Frank, I just needed this to stabilize a shot that should have been a lockoff but had a bit of steadicam wobble in it, so I could difference key an element off it. This works like a charm, thanks!
"a feature request for many tears", nice... :) One of the TDs over at Digital Domain has written this. In the unlikely event that it's not proprietary, care to share? On Aug 31, 2011, at 4:55 PM, Frank Rueter wrote: >> That gizmo is great, but it will only stabilize things on a certain >> depth-plane. > Yes, that's by design as that is what you most often need and it concatenates > with other transforms nodes. Any projections or non filmback dependent setups > are a whole different issue and harder to wrap into a comprehensive and easy > to use tool. > >> By the way, as a feature request: It would be a great thing to have a >> framehold-node for stuff in the 3d-system. Yes, you can always do this >> via a simple expression, but a 3d-framehold would be super convenient >> thing to have and perfectly integrate into the atomic-node design of >> Nuke. Thoughts? > > agreed, this has been a feature request for many tears. feel free to report > it, the more people ask for it the higher the priority might get for > implementing it. > > > On Sep 1, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Michael Ralla wrote: > >> That gizmo is great, but it will only stabilize things on a certain >> depth-plane. >> >> If you want to sort-of lock down an entire scene (anything moving >> left out completely for now), I'd try to somehow generate a somewhat >> accurate point cloud of the scene with the 3d-tracker, attempt to >> generate geo from that with PoissonMesh if possible and then do the >> standard re-project from the moving shot cam that your solve generated >> and film it again with a freeze-framed camera or smoothed-out version >> of the shot cam. Obviously, this might introduce some stretching and >> warping - and removing any kind of lens-distortion first will most >> likely improve the overall accuracy... >> >> By the way, as a feature request: It would be a great thing to have a >> framehold-node for stuff in the 3d-system. Yes, you can always do this >> via a simple expression, but a 3d-framehold would be super convenient >> thing to have and perfectly integrate into the atomic-node design of >> Nuke. Thoughts? >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> michael. >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Deke Kincaid <[email protected]> wrote: >>> sure, Frank's imagePlane gizmo wraps the technique up into a nice simple >>> package. >>> http://www.nukepedia.com/gizmo-downloads/transform/imageplane/ >>> -deke >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 15:59, Ned Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey all, >>>> >>>> Is this possible? >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Nuke-users mailing list >>>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Nuke-users mailing list >>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Nuke-users mailing list >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users > > _______________________________________________ > Nuke-users mailing list > [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
_______________________________________________ Nuke-users mailing list [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
