8 Replies Latest reply on Sep 7, 2009 5:23 PM by Kurt_777

    How to explain this....?

    Kurt_777 Level 1

      You know that trick they do in After Effects, where you can superimpose an object, (like, say, a space ship or whatever), floating in the sky above a city skyline, and it stays where it is relative to the city, even though the camera is moving all around, like a hand-held shot. It looks like the object was in the sky when you filmed the shot, and its jiggle motion is locked to the jiggle motion of the rest of the environment. Well, is it possible to do that in PRE7?

       

      Did that make any sense whatsoever...?

       

      Thanks,

       

      Kurt.

        • 1. Re: How to explain this....?
          the_wine_snob Level 9

          With a bit more hand-work, it is. You have your spaceship with a transparent background on Video Track 2 and you handheld shot of the city skyline on Video Track 1. Select the spacehip Clip (the still image) and go to Edit Effects. Use Keyframes and the fixed Effect Motion>Position to locate the spaceship. As the handheld skyline below moves, add a Keyframe and reposition the still. Repeat for the footage's Duration. In AE you can locate to a point in the background and use a follower to locate the spaceship. This does automate things, but you can still do it by hand in PrE.

           

          Good luck,

           

          Hunt

           

          PS - AE also has the "Jiggler."

           

          Message was edited by: the_wine_snob - Added PS

          • 2. Re: How to explain this....?
            Kurt_777 Level 1

            Excellent! Thanks, Hunt. I figured it would probably need some painstaking input to achieve, but that's fine by me. Got nothing but time.

             

            Just thought of something else... If the city footage was filmed hand-held, with a lot of rapid jerky camera jiggle, there would be a lot of motion blur in it. But the repositioned space ship would have no motion blur, it would just look like a photo in the background that didn't obey the laws of optics, wouldn't it? I guess I'd have to add a little blur to each instance of the photo, according to the surrounding motion blur direction. Or does the Effect Motion>Position thing calculate that?

             

            I know, I should just go and try it now, instead of agonising over it.

             

            Kurt.

            • 3. Re: How to explain this....?
              Steve Grisetti Adobe Community Professional

              After Effects include a Motion Tracking feature that does this automatically, Kurt. With Premiere Elements, you'll need to keyframe each jiggle manually.

              • 4. Re: How to explain this....?
                the_wine_snob Level 9
                I guess I'd have to add a little blur to each instance of the photo, according to the surrounding motion blur direction. Or does the Effect Motion>Position thing calculate that?

                 

                Effect>Motion Blur, or similar, would have to be added, and could be Keyframed about the same way, with varying amounts of Blur at some times.

                 

                Many Effects can be Keyframed. For those that cannot, there still might be some tricks to get a variation in those Effects too. This is often done by using the Scissors/Razor to cut the longer Clip into smaller ones, and different levels of that Effect added to each of these. I'd add Cross-Dissolve Transitions between them, to ease the viewer's eye into believing that the Effect is Keyframed. As you have created these smaller Clips from the lager one, you will have the necessary Handles for these "sub" Clips, unlike having many complete smaller Clips. The Handles, or lack thereof, are often tripping points for many with the use of Transitions.

                 

                Good luck, and again, AE can take a lot of the handwork out of something like this, if one knows AE.

                 

                Hunt

                • 5. Re: How to explain this....?
                  Kurt_777 Level 1

                  That's a lot of work, but I guess it would be very rewarding to achieve that effect without simply clicking on a button. Kinda like painting a picture from scratch, instead of by-the-numbers.

                   

                  (Who am I kidding?)

                   

                  You know, I'd go out and buy After Effects if there was an entry-level version that I could afford. But being retired and on a fixed "income", it's not an option. I have to settle for watching Andrew Kramer's video co-pilot tutorials and drooling.

                   

                  Thanks for the hints, Hunt.

                   

                  Kurt.

                  • 6. Re: How to explain this....?
                    Kurt_777 Level 1

                    Yeah, Steve, I love that motion tracking feature. I watch Andrew Kramer's video co-pilot tutorials and he's always using it. Probably the single most useful tool of any video editing app, I'd say.

                     

                    I used to watch those movies where the creature or the bomb blast or the spaceship or whatever would remain relative to the the background of moving shots and think, how the heck do they do that?!!!! I noticed it particularly in Cloverfield, but no doubt it was used in many other films, and I just assumed they had used large scale models or something similar.

                     

                    If Adobe brought out an app that had only that one tool, I'd buy it.

                     

                    Kurt.

                    • 7. Re: How to explain this....?
                      the_wine_snob Level 9

                      Kurt,

                       

                      Unfortunately, there is no AE Elements. However, much of what can be done in AE can be done in PrE. The main problem is that many of the automated aspects from AE are now "by hand," in PrE, and even PrPro.

                       

                      There are also add-ins and stand-alone programs, that can duplicate some of the great features from AE, but none that I know of, do nearly so much and with such ease.

                       

                      For instance, for Title and text effects and animation, one can use Blufftitler, ProDAD's Vitascene and Heroglyph, and there are others. Pixelan's Spicemaster can do a lot of great Transition Effects and many can be applied as Clip Effects.

                       

                      Still, AE is almost in a world all alone, and does have virtually unlimited powers - it only depends on one's expertise, their time and their budget.

                       

                      Good luck,

                       

                      Hunt

                       

                      PS one of the best acquisitons that I ever made was upgrading to Adobe Production Studio from my Photoshop license. It was not cheap, but it included AE, PrPro, Encore and others, plus additional licenses for PS and AI. Best $ that I have spent in decades.

                       

                      Good luck,

                       

                      Hunt

                      • 8. Re: How to explain this....?
                        Kurt_777 Level 1

                        Mmmmm, all those products.... Get thee behind me, Santa!

                         

                        The magic word is budget. I envy anyone who can afford all those Goodies.

                         

                        I'm trialling Bluff Titler at the moment and it's good stuff. Might get it yet. And I've found there's a stand-alone version of Magic Bullet Looks that I'm checking out. I haven't looked at Pro DAD and Heroglyph yet.

                         

                        Yes, AE is the bomb, and if I was a paid professional I'd be crazy not to buy it. But I gotta draw the line somewhere.

                         

                        Cheers,

                        Kurt.