Jump to content
WnSoft Forums

uuderzo

Members
  • Content Count

    268
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About uuderzo

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 06/08/1971

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Italy

Recent Profile Visitors

949 profile views
  1. Thank you Dave for your hint. Anyway i feel it difficult to perform a part of the editing in PTE and a part on Resolve. Would PTE be able to render uncompressed AVI files with transparency, like, say, BluffTitler? This would allow me to overlay PTE AVI generated file in the Resolve timeline. P.S. You may wonder why i don't use BluffTitler. Well... it just doesn't click in like PTE
  2. Tom, do you mean it's now possible to generate a PNG sequence as animation? I missed that. I'm still on 7.
  3. I'm looking for a flexible video titler, to produce titles that i will use in Resolve. After looking for an openFX plugin (there are some out there but really don't like them) i tought i could use PTE for the task. Given that i need titles to superimpose on background video (rolling credits and so on), what is the more efficient export that i can use for the task? Thanks! Umberto
  4. Hi all! I'm looking around to find a decent and affordable storyboarding application. I looked into several apps but each one has pros and cons... Perhaps i don't really need a full storyboarding application, but something similar to Picture2Exe with the ability to directly inject slides from hand drawings. I don't want P2E to become a drawing application but... being able to link to some external apps, such say SketchBook and managing all the underliyng picture files so i can click a button, open sketchbook, draw and save, see the result into a P2E layer, animate move ecc... double click a layer a come back to the drawing application... What do you think?
  5. IMO what PTE needs is a rework of the O&A UI. I mean, there are lots of features that "pop up" from small buttons and so on. The idea that an occasional user may have is that there is a bit of confusion, like if some interface were added "later" (for example, the 3d parameters). The new GUI trend is the docked panel instead of the floating one, maybe moving to this direction may give some freshness to the UI, even if i understand that it's quite impossible to please everyone. I suppose that trying to uniform all GUI elements and adding those things that people expect should exists (massive drag'n drop instead of popup menus or keyboard shortcuts) may make the app more user friendly to the newbie. Even trying to clean the toolbars by making them context sensitive (but it may be annoying not to find a button just because the UI is not the in the right "context"). My 2 cents.
  6. Yes, perhaps the only drag and drop support would be enough to speed up things. Greetings! Umberto
  7. You're right Ken, today i mistaken twice. Sorry.
  8. The yesterday projection went well. Anyway, i'd love to see something in the project options that would let me tweak final output proportions and placement to being able to adapt in no time to a specific projection issue. My secret dream is the distortion feature available in Wings Platinum. You can distort the final output to match every strangeness of the projection surface. But i'm dreaming
  9. What about adding drag and drop feature to reorganize objects in the object hierarchy? That could ease reworking complex sequences. Moreover, i'd love to see a new "wrap selection into frame" command, and similar "unwrap children from selected node". This would simplify the tedious task of: 1. Adding a frame 2. Moving it in the right place 3. Cutting objects 4. Paste them into the frame Maybe not only for frames, but for any kind of container object.
  10. I fear this cannot apply to my project. Each slide is composed by several pictures and videos with nested animations. and some pictures are animated in 3D with perspective effects, i think that adjusting the border of each one would not lead to the desired result (and a slide style would not be enough to manage such complexity, i fear). I suppose that your hint will work only with single picture slides? Anyway, the projection is next tuesday and the video will be loaded into the projector on monday (and, obviously, i knew about this issue only yesterday). Considering that the DCP transcoding takes about 10 hours, i'll go with the triple conversion this time. And hope to avoid DCP projectors in future Umberto
  11. Those days i'm facing a really annoying issue with a theatre 4K projector that cuts the lower part of my video frame. Well, not really, it projects everything but the image falls off screen in the lower part, cutting my subtitles. I asked the projector man to adjust it so the entire frame will fall on the screen but no way. Looks like i'm not a big fish there. So i needed to keep the original video resolution but to "compress" the image a bit leaving a black area on the bottom to tweak that annoying projector. No way to get the result from inside the video ancoder of PTE. So i needed to use XMediaRecode to get the result. But this way i lose sharpness because the PTE encoded video is re-encoded again. And a third time to get the final DCP encoding. The last encoding is not avoidable, and i don't think PTE should deal with DCP format. But what about adding a "tweaks" panel in the video encoder (or the project options?) to being able to size and move the video into a virtual frame? This is difficult to achieve in no time on a lengthy video because you must tweak all slides. Umberto
  12. Sorry for the delay. I built a simple PTE project to illustrate all three types of fake 3d effects used in the video. Feel free to use this project for personal use, please don't use in any other way the included images (even if they were downsized). They are copyrighted and not all are shooted by myself. Fake 3D how to Thanks for watching! Umberto Edit: Well, there is a fourth effect used in the video, but this involves the usage of a video rendered out of the PTE application. Those videos were rendered with a 3D modeler, and they involve a deformated 3D plane on which the picture is front projected. Since it's not PTE related, i didn't include them in the project.
  13. With pleasure. Please allow me some time to setup a decent explanation video. Greetings! Umberto
  14. Hello Mickp, I got your point, as said to Yachtsman, i must calibrate the entire show to avoid tiring the audience. I hope being able to post the entire show on internet, but first i must entirely rework the music track that is bringing to me a lot of distribution limitations. Thank you! Umberto
  15. I appreciate your comment! I must admit that in the original show the 3D effect is less visible because it is designed to be played on a 4:3 projector. But when working on the trailer i changed it to 16:9 because this seems to be a de facto standard on many sites. This modification required some pictures adjustments that as a side effect caused an exageration on 3D. I agree that watching an entire video (20 minutes) with those exagerated effects may be irritating to someone's eyes. Your comment helps me calibrating the real show, it started with far less 3D effects and i done 6 revisions until now adding more ande more effects. But now i think i must consider the overall effect and, maybe, rolling back someting. Thank you again Yachtsman!
×
×
  • Create New...