|
Electric Crayon posted:I really, really hate this guy: That's pretty drat impressive. Shows an absolute solid understanding of the principles of animation. On another note I just purchased the entire Element 3D Studio Bundle from Video Copilot. I'm excited. First project I get to use it on? A Cash for Gold commercial! Oh advertising... how you have your ups and downs.
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2012 17:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 04:02 |
|
|
Also I'd like to point out that you are shining example of "the program is just a tool." What makes that thing really pop, in my opinion, is that you have a fantastic eye for design and color and pacing.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2012 16:24
|
|
|
Dr.McButtcheeks posted:My big question, whenever I watch pieces similar to yours, is that nice soft shading. How did you go about creating that? Is all that shading done on the shape originally inside of Illustrator? Or did you use some sort of drop shadow effect in AE? I don't know what he uses, but I often use two instances of the drop shadow effect (not the drop shadow layer style) to achieve that look. It's hard to get that "shadow is soft until it gets near where the object meets the ground/wall then it gets sharper and darker" look with just one shadow. Use one to achiever the softer look and one to achieve the closer/sharper look. You can also start working blurs in there to get an added layer of control.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2012 02:32
|
|
|
raging bullwinkle posted:
Your Transparent Toggle button. Right by the Track Matte option drop down. Essentially you'll have your bottom layer. Your middle layer which casts the shadow and has the transparency matte option toggled to ON. However.. not only does this make the parts of the shadow that aren't cast onto the object invisible... it also makes the parts of the shadow caster that don't overlap the lower object invisible as well. SO just duplicate the top object and turn transp toggle off and drop shadow off. It should look like this:  It's nowhere near as complicated as I make it sound. Takes just a few seconds. You'll have to pre-compose the layers though so the transp matte doesn't get affected by everything else going on in your comp.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2012 22:57
|
|
|
raging bullwinkle posted:I think more people should post things to look at. Did you have to follow a TutsPlus video for some of these techniques? Apparently my company has had a premium account for a while (and never bothered to tell me..the guy that could use it the most). I logged on and saw a video really similar to this in style so it was just making me wonder. edit: It's the "Morphing Simple Summer Shapes" tutorial. edit 2: which, holy god, is the worst tutorial ever. I hope the quality improves on this site. BonoMan fucked around with this message at 18:33 on Dec 6, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2012 18:22
|
|
|
raging bullwinkle posted:I haven't seen that tutorial, but the video it copies (this one https://vimeo.com/46616230, which is far superior to the tutorial recreation, by the way) was a huge inspiration and part of my reference library for the project. I'm not sure what the tutorial contains, but it can't be much more than teaching you about the graph editor, masks, keyframes, etc. I think if you were to step through the original video frame by frame you'd be able to figure out how it was done. If you see something you can't figure out, post it here. I bet one of us could give you a solution. Yeah I was just perusing the site and came across it and it felt similar to yours. I wasn't really "taking" the tutorial or anything (I did watch a minute or two of it and I think "tutorial" is being generous). I feel confident enough in my abilities to recreate most of that. I didn't, however, know that the video wasn't an original of the tutorial maker. Huh!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2012 11:21
|
|
|
Does anybody use 3D Stroke from Trapcode? We bought it the other day because I had to recreate an old ad for a client that used it. Nifty little program, but holy god is it slow. On an absolutely beast of a system (that I do heavy 3D work on and edit native 4K files from RED very regularly) it just forces it to a crawl. On a standard def comp. At full res, with one single 3D stroke and a gradient background, it takes 2 to 3 seconds per frame to render. What the gently caress is up with that?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2013 18:58
|
|
|
kuskus posted:That is nutty. I made a new 1080p 29.97 comp, flew a camera through the "geometric blobs" 3d stroke preset at a low angle with motion blur and it rendered in half-realtime. This is an aging 2010 8-core. Seems reasonable; if you were expecting faster and don't get that, I dunno. I don't know. This thing is a beast on everything I throw at in AE but as soon as Stroke goes into the scene it slows down. Only thing I could find on the web is some Creative Cow post from 2008 with the exact same problem but no solution. Oh well.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2013 00:23
|
|
|
OtherCubed posted:Trying out some stuff in 4d: https://vimeo.com/59018705 That looks great. Is there a succinct reason C4D is preferable for motion graphics? I've always been a Maya guy, but now that I do almost strictly motion graphics work for production, it seems I may want to look at making a change.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2013 03:34
|
|
|
RizieN posted:There used to be a 3D thread, with some title about doing it for the NURBS. But that's long gone. Maybe we should start a new one? What? It's still pretty active. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2877226&pagenumber=178#lastpost
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
El GiNGiS posted:That is pretty odd. Something is up. Are you working with color management turned on? Turn that off. Also make sure you are working in 8bpc color mode. Only turn that stuff on at the very end when rendering or when you are messing with color. Also try turning off motion blur and frame blending if those are on. Also in preferences>display make sure 'hardware accelerate composition' is turned on. If you are using cs6 maybe you have that new raytracer enabled, try turning that off as well. No raytracer or any other AE flag set that would cause it to slow down. I still couldn't figure it out, but it was just with a certain stroke. I tried a few other comps after the project was done and it went smoothly. No idea (I double checked all the settings...everything was just like in the comps that went smoothly).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
Electric Crayon posted:So much for CS7. I like it personally, mainly because my flow of needs for home usage is pretty start/stop so I can just subscribe as needed. Plus the lack of tiers and all inclusiveness of it (and constant updating to newer versions) is nice. Also if you use it at work you're allowed two installs of the license so you can activate it at work AND home  .Or if you only have one install of it you can activate it back and forth between work and home as needed. You just won't be able to use both at the exact same time.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
Jesus H Christ the graph editor in After Effects is the biggest piece of poo poo ever (compared to say, Maya, where it's pretty intuitive). Any resources out there to get my head around it? Especially in AE CC. None of my curves have tangent handles! edit: Separate Dimensions just solved like 99.9% of my issues.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2013 22:57
|
|
|
So, hey, anybody want to move to Mississippi for at least a year, work under me, and make a meager salary (with benefits!)?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2013 20:45
|
|
|
Travakian posted:What's in Mississippi? Lots of open land. edit: Basically I work at a production house/ad agency and am starting a long year long project with a client. I'll be doing other stuff when I can (the big project is a 90 second animation with sound design/vo/etc every month), but my bosses are essentially looking for some renaissance man to come help out while this is going on. Of course they want someone that can do motion graphics, graphic design (print and web) and hopefully knows a little code. They aren't completely delusional that they'll find that perfect someone, but that's their wish list. Should have an actual job posting sometime soon. BonoMan fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Sep 6, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2013 14:12
|
|
|
Posted our job posting in the careers thread here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2563469&pagenumber=48 edit: And the listing on our site - http://madg.com/motion-graphic-artist-job-opportunity-mad-genius/ BonoMan fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Sep 17, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
jaik3n posted:I'm working on my reel at the moment, and I was wondering if I should include really nice projects I've put together for corporate clients that use a fair amount of stock material. There's been a lot of tweaking and compositing done to the templates and stock elements that I've done. I would not include projects that use stock elements as it's sort of disingenuous to what you're selling to a potential employer. I've been going over reels for our job posting and as soon as I see something that I immediately recognize from Videohive or a Video-Copilot tutorial, it definitely puts me off a bit. Even worse is seeing something that looks great, going to their site and looking at individual projects and seeing a huge quality discrepancy in their actual work vs the reel. Half the time I wonder if people just steal poo poo to put on the real. Either way it'll make a potential employer skip right over them.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2013 21:05
|
|
|
Yeah there's a BIG difference between a stock "item" in your project and using a template. We use stock items a lot in things, but we've never done a stock template or AE project. If I'm hiring a motion graphics guy/gal then it's okay to use a stock photo or 3D element because I don't everyone to be a generalist in every single area. But if I'm hiring you to create snazzy motion graphics, and your reel is filled with stock AE projects, then that doesn't really sing praises for your ability. At least in the mind of the hirer.
BonoMan fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2013 21:16
|
|
|
Travakian posted:Finished a new reel recently, would love any feedback/comments! It's good but ditch those shots with just the plain text on some footage (from the piece that opens the reel ... with the deer). Those aren't up to par with the rest of the work and bring it down.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2014 04:34
|
|
|
OtherCubed posted:So, a long time later, Vigoro has been released! If anyone still looks in here, it got its start as Circles (which is still available for free on my site!) right here on this very thread! Bought this yesterday. Haven't had a chance to try it yet, but we got a big client project coming up we're going to try it on. Excited!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
Yo, OtherCubed! I don't think you set up the 1.03 upgrade properly on AEScripts. Doesn't show up in the version history of my downloads and since it's not a name your price script, I can't upgrade for "free."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
OtherCubed posted:Sorry, should be up now! Let me know if you can't see it still. Works thanks!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
raging bullwinkle posted:I ask this same question, out loud, in the office, to no one in particular, on an almost daily basis. "JESUS loving CHRIST gently caress YOU AFTER EFFECTS YOU loving PIECE OF poo poo" - a lot of people in my office on a daily basis.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
Well to be honest you're asking a very LARGE question ("what makes my shot look good") and it stretches over various disciplines. Directing of Photography/Cinematography Production/Set design. Color design. Color correction. They're framed up better than your shots, but they have the right supporting structure to give them something to frame. There's detail in their sets (which gives an appropriate sense of scale as well as being just overall more interesting). There's foreground/middle/background sometimes. Gives a sense of parallax and visual interest. Properly balanced objects within the scene. Color themes as well as properly balanced color correction (yours doesn't seem to have much color theory applied. Lots of bland grays and the lighting is uninteresting and everything has kind of a washed out improper contrast feel). I suggest actually studying up on cinematography in film, color theory and basic three point lighting (at least to start out with).
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
magnificent7 posted:Thanks for the input. I agree with everything you said. For what it's worth your screencaps of the project you can't post yet seem miles better than the initial clip you posted! So you're definitely moving in the right direction. I'd step back from mographics when you get a change and start studying film a bit more. Check out Every Frame a Painting and other resources. http://everyframeapainting.tumblr.com/
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
That's a stretch Hummer limo. It's there to symbolize American excess and it's reliance on oil.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2015 15:48
|
|
|
Any of you motion design folks have a great reel, looking for a job at an ad agency/production studio and lookin' to move to SUNNY MISSISSIPPI!?!? Then hit me up via pm or here. We're hiring!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
We encounter this all the time. Best tactic we've had is literally doing up a quick sketch storyboard (don't go all out) and scratch VO track and SHOW them how ridiculously paced it is. If you explain it they'll go "yeah yeah yeah but I want it." If you show them they'll go "oh... ok yeah that doesn't work."
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
magnificent7 posted:To come back to this briefly, thanks. It helped, a lot. Using Premiere would greatly help you. I've been doing this for years and STILL fall into that same trap of "eh gently caress it I'll do it all in AE" ... so trust me I know the feeling  .But yeah, Premiere would help. So, first, you can do scale and pans in Premiere and if they're really simple it might just be best to do that in Premiere. If not I'd still do the majority of my editing and syncing to the VO/music in Premiere. AE is poo poo for real time playback so you'll save hours doing that part in Premiere and not AE where you're loading crap into RAM Preview every time you want to see something. If you can get your pans and motion scales to work in Premiere instead of AE that will save you even more time. Then you would just export out to AE (through exporting a movie or dynamic linking the AE and PPro projects together... which I rarely do so somebody else can probably give you better advice there) and do your titling there and export via AME. You can also do titling in Premiere if it's pretty simple, but I hate doing titles in Premiere. Hate it. Depending on the length of the project you can export the whole thing or just the chunks that need graphics and round trip it back into PPro (again the dynamic linking would probably the best thing here but I'm stubborn and too old to learn how to do that properly). So, uh, that's a convoluted way of saying "Yes use Premiere for all of your editing needs then go into AE for graphics because editing in AE is sloowwwwww as gently caress and will waste a lot of man hours."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
magnificent7 posted:Yeah I saw that, but playing the clip with the audio is jacked; it lags horribly. I'm not sure if the purpose there is to just do amazing motion graphics for the purpose of porting into some other software, (DaVinci?) to align to audio, but it seems like a really huge mistake in development in this day and age to not really plan for audio as a part of your clips. No that's only if you add the Adobe stock plan to your CC sub. You should stay at $50/month and I'm fairly sure you can easily just ask for cheaper and get it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 04:02 |
|
|
Electric Crayon posted:dumb question for motion designers: my job is giving me the option of going to Siggraph this year, since I missed the NAB conference. Is it worth the cross-country trip as a mere motion graphics guy for a cable network? Is your job paying for it? Then yes.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 03:25
|
|