I've often wanted this, too. There must be a feature request already, I bet.
You should email [email protected]. -Ean

P.S. 'Feather/falloff' are different but also useful and should remain.


On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Daniel Silwerfeldt <[email protected]>wrote:

>   Super thanks alot for your asnwers and yes the Blur and dilate/erode
> shoould definately be inside the mask option.
>
> I will play around more with Nukes CC – thanks for the tips.
>
> Cheers
> Daniel
>
>  *From:* ROBERT JACKSON <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 27, 2011 11:12 PM
> *To:* Nuke user discussion <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [Nuke-users] Soft mask and color correct
>
>  funny you say that,
>
> more & more I am using a blur node to create a soft edge ( & I mean soft,)
>
> playing with feather & feather falloff is not really intuitive,
>
> as you can end up with splines that are so far removed from the roto shape
>
> that adjustments become a real headache.
>
> Have found it to be good for minute adjustments though...
>
> Should for sure be offered up inside the node
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* J Bills <[email protected]>
> *To:* Nuke user discussion <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 27 September 2011, 20:30
> *Subject:* Re: [Nuke-users] Soft mask and color correct
>
> yes, as said you're probably looking for just a straight up blur,
> which is different from feather and falloff - shame it's not built
> right into the node.  with the addition of multiple shapes per node in
> nuke 6.x, it would be helpful to have blur and dilate/erode per shape
> rather than having to do those effects globally after the fact.
>
> the ColorCorrect node in nuke is actually quite well set up, and you
> might grow to love it.  My guess is you've not played with the splits
> between shadow/mid/high (ranges tab).  If you choke up on your falloff
> between your splits, you might be able to get more separate control
> you're looking in, for example, the shadows without pushing too much
> into the mids.
>
> keep in mind different footage will respond differently - ie the
> shadow and highlight values are rarely in the same range.  that said,
> I rarely use the default ranges when using CC.  your first move with
> that should always be to quickly set the ranges using the test
> utility, then color correct after that.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:38 AM, michael vorberg
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > for the colorcorrect behaviour:
> >
> > if you used fusions colorwheel to change the color then you did a
> tinting.
> > thats a diffrent method than changing the gain
> > i tend to use the TMI (Temperature Magenta Intensity) sliders in nukes
> color
> > tools. if go to a cooler (blue) tone it compensates the other colors to
> keep
> > the luminance
> >
> > greetings,
> >
> > michael
> >
> >
> >
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> I惴 trying to make really soft mask with the roto tool, but I still get a
> >> very hard edge I think. I扉e tried the playing with feather (obviously)
> and
> >> even cranked that upp to 500 and also tried Linear, smooth, smooth1 and
> >> smooth0, but still I don愒 get the soft mask I want. I miss the matte
> tool
> >> from Fusion.. I can愒 mimic those masks in Nuke -yet. I guess I am
> missing
> >> something.
> >>
> >> Also I惴 not fully understand the Colorcorrect in Nuke vs Fusion Color
> >> Corrector.
> >>
> >> 1) If I want to add more blue in the shadow areas for example.. in
> Fusion
> >> I just choose shadow and add in more blue without changing the luminance
> of
> >> the shadow area just the color. In nuke when I gain in blue color I
> always
> >> change the luminance and have to compensate that...
> >>
> >> 2) Are there any similar tool like the levels in Fusion Color corrector
> >> with all, shadow, middle and high愀 easily changed seperately. I have
> used
> >> the Nuke Histogram together with luma keys..
> >>
> >> I don愒 want to start any Fusion vs Nuke rant.. I really like both
> programs
> >> and I use them both depending on the studios I work for.
> >>
> >> cheers
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>
_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users

Reply via email to