Shake 4 & 3d Compositing

[user_deleted]

I'm a Shake 3.5 user and I've been excited about the 3D compositing feature in 4.0. I was wondering how it was working out for the users here - is it easy to use, how does it handle Maya cameras, 3D tracking?

(I did a search for a thread on this but "3D" is under 4 characters so the engine wouldn't complete - if this has already been discussed, a link to a previous thread would be very helpful - thanks in advance)

[user_deleted]

The Multiplane node is very easy to use, imports .ma files from maya, but does not do 3D tracking (To do 3D tracking inside shake you need to buy Pixel Farm's Software ). I like it very much and I use it a lot, but i have tell you that the node is a bit buggy... so be patient.

[user_deleted]

My opinnion of the multiplane node is that it is a useless load of shit and I wish that Apple would have concentrated on making the cache workable rather than giving in to the requests of amateur users who all use cracked software anyway.

Ok, so I import a point cloud and animated camera from whatever tracking/3d software. Now I need to isolate a point (there might be a few thousand) to attatch my plane to. lets say i need point 900. How exactly do i find this? I have to mouse over thousands of points until I find the correct one to right click on?

OK so lets say I manage this, I am still faced with an interface which is hardly usable and the software is likely to crash on me and possibly corrupt my script.

Every time I have tried to use this in production, I have wasted a days work before going back to tried and tested methods.

[deke-kincaid]

QUOTE(mikemarcus @ 12/25/05, 03:22 AM)
My opinnion of the multiplane node is that it is a useless load of shit and I wish that Apple would have concentrated on making the cache workable rather than giving in to the requests of amateur users who all use cracked software anyway.
I was at the siggraph 01 meeting where they asked us what the top features we wanted in the next version. If I remember right they have 5 features already listed and then you could write in any you wanted. 3 that I remember were: morpher/warper, 3d space and better api. If I remember right, those 5 were the top ones requested from existing customers.

This was before Apple and most of those people there were pro users(since most ameteurs didn't even know what shake was, let alone there weren't any schools that even taught it back then).

[joojaa]

QUOTE(beaker @ 12/27/05, 12:55 PM)
This was before Apple and most of those people there were pro users(since most ameteurs didn't even know what shake was, let alone there weren't any schools that even taught it back then).
[snapback]223356[/snapback]

Now first thing I was told on my uni course on product developent 505 was the following:

Most customers dont know what they need or want, if they did then they wouldnt be your customers. Its your job as a product designer to find the few customers who are not costrained by your tools, they allready have in their mind what your next version software will have even if you dont ahave a clue yet. Try to identyfy and find theese people, they are worth more to your business than all your other customers combined. The task at hand isnt easy tough since only 1/100 - 1/10000 are on such a level of the core customer base. Everybodys got a aoppinion on the subject tough, even the ones that have no clue what they need they just dont know why they dont need what they are asking.

this is not a way of saying most are twerps, its just that they havent focussed on this enough. development is about what the users want tomorrow not what they want today.

A example of this was when it was starting to become clear that people would be ready to buy cellphone accessories and services in early 90, people were asked what they wanted 90% said they wanted wetaher forecasts, news and stocktips on their telephones. Noone was seemingly interested in fun and stupidness such as fartjokes. Its 2005, crazy frog is annyouing the hell out of us do i need to say more.

Just so you guys underastand what and who it is you need to ask and request stuff from. Also what you ask is dangerous, i dont think the question was clear and good enough. I find it hard to think that the multiplane node was what people have in mind. So the question should have been HOW WOULD YOU LIKE 3D INTEGRATION TO BE IMPLEMENTTED!

You get the aswer you ask, just be sure the question you ask is the one you need!

better 3d integration then for all we can knwo might be thet he wanted to be able to more easly use and acces otehr 3d data than currently ie used in comp circles.

Better api ais also as superfluous thing, tough understandable. Infact even maya users request just that even tough most doent usderstand tahts what they are requesting. why the hell dont they request the program to be better, if you intend to do a request properly atleast describe whant and how.

[user_deleted]

hey, thanks everyone for your comments. really the two big things i still use AE for is heavy keyframming (motion graphics) and 3D/2.5D compositing. 3D comps in Shake is a big plus for me and it's too bad the bugs are in there but i'm sure they'll get worked out.

[user_deleted]

I think that the question that prefessional compositors ask is does a 3d environment make compositing layers on different depth planes easyer or not? Granted, if you want to import a photohop file, separate out all the layers, animate them all and add effects, a 3d space adds miles of extra functionality but this is motion graphics and not compositing. This isnt what shake is for, you are better to use after effects. For adding pans to a composited shot with paralax, shadows and whatever else, we have been doing this perfectly well without a 3d space.

For compositing, the only reson I can think of why I might want to use a 3d space is for importing camera data from either the 3d package or from a tracker and using it to track in a layer. For this specific task, shake sucks so I havent gained anything other than an extra icon in my layers tab.