Here's a little script I've made to make the roto process for Pink Five more user friendly and to replace Teague's beam method*. It was written with a specific purpose in mind so I don't now how useful it'll be for everyone else but hopefully it'll work for you in one way or another. I might develop/tweak it more if there's any interest.

http://lamer.3design.net.pl/P5_RotoHelper_v2.jsx

Drop the file into your scripts/Script UI Panels/ folder and you should be good to go.

There's a short overview included in the file itself but here's a quick tutorial anyway:

Basically the script extends the lightsaber core by 50%. This is useful whenever you need to have a shot of someone slicing something with a lightsaber. You simply shoot the scene with a shorter stunt blade and extend the core in post. The main issue with that is when doing it by hand you have to guess how far to move the mask. This becomes even more difficult when the blade gets obstructed or there's some tricky perspective involved. It's hard to keep the lightsaber at a constant, correct lenght throughout the shot.

That's where the script comes in. All you have to do is:

1. import your footage and make a new comp
2. hit Setup scene which will create a Roto layer with a 4 vert mask
3. align the mask with your blade (make sure the bottom left corner of the mask goes on the bottom left corner of the blade)
4. roto ALL the frames
5. hit Generate extended core

this will extend your core (duh) to a correct lenght and automatically round the top using a 'roundness factor' (default: 4). All this is happening on a new layer named Core. Your Roto layer will be preserved in case you need to go back to it for any reason. When extending the core the script will also create a matte layer where you'll put all the other masks. (don't add additional masks to the Core layer itself, use the matte, trust me)

Round Top and Round Bottom allow you to tweak the roundness of the blade for individual frames. The tangents are always kept in in line with the mask so the curve remains even. Round Bottom also gives you an option to curve inwards whenever the hilt gets in the way.

'Generate lightsaber glow' is where the cool stuff happens. Once you're done with rounding and masking hit the button. It'll make a precomp with the glow layers and link the Core shape and all the masks of the Core Matte layer with their counterparts within the Test Glow precomp.

Core controlls the shape of the blade while Core Matte has all mask properties linked so you can go crazy with feathering, expanding etc and it'll autoupdate.

Of course it does all the linking magic when the precomp is being created so if you add another mask to the matte after you've added the glow it won't be linked with the precomp. Although if you're adding the glow before having all your masks set up you're working backwards and therefore don't deserve the live update anyway wink

Play with it and let me know what you think smile

Also Teague deserves a credit for putting up with all the dev versions and pointing me in the right direction.


--------
*If you don't know what that is ask Teage, I've signed an NDA wink

227

(11 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Hey. Don't diss Raise The Titanic. It's awesome.

228

(9 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Squiggly_P wrote:

Something in that movie isn't right.

Every character is dumber and instead of letting Daniel Craig do his own thing with the character they forced 50 years worth of history on him. Watch the Casino parkour chase when Bond enters the embassy. He's like a human weapon in there. Goes in, gets the guy, shoots his way through the building and escapes without missing a beat. All with laser focus and military precision. Now in Skyfall they have him make funny faces in the middle of a fight just because he's seen a big lizard. It's not something this Bond should be doing.

Then you have all the references to the old films which are wrong and pointless. The scene where M and Bond talk about ejector seats feel like a skit from the MTV Movie Awards with Judi Dench as the host. This shouldn't be in this movie. Bond shouldn't have the gadget filled Aston and Q shouldn't be a smug asshole about explodng pens. If anything Skyfall has a vibe of a very very high budget fanfilm made by someone who didn't really like the character established in the first film. It goes out of its way to push us back into the 60's as much as possible and it doesn't work.

EDIT:
Also Craig looks stupid with the Walther PPK. He's a big guy and the gun looks like a little toy in his hands. I know it's canon but come on...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-J_9EOzDOP7w/UKBKTHRmGgI/AAAAAAAAAmA/qJc0PqiFpQ0/s1600/120731Skyfall_6485615.jpg

And then he dies... hard.

fireproof78 wrote:

Then Sam Jackson shows up with brittle bones to convince him to take the red pill for his hair

http://www.spaceavalanche.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/matrix_english.jpg

C-Spin wrote:
Lamer wrote:

Die Hard 6 will be about McClane finding out that he's actually immortal now. He'll run around begging people to kill him but noone will be able to.

I think they need to turn Die Hard into a six film prequel saga to The Matrix and reveal in the next one that John McClane is the first of the failed Ones. It's the only way to salvage the franchise.

And then he goes mental because he realises he could've had hair the whole time.

Die Hard 6 will be about McClane finding out that he's actually immortal now. He'll run around begging people to kill him but noone will be able to.

233

(26 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Let's keep this thread on topic.

Replied here: http://downinfront.net/forum/viewtopic. … 840#p31840

234

(9 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Ok, let's discuss this


Tomahawk wrote:

First off; what Bullet said. Casino Royale had a pretty weird and off-putting ending, for a Bond movie. Sure, it's nice to step away from the tried and true formula, but then doesn't Skyfall fit that perfectly?

Being different for the sake of being different doesn't make it good.

Tomahawk wrote:

Instead of Bond Single-handedly(or alongside a femme fatale) assaulting the villains fortress, figuring out his plan and then offing him, the roles are switched, with Silva attacking Bond's "Fortress". Sure, Skyfall(the estate, not the film) isn't a fortress, but it lures Silva away from the populated areas, leaving only Bond and M for the remaining potential death toll.

And I'm all for that. But I need the situation to make sense. Why go off the grid? Silva's plan ends with the courtroom shootout. No more tricks up his sleeve after that. Sure, it lures him away from the cities but if that's all you need then signal HQ as soon as he appears on site, get air support and blow up the whole mountain. He has the entire MI6 at his disposal and he goes for sticks and stones because 'meh'. He ends up outnumbered, outgunned and he fails to protect M which results in her death. He could've stashed her anywhere along the way and she would've lived.

Tomahawk wrote:

Also Bond killing Silva with a knife, was a perfect example of setup, and payoff, if you ask me.

Yeah. Perfect and painfully obvious at the same time.



Skyfall, to me, feels like a reboot of a reboot. Casino has set up a new Bond perfectly. It took a step away from the rest of the series and felt fresh and updated because of that. Skyfall not only takes a step back but also tries to reference and acknowledge all the previous films at the same time and ends up feeling like a giant mix of everything that came before it (and not in a good way).

I welcome your completely opposite opinions with open arms smile

235

(26 replies, posted in Off Topic)

(we probably should get a separate thread for this)

bullet3 wrote:

You must admit it's a more traditional ending than Casino Royale. Here it's still "Hero faces off with main villain and his forces", except they do a clever subversion where instead of having bond assault the villains fortress, which we've seen as a Bond climax about 15 times now, they have Bond having to defend HIS fortress against the bad guys.

  Show
The subversion is clever but it's not thought out. Why would a highly trained, secret service operative put himself in a situation like that? Why go there at all? He hasn't been there since he was a kid and the place offers no tactical advantage. It's not a fortress by a longshot and there's no reason for him to be there.

Also there's no reason for him to assume that Silva won't just pull up with a rocket launcher and blow the whole house up. Silva already had his confrontation with M. That's why during the court scene he doesn't get melodramatic but tries to shoot her in the face on the spot. That was his master plan all along. You can't assume that he'll pause for a chat afterwards.


bullet3 wrote:

Casino Royale Bond doesn't even face off with the main villain. A side party eliminates him, and then the climax is bond fighting a few nameless henchman.

I liked that actually. You're left wanting more and then the movie gives you more by having that last fight in Venice.

bullet3 wrote:

I still love Royale more, but you must admit it's much more radical and unusual structurally than Skyfall.
I actually just rewatched Skyfall on Blu-ray and I love everything about the last 30 minutes, I think it's outstanding.

I love Casino Royale. It's one of my favourite movies wink

I really wanted to like Skyfall. If you can convince me that it's actually awesome and I'm just overlooking everything that's good about it then I'll be grateful.

236

(26 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Jimmy B wrote:

I genuinely don't see the ending of Skyfall as a fault. It mixed things up a bit, it changed the Bond format a little for the anniversary, I don't see the problem. I loved it.

It was pointless and didn't make any sense on any level. Also the 'oh it's a anniversary' line of reasoning not only filled the movie with references to things that never happend in the new Bond series but also made a mess of the new format. It felt like watching The Explendables 2. 'Oh remember that thing you liked in the other movie? It was cool wasn't it? Look how hard we're referencing'.

Jimmy B wrote:

Also, it still didn't change tone, the main theme of revenge was still there, the bad guy's main goal was still intact. As was the sense of danger and threat, it didn't even change genre.

Is revenge the main theme here? Or is it getting older and finding your place in the modern world?

237

(26 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Tomahawk wrote:

even Casino Royale.

Interesting. Care to elaborate?

238

(26 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Skyfall?

  Show
Spy movie turns into Home Alone with the elderly for no damn reason.

http://oi49.tinypic.com/2lwvq0p.jpg

Dorkman wrote:

Both are awful because both tend to be unmotivated and just there because the filmmaker doesn't know what else to do.

and/or the actors can't sell what they're doing. Which is why this:

will always be better than this:


Pull the damn camera back. I want to see a cool fight scene not get epilepsy.

(BTW if you haven't seen SPL you're missing out)

fireproof78 wrote:

When's it come out! And are those cortosis blades?

You haven't seen it?

242

(23 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Teague wrote:

Good to see Chris Cunningham on here already, but boy, you better have a Michel Gondry video comin' up quick or something is wrong with the system.  tongue

http://imgur.com/HIspm.jpg

244

(37 replies, posted in Episodes)

I like Sucker Punch...a lot. Just sayin'.

245

(70 replies, posted in Episodes)

The Phantom Menace commentary is awesome big_smile

246

(54 replies, posted in Creations)

For funzies then?

247

(54 replies, posted in Creations)

Teague wrote:

Also, I have found that it sounds pretty bad on anything other than good speakers or headphones. I think I'm a bad engineer.

Fancy sharing the multitrack?

Jimmy B wrote:

Bacon and Cage......

Sounds like a title for an 80's cop show smile

Once you understand that a 'Nick Cage Movie' is its own, separate genre you'll be onboard wink

250

(23 replies, posted in Creations)

Thanks guys. A little backstory on this:

I did this a while back. I went mental one day and wanted to just paint something really detailed and get it as realistic and close to the reference (yeah it's not painted from imagination, I can't do that [yet wink]) as possible. I've put somewhere around 16-18 hours into this and got really close before photoshop crashed while saving. So this is my last backup before that happend.

Even unfinished it's still my best painting. It's all downhill from here smile