That's a great explanation! I work as a matchmove artist in NZ and it's always tricky telling people what I do. I'll just link them this video instead now
I was match-moving for my friend's capstone vfx shots. I didn't have access to any dedicated match moving software at the time. I tried several 3d camera trackers ( c4d, nuke, fusion, ae) none of them could figure out the camera movement of the footage. There was barely any parallax in the shots. In fusion, I got some seemingly good tracks that had solve errors under .3 pixels. But the problem was that the camera track was NOTHING LIKE the actual camera movement. So I then had to 'rotomate' the rotation of the scene to match the camera. Since the camera tracker got the translation right, but the model was rotating wrong and sometimes drifting. All these issues could have been avoided if my friend had any idea how the VFX match moving worked and chose to shoot locked down on sticks rather than handheld. ☠ Mad respect to those who do this task for a living. I don't know if I want to pursue match-moving anymore.
Try syntheyes. However, shots with little or no parallax cannot solve a 3d scene unless you have multiple witness cameras or a 3d scan so you can triangulate points in space. No parallax you can try a 2d solve. Any errors I usually have to fix by eye or in compositing to remove jitters or slipping tracks.
Because it's not as sexy as animation. Just like rotoscoping. Even compositing is not focused in some schools.Thanks to the school of youtube, people have more knowledge and inspiration.
That's a great explanation! I work as a matchmove artist in NZ and it's always tricky telling people what I do. I'll just link them this video instead now
I use Syntheyes and do manual tracking by eye. Awesome you made this video ! Thanks. I have matchmoved shots that took weeks to finish.
Your content quality and explanations are excellent - quick, concise, and really well explained!
I was match-moving for my friend's capstone vfx shots. I didn't have access to any dedicated match moving software at the time. I tried several 3d camera trackers ( c4d, nuke, fusion, ae) none of them could figure out the camera movement of the footage. There was barely any parallax in the shots.
In fusion, I got some seemingly good tracks that had solve errors under .3 pixels. But the problem was that the camera track was NOTHING LIKE the actual camera movement. So I then had to 'rotomate' the rotation of the scene to match the camera. Since the camera tracker got the translation right, but the model was rotating wrong and sometimes drifting.
All these issues could have been avoided if my friend had any idea how the VFX match moving worked and chose to shoot locked down on sticks rather than handheld. ☠
Mad respect to those who do this task for a living. I don't know if I want to pursue match-moving anymore.
Try syntheyes. However, shots with little or no parallax cannot solve a 3d scene unless you have multiple witness cameras or a 3d scan so you can triangulate points in space. No parallax you can try a 2d solve. Any errors I usually have to fix by eye or in compositing to remove jitters or slipping tracks.
New subscriber
Why didn't they have this in my school days? I would have trained in VFX. Love tol earn more, great behind the scenes sample. Christine :-)
Because it's not as sexy as animation. Just like rotoscoping. Even compositing is not focused in some schools.Thanks to the school of youtube, people have more knowledge and inspiration.
VFX is cool
Amazing! But Mocha Pro isn't compositing software. It is planar tracking software.
Thanks! Yeah the point I was trying to make was that Mocha could be used in compositing as a 2d Tracking solution.
I was unclear about that.
Mocha Pro can do 3d solves using planar tracking. It's a great 2d tracker.
We obviously can't shoot actors.
Alec baldwin has entered the chat.