View Full Version : animating quickstrokes
May 14th, 2004, 04:12 PM
ok, just learned about being able to animate the start and end points of quickshape paint strokes... is a way to animate the size of the stroke through time? So that as the stroke grows in length it also grows in diameter? make sense?
May 14th, 2004, 06:13 PM
To my knowledge, no. Shake's quickpaint and roto tools are lacking. You're much better off painting in combustion or photoshop.
May 14th, 2004, 06:28 PM
Thanks for the quick reply about animating the QuickPaint strokes... I'm just getting excited about learnin shake that I start hopin that it can do more than this great software can already do!....
May 14th, 2004, 06:36 PM
Welcome to the board. :) Shake does have it's strengths and weaknesses, for sure! When you get into it, you'll find that mathematics, scripting and expressions that shake provides are quite powerful!
May 14th, 2004, 07:48 PM
dont forget the old and dead commotion...
To bad it died due to "short thinking execs"
May 14th, 2004, 09:30 PM
Sorry, I am going to be bold and correct you Aruna! ;) You CAN animate the diameter of the paint stroke in the parameters window. Simply turn on keying for the diameter property and you can use the slider or input a number. I just did this on my matchmove track located in the body tracking thread of the Matchmoving forum.
The tracking points get closer to the screen, thus getting larger so I tracked clone strokes over the markers and animated the diameter across time. Let me know if you need more direction Matt.
May 15th, 2004, 12:03 PM
What I think both Matt and Aruna are reffering to is making the stroke grow thicker and being drawn at the same time, preserving the small size at the beginning of the stroke and have it grow along the stroke. Sort of like using pressure to control size in photoshop. That way the stroke wont have uniform size.
If you check the syntax of quickpaint you'll see that you can only define one width for each stroke, not one width per knot of the stroke, you can however, as you point out, change the thickness of the entire stroke :)
May 15th, 2004, 12:09 PM
Communication strikes again. I don't like saying incorrect things.
Sorry about that,
May 15th, 2004, 12:27 PM
hehe :D dont worry about it mate, keep up the good work russ
May 15th, 2004, 07:36 PM
Thanks for the responses, right and wrong(good to see people at forums!)... what about flame or infoerno... can they do what I asked about earlier?...sorry i can confuse myself when trying to explain what I'm llokin for...
May 16th, 2004, 01:04 AM
Do a certain extent, yes. They have a function called record in the paint node/tool, which can record your paintstrokes and render out the sequence. It's not really editable after you do it.It's one of those things which is there, but I've never really used it in production.
Same in shake.. I try not to use the paint functions to be used as marker removal and such. It's too much of a pain. There are other quicker ways to get the result than animating a paintstroke. The only time I use paint is to clean up a matte for a couple of frames, and do some dustbusting. I don't use it for roto edge or consistent/repetitive paint fixes. Too much crawling and boiling.
May 16th, 2004, 06:34 AM
Same here, it's good to have it, but it's not ideal for most of the roto/cleanups in a typical project.
May 16th, 2004, 11:10 AM
Then how do the two of you go about removing tracking markers like the ones in my body match or better yet Aruna, the ones in my industrial match? You really wouldn't use paint with clone strokes to do that? I have found it to work, but I am ALWAYS looking or better, brighter methods!
May 16th, 2004, 01:12 PM
If I understand you correct, painting is just another way to create a matte for what you wish to remove, I usually use a bunch of rotoshape to create the shapes, it's easy enough, and basically the same idea. Paint can get real heavy :) You can track a rotoshape to your marker and use that matte to reveal your original footage with a slight Move2D off-set, essentialy the same as cloning, but I'm assuming your doing something similar already :)
May 16th, 2004, 01:20 PM
Not trying to sound smart...but I did think about doing that originally. It just seemed so logical but I thought....what kind of workflow is that! Guess it doesn't matter if the job gets done well. Thanks for the reassurance! On the same token I was concerned about some tpe of offset working because of my body movement and how close the markers are to one another....I am going to try that for sure now.
MORE! How else are you guys removing markers?
Thanks a bunch :thumbsup:
May 16th, 2004, 02:18 PM
I'm still learning... what are the markers that you guys are talking about?
May 16th, 2004, 03:05 PM
Oh, I keep talking about my Matchmoving forum post. Check it out and watch the footage. Your paint question relates to "painting out" those tracking markers I used to matchmove the file. Here:
Body Tracking Forum Post (http://www.vfxtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2043&perpage=15&pagenumber=1)
May 17th, 2004, 10:54 AM
I use a variant of what Arvid suggested.. Using roto and masks to encompass a tracking marker, track that mask to that marker, and then offsetting a little bit of the plate and putting it back over it. Works wonders for marker removal, wire removal. Sometimes it gets a little hairy depending on where the marker is located, and then I'll track in a clean plate of the area and match the grain and such. I've seen alot of wire removals that just try to track in one painted plate, or paint frame by frame. It's a no-no. Not only does it look horrible in the end (boiling, shifting), it takes forever for minimal gain! But that's where we start. I started doing it like that at my first job, tracking in a painted frame, and then trying to paint frame by frame. It looked like ass. Then my lead comp told me not do it like that, and she showed me a better way. Course at the time I had no idea what to look for, but now I do. :) And so do you! hehe.
May 17th, 2004, 01:34 PM
This community proves its worth over and over again!:)
You guys rock,
May 17th, 2004, 03:04 PM
You can offset the plate with a move2d, then link another move2d with a negative movement to put it back on top, so you can control the offset easily over time if you want to without much hassle.. like so, use the "master" to choose offset :)
ColorWheel1 = ColorWheel(720, 486, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1);
QuickShape1 = QuickShape(720, 486, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, xScale,
width/2, height/2, 0, 0.5, 0, 128, 322.875, 323.75, 1, 0,
1, 0, 1, 1, 333.25, 292.875, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 299.875, 287.125,
1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 293.5, 311.75, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1);
Move2D_MASTER = Move2D(QuickShape1, 100, 100, 0, 1, 1, xScale,
0, 0, width/2, height/2, "default", xFilter, "trsx", 0, 0,
0.5, 0, 0, time);
IMult1 = IMult(ColorWheel1, Move2D_MASTER, 1, 100, 0);
Move2D2_slave = Move2D(IMult1, Move2D_MASTER.xPan*-1, Move2D_MASTER.yPan*-1,
Move2D_MASTER.angle, Move2D_MASTER.aspectRatio, Move2D_MASTER.xScale,
Move2D_MASTER.yScale, Move2D_MASTER.xShear, Move2D_MASTER.yShear,
Move2D_MASTER.xCenter, Move2D_MASTER.yCenter, Move2D_MASTER.xFilter,
Layer1 = Layer(Move2D2_slave, ColorWheel1, "Over", 0, 0, 0);
May 18th, 2004, 01:18 PM
Nice, very nice Arvid. I don't understand why you want "negative movement"...or maybe I just don't understand what you mean by that.
I get that I am revealing the original plate offest by a move2D node to cover the markers with "fresh" places on the offset Plate via rotos and point tracks...but don't you want the offset plate to play in the same time frame? Are you talking in the context of time or XY position?
May 18th, 2004, 06:57 PM
I'm talking about XY positition :) this obviously depends on the task at hand, but what I meant was, the first Move2D moves the matte away from the original spot, and the second moves it back to where it came from, but with a new clean spot taken from somewhere else in the image. The idea with this particular script is that the movement is negated via a link so you only have one single control over both off-set and re-set if you catch my drift :D
It's a simple matter of multiplying it by negative 1, useful in many situations :) The confusing part was probably "over time" in my last post, what I meant by that is that if you're going to animate the clean-spot, you'll find it much easier if you only have 1 control to animate.
May 25th, 2004, 08:20 PM
Whoa, thanks for encouraging me to use rotos for marker removals guys. I just did 3 markers in 1/10th the time and I don't have a stack of paint strokes to battle through.