Yes Flowers of War. Its all projections. VERY VERY VERY little 3d. Tony Willis went in knowing he was going to use a lot of projections and when they where designing the effects for the movie. Randy S. Little http://www.rslittle.com <http://reel.rslittle.com>
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 2:31 PM, ChasingLight < [email protected]> wrote: > ** > I think your talking about The Flowers Of War? Great but grim film. I will > be watching again now you've said that. I have gathered its not easy to > model in Nuke seeing how little I have been able to find out about it prior > to jumping on here. I think I will just jump back into Lightwave and try > playing around with matching actual obj's into my Nuke scenes. The work > Ferrand has on his website is amazing, The Lord of the Rings work > especially. Thanks for all your help. Greatly appreciated. > > Tim > > *Randy Little wrote:* > You can do it that way as well.� The movie 13 flowers ( I can't remember > the final western name) was done this way (look up christian bale in imdb > its near the top.) � The complexity of doing this way can be quite hard as > modeling in Nuke isn't as easy as in a 3d package. It great for less > complex or opps we have to make this work.� If its a single still without > camera or survey data it can be quit tedious to line up all the geo with > the scene elements.���� I though Deke Ferrand at Hatch had some pretty good > examples of how he does his Matte Paintings I would just google his name.�� > > Randy S. Little > http://www.rslittle.com <http://reel.rslittle.com> > > > > > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 1:19 PM, ChasingLight ** wrote: > *Quote:* thanks Randy, I understand that the matte painting is for the > background, just not how it is created from concept to final. I guess I was > under the impression it all started with a 2D image and turned into a 3D > paralaxing background rather than it starting as 3D in the first place. > > What I am hoping to achieve ultimately is to take the 2D landscapes I have > created and give them a more realistic 3D feel that i cant personally cant > achieve on cards, and the basic geometry shapes provided in Nuke. For > example a simple house photographed in a wide landscape. I wanted to create > more accurate geometry for the house rather than projecting it on a card or > cube. Perhaps I am over reaching. > > Randy Little wrote: The 3d is the matte painting. A matte painting > usually just implies a > back ground element. The are just getting more live in how they are > used and created as the technology allows for them to be integrated > without being baked as a plate that is just stuck into the comp. > http://hatchfx.com/demo.php > > > Randy S. Little > http://www.rslittle.com > > > > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 12:21 PM, ChasingLight > > wrote: > Quote: Wow, Thanks for the reply, that is an incredibly complex example > of what I > had in mind. Looks amazing. I guess what my confusion is, is how the > pipeline works. In this example, if you dont mind me asking, was the matte > painting created first, the geometry then modeled from the camera position > in a 3D Application, imported into Nuke, camera solved and re-projected > onto > the geometry? > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
