I was thinking along the lines of what Telegram! was testing out - import into higher res proect. Thanks for testing out the options. Interesting that the mixdown offered pretty comparable results to the P&Z.

     

    Why does the mixdown maintain quality but the imported (at UHD) does not? Arent both being switched to 1080p?

     

    It'd be great if there was a 3D Warp effect control to enable access to the full res file. Would that be a reasonable option to implement? It would be good for video as well. It sounds like Frame Flex but I havent really used that much. You'd get the benefits of 3D Warp for rotation - which does seem to be an issue if working with Frame Flex.

     

    Going the route of importing stills, cutting them into the timeline for visual reference and timing, adding Pan and Zoom, linking to the file, nesting with 3D warp is much more cumbersome than import at the full res (or close to) and apply 3d warp. When working with a lot of stills any reduction in steps would help get through it quicker.

     

    I havent used Premiere much but I think in there you just import stills, cut to timeline and go to effect controls tab. Doesnt solve for the linking issue but that's true of every file in there but it's much more effecient. 

     

    Am I off base in finding P&Z to be inefficient and cumbersome compared to other NLEs?

     

    Thanks!

    Adam

     

  • Thu, Oct 11 2018 4:49 PM In reply to

    Re: 2018 Still image workflow?

    upsidedownjim:

    Thanks everyone for taking the time and effort to reply. Apologies for the delay in my reply - been swamped with tight deadlines.

     

    For now we are importing the stills, adding 3D warp and letting Online deal with any issues. They were ok with that approach.

     

    I was thinking along the lines of what Telegram! was testing out - import into higher res proect. Thanks for testing out the options. Interesting that the mixdown offered pretty comparable results to the P&Z.

     

    Why does the mixdown maintain quality but the imported (at UHD) does not? Arent both being switched to 1080p?

     

    It'd be great if there was a 3D Warp effect control to enable access to the full res file. Would that be a reasonable option to implement? It would be good for video as well. It sounds like Frame Flex but I havent really used that much. You'd get the benefits of 3D Warp for rotation - which does seem to be an issue if working with Frame Flex.

     

    Going the route of importing stills, cutting them into the timeline for visual reference and timing, adding Pan and Zoom, linking to the file, nesting with 3D warp is much more cumbersome than import at the full res (or close to) and apply 3d warp. When working with a lot of stills any reduction in steps would help get through it quicker.

     

    I havent used Premiere much but I think in there you just import stills, cut to timeline and go to effect controls tab. Doesnt solve for the linking issue but that's true of every file in there but it's much more effecient. 

     

    Am I off base in finding P&Z to be inefficient and cumbersome compared to other NLEs?

     

    Thanks!

    Adam

    Not at all sure why the 4K Mixdown maintains its UHD quality after render back in 1080 Project, when a 4K masterclip doesn’t. Perhaps it is created/treated differently than a still import/masterclip. One clue: I did learn here recently that inside the Avid MediaFiles Folder, you can see that it makes no difference in MXF file size whether you choose to import a still for 1 second or many seconds... the size is rather small (1 Frame size?) and equal in either case.

    One not so good thing that occurs: the UHD mixdown makes progressive frames, whereas a Pan Zoom done in a 1080i Project could render out with interlaced, field by field “camera” movement. So that’s a potential limitation.

    I’m not the one to ask about using 3rd Party software, but I accept that AE and now Fusion are full-featured compositing solutions many editors rely on. Like you, I have to stay entirely within a stock Avid MC at times.

     

    Windows7 Pro; HP 820z, 16GB ram; Composer Nitris DX, Squeeze v8.5 Pro _____ Windows10 Pro x64 Dell XPS 8930 Special Edition Tower i7-8700 3.2 Ghz; 32GB... [view my complete system specs]
Page 1 of 1 (12 items)

© Copyright 2011 Avid Technology, Inc.  Terms of Use |  Privacy Policy |  Site Map |  Find a Reseller