Jump to content


ianfreeze

Member Since 12 Mar 2008
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 06:36 PM
-----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Future of Video at SXSW

18 March 2014 - 08:45 PM

Also, hopefully screen resolution will go the same way proc clock speeds and DSLR mega pixels went. The arms race will stop being about how BIG can we make it, and start to be about how WELL we can make it. instead of 47k cameras, why not try to make a sensor that has over 20 stops of dynamic range? Or wider color range? Or better encoding algorithms? or so on and so on.

 

From what Ive read about Rec 2020 thats the way things are starting go. 

A little primer for those interested: http://nofilmschool....mut-frame-rate/

 

Tangentially, does anyone else find it strange that 1080p hasn't even FULLY proliferated the market (how many jobs are we doing where we still have to protect for 4:3?) and a new format is already starting to roll out? SD was around for 50 years. VHS was the delivery mechanism for a decent chunk of that time. DVD's had about 10 years. BluRay has had what? 5 years? Maybe I'm old and crotchety but the madness needs to stop.

 

edit: sorry for hijacking the thread, go about your business.


In Topic: I need some expression help

06 March 2014 - 10:52 PM

This tripped me up when I first started learning expressions. When adding an expression, pay attention to what that property needs. If it's scale/position, then your expression needs to spit out more than one value.

 

 

I thought about that, but thought that since these two values could be linked (proportionate scale), unlike position, that it could take a single input. I was wrong.


In Topic: I need some expression help

06 March 2014 - 04:53 PM

Ahhhh haaa, well that makes a lot more sense. Thats why I asked. Thanks Harry.

 

Also Mylenium, I'm really sorry I scared the shit out of you. 


In Topic: I need some expression help

05 March 2014 - 09:59 PM

alright, after a lot of different google searches I came up with this

 

s=(comp("main comp").layer("07_main").transform.scale)+50;

[s[0],s[0]]

 

set my value + 50 to a variable, then assign that variable to each value in the scale array (I think I'm saying that right...)

anyway, seems like a backwards way to go about it, but it works.

 

ALSO, unlike position that has its array values defined as [0][1][2] scale has them BOTH defined as [0]

interesting stuff.


In Topic: I need some expression help

05 March 2014 - 09:50 PM

yes, those are the same as well.