Somebody replied that Fusion is up to the task but then his comment just disappeared. I don't know why. So give it a shot! Comes with Davici Resolve and it's free!
@@millolab Cool! Can it handle massive comp trees? Resolve is already 100 times faster than Nuke for grading. If they use the same technology in Fusion that would be awesome
I had pleasure to work on Ad Astra at Atomic Fiction as a compositor, I just wanna congrats the amazing work the CG team has delivered. Good job guys! I left a bit after it was delivered, I defiantly miss working with the team!
Yeah, I was expecting nuclear retaliations on this part but only got two thumbs down so far. And I forgot "it does tracking but it's no 3D Equalizer" but when you consider all the things that Blender can do, it's quite amazing. It does 90% of the job the other specialized software can do, for the most part.
@@BlenderBob Exactly. It's 100% the truth, and that's totally fine. Like you said, it's astonishing that it can do 90% of what these very expensive commercial packages do with hundreds, if not thousands of paid developers and millions of dollars of development money. It's a small miracle really. Also, facing the truth about Blender's shortcomings only help it get better. If it were 'perfect', the team could just close up shop right now and 2.91 is the final release in perpetuity. I have to give Fusion a better shot. I love Nuke, and Natron is nice for some of those simple tasks, but its a bit unstable and like you said, abandoned - which is a real shame. But I just don't know anyone who uses Fusion. When I kicked it around a couple of years ago, it seemed very capable. Ugly, but capable.
@@AndyTanguay Fusion is more than capable. It's being used for a long time now, I remember we used it back in 2010 for movie VFX, and it held up nicely. You can look up and see that to this day tons of movies come out with shots done in Fusion.
Blender is absolutely capable! I have been working on a short film with Blender for about three years now. It includes a realistic moon orbit and landing sequence with a dust sim and much more. And I almost didn't pay a single penny. You just need time and dedication. 😉 I also chatted with Jared Michael, who worked on the lunar surface for Ad Astra and For All Mankind. His stuff is insane!
man you are a hero! I love that you take time to explain all these precious pipelines! not to talk about your advanced 3D modeling tutorials, please don't stop your great precious work!
Really cool. I tend to find that microdisplcements in Blender can usually handle anything you throw at it - but that moon texture is insane. 700 million pixels displacing in real-time!
Blender Bob, I'm absolutely loving these videos. Real industry experience and comparisons go a long way! Thank you for taking the time to put these videos out there for free. :) Also, for After Effects folks out there who may be unaware of the reason behind the shade: AE is a great tool, but layer based compositing workflows have major limitations when compared to node based workflows in software such as Nuke, Fusion or Flame. There are definitely workarounds that if you master the program you can and will achieve the same quality of results that other programs can, but those comps can get complex and hard to follow, which is a big issue in a studio environment where you're working with teams of other artists in a major pipeline. Node based workflows offer far more flexibility and organization when it comes to making adjustments, addressing notes and working with other artists... that being said, if you're an independent artist or even working in a smaller studio, After Effects is still a great compositing software in the right hands... just not quite as streamlined for the job as Nuke.
Thanks for the comments. I couldn't have said it better for After Effects. Node compositing is the way to go. But Nuke is like Maya. It's getting old, barely evolves from one version to another and it's not very fast. You can do crazy colo corrections in Resolve with many many nodes and it's all in real time. Nuke.... render... render.. render... They don't use the GPU as they should. We need a new, modern and fast compositor.
@@BlenderBob This to me feels odd. A crazy expensive piece of software that hardly evolves. Compared to a free piece of softare like Blender that constantly evolve.
Love these videos, Blender Bob. These sorts of breakdowns are exactly what's needed to help studios realize that they can add Blender to their pipeline.
Have used Natron for both some short live-action compositing and pure-2d-animation projects, and apart from the wonky stability issues found it pretty capable and flexible.
Hey. Small tip I found really helpful when using adaptive subdivision in the experimental mode of cycles. Since adaptive mode doesn't update the geometry in real time you have to first get close to an area you want to check the subdivision detail of. Press tab twice (go into edit mode and go out of it) and it will update with new geometry based on the last position of the camera
It’s so cool you worked on it! I love this movie and especially the lunar chase sequence. Natron, I don’t know if there’s a supporter yet, but 3 years ago when I dug through it, they had stopped development and were looking for a supporter. Somethings had issues, but generally it worked (and it’s only the 2D engine). I briefly thought about becoming a maintained, the code is very cleanly written and used QT UI library just like Nuke. But being a maintainer takes a lot of time and it’s unpaid… Frankly I stopped using NukeX I had version 8 license and I didn’t composite as much and Fusion can do it just as well. And it’s easy to learn coming from Nuke. Although workflows in Nuke are more keyboard friendly.
yeah i agree more experienced(as opposed to title professional) film/3d/vfx industry artists creating images in Blender would make others understand that Blender is able to do this sort of stuff! Thanks for demonstrating some of it!
You're welcome! I wanted to reply to your other comment about Natron but I cannot find it anywhere. Yep, Natron needs a Natron Foundation. Now it's just dead. No new versions. Nothing.
@@BlenderBobI'm watching your videos all day and learning new stuff. Even now while typing the comment. Thanks for your videos. Want more videos about blender. Specially driver and geometry node and some fluid sim if possible. after effects is good for 2D stuff.
Blender Bob, quality over quantity, brother. Keep producing valuable content and you’ll attract the right followers who appreciate your knowledge and experience.
Of course. That's what we do all year long at Real by Fake. But for compositing you would need something better than Blender. Resolve, can do the job but it's not as powerful as Nuke
There are 2 blender users which might be able to pull this of in blender. One is Alvin, he has created stunning shots using blender. Second is mrdodobird aka ian Hubert. He creates stunning visuals.
I tried on my machine at home, a more than 10 year old quad core i7 with a 980ti and 780 Nvidia card, 32 gig RAM and it worked! Then I tried at the office, the 40 seconds rendering part, and it's a 32 core AMD cpu with 64 gigs of RAM and a 2080ti. A beast. But the displacement map painting was actually done on my home machine. So, even my old machine could handle it.
@@BlenderBob OK, thanks for the answer ! Now I just have to choose between left and right, to know which kidney to sell, so I could afford such a beast... ^^
@@alexandreancel6423 Depends. Is it a hobby or you main source of revenu? If you have a company, it's tax deductible. If it's for your main job, you need a powerful machine because you need to deliver. If it's a hobby, so what if your renders take longer to run?
@@BlenderBob I was kidding (Is kidding about kidney... kidneying ??). For now, it's a hobby, along with video games, so my rig is enough (Core I7-7700, GTX1070 and 16Gb ram). But I'm hoping to make CG one of my revenues, so maybe I will have to invest, but with my company as you cleverly suggested... It's more a motivating goal than a need.
Thanks for the videos Bob. I'm a long time Maya, Vray and Nuke user and I'm currently doing more of my professional work in Blender. My typical workflow with Nuke is to render multi-channel EXR files with either mult-mattes and/or Cryptomattes, shadow passes, reflections, AO, zdepth, etc. and then break them out in Nuke with shuffle nodes. I've found Cycles a bit lacking in the AOV department. Do you have any advice for multi-channel rendering workflows in Cycles? Thanks again.
You're welcome! I'm planing on doing a clip on the subject eventually. (I have a long list...). I work the same way as you do. I have template from Blender EXR comping in Nuke. The AOV I miss in Cycles is the point position but you can easily do it in a render pass. Which AOV are you missing?
@@BlenderBob Thanks for the reply. I do prefer vray's multi-matte (not sure if there is a Cycles equivalent) over cryptomatte and I've found the vector pass(post motion blur) and zdepth passes kind of finicky. It's probably my lack of experience with Cycles and Blender in general. I'm experimenting on projects that are not as deadline dependent in case I have to go back and render in Vray.
@@smoothprox The only way to get Cryptomatte to work properly in Nuke is to render EXR full res, not half, which is strange because half works perfectly with Arnold. Here's a great trick fir Nuke: No matter where the images come from, Cycles, Arnold or whatever, in Nuke, just read then and write them back without any changes. You will be surprised to see that the load time reduces enormously! Why? Go figure. But it works. I can't confirm for vRay though. For motion blur, I used the Arnold settings for the vector blur node in Nuke and I work as expected. But if you work in the film industry, motion vectors are not welcome. Nothing beats 3d motion blur. Vector blurs will give you issues with rotating objects and object that passe in front of each other in different directions. I pretty much never use vector blur. I heard a while ago that 3D motion blur in vRay slows down the renders like crazy. I don't know if it's still the case. Cycles has a beautiful motion blur. It automatically adds divisions to make sure that circular movements render properly. I just did a helicopter and I was happily surprised by the results. I couldn't find any settings for the amount of divisions and I was expecting something bad. Not! I love Cycles!
@@BlenderBob Thanks for the pointers I'll definitely try the re-write image sequence trick. I work in episodic television in the automotive genre so I can get by with motion vectors in a crunch. I will experiment with the 3d motion blur time permitting to see if it's faster than vray. I'm using a small render farm with vray and have yet to try any distributed rendering on Cycles. One step at a time. Again, thanks for the advice and I look forward to your next video.
As much as I love Blender, I'd have to agree on your other software preferences: Davinci Resolve, Nuke, and Substance are some of the best products I've used for content creation. As for Natron, it does enough for most compositing, although its keying can be meh unless you have expensive plugins (Nuke's keying is way better with the plugins too). Substance Painter and Designer is definitely the best bang for buck software I know.
Blender is a Jack of all trade, master of none, except maybe for modelling where it excels. Blender dans track too but it's not 3D Equalizer ( I forgot that one). But is really good for the vast majority of the VFX needed for TV shows and some movies I see a great future for Blender.
@@BlenderBob As a former layout and tracking artist at ILM, I'd say the tracking tools in Blender is pretty damn good for something that's free. At ILM they have their in-house ZENO software and the MARS tracking tool which is amazing. I have been using Blender's tracker in full manual supervised mode and I think it if you have a good foundation and understanding of matchmoving principles it can tackle some pretty complex tracks. I'm now trying to teach these techniques to my students, I just hope their head don't explode :D
@@weeliano I'm not too familiar with Blender's tracker. If you watched my latest clip you will understand why. ;-) Does Blender's tracker allow you to output an undistorted plate (and something to redistort in comp)?
@@BlenderBob Yes I believe it can, it has the ability to straighten out distorted plates in the Track Tab - Lens Distortion section, but in a more manual manner by adjusting the K1,2,3 distortion values. I also found a way to render out the undistorted plate as well by activating the render undistorted in the clip display options in the tracker. I think a lens test grid plate will have to be loaded for the tracker to be calibrated to get the best distortion values. I remember at ILM they have a library of distortion tables for all the cinema lenses they used for shooting the plates.
How realistic was moon surface shader in ad Astra, moon shading a consideration rendering especially standard dynamin range. The dust on the moon is what's called non lambertian or you can say flatter than flat. If the sun is above a certain angle you'd probably crash a moon buggy because a hill or crater slope would have same brightness as flat ground.
In the film industry, nobody cares if it's physically accurate or not. As long as it looks good. That's the universal rule. The only thing they did correctly was not to add stars in the sky. Sorry to disappoint you. :-)
@@BlenderBob thanks. We get used to the principled shader in blender. The old diffuse based has a "roughness" slider. But even the moon isn't perfectly diffuse. Just saying at high sun illumination levels on the moon it would be wierd looking. Surface irregular but would perceptually appear uniform.
I really like this channel, so much useful information! Wouldn’t it be more efficient to convert the 40k image into 10 Udim Tiles with MipMapping? Maybe using Nuke with a tiny bit of python or even imagemagick? Best C
I suggest people to look at the work of Albin, I'm sorry for not remembering his surname. He jas doen amazing blender shots with tons of debrief and what not
Maya didn't crashed because of the amounts of polys. There was only one polygon in the scene. Maya crashed because it's old code that is not optimized for the latest technologies and Autodesk just doesn't care anymore because they have 95% of the VFX market. Maya is a drop in the ocean for Autodesk. It's a very small part of the company. I loaded 8k textures in Maya and I crashed... I don't want to use Maya anymore. It's still better than Blender for UVs though. That's pretty much the only reason I still use it.
@@BlenderBob Yes, they, Autodesk, are experts of buying good software and forget to maintain it. Even a lot of excellent software is discontinued. So I agree with not use Maya any more. But I struggle with if its the right way to learn Blender s; r; g; or keep the industry standard w;e;r;?
@@stefan.holst65 Blender is highly customizable. My Blender feels like Maya. I use QWER just like in Maya, I just changed the hotkeys. It's a bit tricky because you can lose some functions in Blender so you have to resign then to something else. And the hotkey management system in Blender really sucks compare to Maya's. And that's why I don't want to make How To tutorials because my keyboard had been totally remapped. And I use a lot of pie menues too.
In a world where people are always looking for what is the best things like blender remind us that good enough is more than you need. Blender is no nuke but if you need just basic compositing blender will do. Same with substance and all the others, what matters more is what you need not what is the best.
I mean... You could probably pull it off without Substance painter, maybe using some procedural materials with nodes and such, but it probably wouldn't beat what you can get from Substance painter.
This video was totally amazing!! I'm sharing this with my friends. We are actually working with blender, nuke, Da Vinci and substance!! I can't believe it we made the right choice jajaja
Haven't fully tested blender 2.9 but huge huge issue regarding production ready has been volume open vdb motion blur. Cycles has a flaw and I think it's deep in the base code regarding volumes so it can't be fixed without rewriting the renderer. Openvdb has motion vectors per voxel that can be used by other renderers to add 3d camera motion blur. Blenders cycles is blind to this and has been for years. I can't even get 2d motion vectors from my smoke Sims if I wanna motion blur with a filter. I figured a workaround but it involves 8x time expansions and octupling vdb cache data and simulate time and having to use only half the files for a 180degree shutter. I'd pay for a add-on that fixes this.
VDB are pretty new to Blender. I guess they will need more time to implement the VDB motion vector. I never actually spent time on the matter. I'll check it out, if I can find the time. Maybe you can ask Blender directly. Submit a bug report. Somebody will have to reply and you'll know more. :-)
@@BlenderBob ua-cam.com/video/HODMomxZilc/v-deo.html this video explains the situation somewhat. I just get the impression cycles volume code is real old and wasn't designed for temporal sampling.
Give them time to implement it. I know at the office we use a Nuke plugin called Smart Motionbur that will creates motion vectors by analyzing the pixel movements on the images.
@@BlenderBob thanks. Technically blender can record what is called velocity grids. You could export to say render man and get true blur. Cycles is "blind" to velocity grids. Frustrating actually old blender 2.7 and the old blender renderer, actually rendered 2d motion vector layer and you could blur the smoke in the node editor. I'm extremely poor and didn't want to pay hundreds for smart motion blur add on. If there was a commercial blender add on even if I had to pay, they are usually much much cheaper.
Hi Blender Bob, you mentioned that you found the 40k moon texture online. Could you post a link to where you got it? I've been searching NASA and related sites but couldn't find an image like the one you used.
I'll give it to you only if you subscribe! ;-) It was hard to find, and it comes in a proprietary format that you have to convert. Just get it from my dropbox instead. www.dropbox.com/sh/wnud0z4mzki4lff/AABuTVQh1Hvl3sBE7PLNCf4na?dl=0
@@BlenderBob talent (´°̥̥̥̥̥̥̥̥ω°̥̥̥̥̥̥̥̥｀), last question sir, i follow Ian Hubert tutorial, i grab green footage online and remove screen green and turn it into image sequence, put it back into blender and build the enviroment around it, but something is not quite there, i want everything is dark blue tone but i cant change the coulor of image sequence so it looks pretty faky, as the question i asked you last night, does it mean i just need to learn Davinci sofware to do the final touch for the color.
@@ashdalat. you can do color corrections directly in the shader of your character. Try to play with brightness contrast and curves. Hubert is the only person I know that renders characters directly in his scenes. Nobody does that.
@@BlenderBob for example the shots in ad Astra where the reflection had to be added on the visors, I'm assuming they were reflective in the clean plate too so it must have been tough to track it by identifying tracking points... So also the motion of the helmet is abstract, it's moving at a speed on the ground, how would one approach tracking this helmet?
@@amanthangellapally2067 Hi Aman! Funny you asked because I was thinking of making a new section of Blender Bob where people could ask me questions about CG in general. Ok, so for the helmets, there was no visor at all. I modeled the helmets and they were tracked by the tracking department. Then a camera was setup where the actors are in the scene and we rendered it with a very wide angle. We then used these renders as environment projections. That'a how you get the perfect reflection in the helmets.
@@BlenderBob wow, so I am hypothesizing a method to track the helmets, correct me if I'm wrong, the helmets you modeled will be put on rigged astronaut models, the rover is first tracked and then the astronaut rigs are parented to the rover and positioned to match visually, then the movement of the head and torso are animated to keep the helmet in the right 3D space... But then since the 360 video is captured, now I'm thinking we would not need the 3d movement of the visors in the direction perpendicular to the screen, it is already inherent in the video due to the motion of the rover so a 2d track of the visors would do the job too... Which of these two approaches would have been used the tracking team or is it entirely different?
@@amanthangellapally2067 We didn't model, track and rigged astronauts for the helmet reflections. Only the visor was in the scene. The 360 camera is stable but moves at the same speed as the rover. The only CG astronaut is the one being pushed out of the rover (for closeup shots).
Why does every film have to be like this? I've only seen this one clip and I'm traumatized D: edit: now I've watched a bit further... I'm surprised your nightmares didnt involve throwing dead astronauts out of cars :O But really, from the VFX side, it's amazing.
@Blender Bob i didn't mean it as an offence, scenes like this are so shocking... i dont know how people can sleep after watching things like this all the time :)
Fusion is super powerful, and it is being developed further by BMD. Take a look at the power users over at www.steakunderwater.com/wesuckless/viewforum.php?f=16 who use it in production daily. You will get an idea about whats possible, that's if your interested to know more.
How funny, you start out naming what, $10K worth of software per year at the beginning. Please go though the entire pipline, especially modeling damage like dents.
Well, the entire pipeline is all Maya/Houdini/Renderman and no Blender involved at all. The point of this clip is to show that even if you don't have all these software it would still be possible to do AdAstra in Blender. And it's not like this is a one man job. A big part of the company was involved in theses shots so I know all the steps that were done. All the damage stuff was done in Houdini, as it should.
Somebody replied that Fusion is up to the task but then his comment just disappeared. I don't know why. So give it a shot! Comes with Davici Resolve and it's free!
Hey it's me .
I love your content and your content making style
@@pugazhcaspian4713 Thank you so much!
Aside from Deep Fusion is almost the same as Nuke.
@@millolab Cool! Can it handle massive comp trees? Resolve is already 100 times faster than Nuke for grading. If they use the same technology in Fusion that would be awesome
this is really interesting! Please do more tutorials on different "industry" projects. It's pretty rare to find this type of content
This weekend!
@@BlenderBob I agree, this is unique content😊 🙏🏽
I had pleasure to work on Ad Astra at Atomic Fiction as a compositor, I just wanna congrats the amazing work the CG team has delivered. Good job guys! I left a bit after it was delivered, I defiantly miss working with the team!
Ni hao Jiang! Atomic Fiction was great. And the comp team also did an amazing job. It's top notch! Xie xie
The "it's no..." section cracked me up. I could almost hear people's blood pressures rising across the Blender-net.
Yeah, I was expecting nuclear retaliations on this part but only got two thumbs down so far. And I forgot "it does tracking but it's no 3D Equalizer" but when you consider all the things that Blender can do, it's quite amazing. It does 90% of the job the other specialized software can do, for the most part.
I'm not the enemy here. I just say things the way they are. After all, it's Blender Bob, not Maya Bob, Houdini Bob, zBrush Bob...
@@BlenderBob Exactly. It's 100% the truth, and that's totally fine. Like you said, it's astonishing that it can do 90% of what these very expensive commercial packages do with hundreds, if not thousands of paid developers and millions of dollars of development money. It's a small miracle really.
Also, facing the truth about Blender's shortcomings only help it get better. If it were 'perfect', the team could just close up shop right now and 2.91 is the final release in perpetuity.
I have to give Fusion a better shot. I love Nuke, and Natron is nice for some of those simple tasks, but its a bit unstable and like you said, abandoned - which is a real shame. But I just don't know anyone who uses Fusion. When I kicked it around a couple of years ago, it seemed very capable. Ugly, but capable.
@@AndyTanguay Fusion is more than capable. It's being used for a long time now, I remember we used it back in 2010 for movie VFX, and it held up nicely. You can look up and see that to this day tons of movies come out with shots done in Fusion.
Blender is absolutely capable! I have been working on a short film with Blender for about three years now. It includes a realistic moon orbit and landing sequence with a dust sim and much more. And I almost didn't pay a single penny. You just need time and dedication. 😉
I also chatted with Jared Michael, who worked on the lunar surface for Ad Astra and For All Mankind. His stuff is insane!
man you are a hero! I love that you take time to explain all these precious pipelines! not to talk about your advanced 3D modeling tutorials, please don't stop your great precious work!
Really cool. I tend to find that microdisplcements in Blender can usually handle anything you throw at it - but that moon texture is insane. 700 million pixels displacing in real-time!
Yep! And on my old crappy computer too with a 780 and 980ti! At the office, I have a beast machine and it's mind blowing.
Blender Bob, I'm absolutely loving these videos. Real industry experience and comparisons go a long way! Thank you for taking the time to put these videos out there for free. :)
Also, for After Effects folks out there who may be unaware of the reason behind the shade:
AE is a great tool, but layer based compositing workflows have major limitations when compared to node based workflows in software such as Nuke, Fusion or Flame. There are definitely workarounds that if you master the program you can and will achieve the same quality of results that other programs can, but those comps can get complex and hard to follow, which is a big issue in a studio environment where you're working with teams of other artists in a major pipeline. Node based workflows offer far more flexibility and organization when it comes to making adjustments, addressing notes and working with other artists... that being said, if you're an independent artist or even working in a smaller studio, After Effects is still a great compositing software in the right hands... just not quite as streamlined for the job as Nuke.
Thanks for the comments. I couldn't have said it better for After Effects. Node compositing is the way to go. But Nuke is like Maya. It's getting old, barely evolves from one version to another and it's not very fast. You can do crazy colo corrections in Resolve with many many nodes and it's all in real time. Nuke.... render... render.. render... They don't use the GPU as they should. We need a new, modern and fast compositor.
@@BlenderBob This to me feels odd. A crazy expensive piece of software that hardly evolves. Compared to a free piece of softare like Blender that constantly evolve.
Love these videos, Blender Bob. These sorts of breakdowns are exactly what's needed to help studios realize that they can add Blender to their pipeline.
Thanks Steve! Now I just need 1.41 million subscribers ;-)
Always hilarious how you keep folks at calm, not starting a 3d app war about can and can not :)
Have used Natron for both some short live-action compositing and pure-2d-animation projects, and apart from the wonky stability issues found it pretty capable and flexible.
Good to know! Thanks for your contribution.:-)
this is great man! We need more videos in this style where you explain your personal pipeline
I did made a clip about pipeline. Check it out :-)
Awesome!
Thanks Ryan!
Your the best Blender Bob, and it's just getting better ever time you post a video!
Thanks Tim!
Great video! Painting the displacement is really cool!
Thanks! You can see my excitement too when I figured that one out.
Wow thank you. Didn't know about DaVinci and Natron. So much prefessional Information! Thanks again!
Great video. Love when you use real shots to explain things. Very educational.
Hey. Small tip I found really helpful when using adaptive subdivision in the experimental mode of cycles. Since adaptive mode doesn't update the geometry in real time you have to first get close to an area you want to check the subdivision detail of. Press tab twice (go into edit mode and go out of it) and it will update with new geometry based on the last position of the camera
It's actually really useful and I'm still wondering why adaptive is still in experimental for this long
It’s so cool you worked on it! I love this movie and especially the lunar chase sequence.
Natron, I don’t know if there’s a supporter yet, but 3 years ago when I dug through it, they had stopped development and were looking for a supporter. Somethings had issues, but generally it worked (and it’s only the 2D engine). I briefly thought about becoming a maintained, the code is very cleanly written and used QT UI library just like Nuke. But being a maintainer takes a lot of time and it’s unpaid…
Frankly I stopped using NukeX I had version 8 license and I didn’t composite as much and Fusion can do it just as well. And it’s easy to learn coming from Nuke. Although workflows in Nuke are more keyboard friendly.
yeah i agree more experienced(as opposed to title professional) film/3d/vfx industry artists creating images in Blender would make others understand that Blender is able to do this sort of stuff! Thanks for demonstrating some of it!
You're welcome! I wanted to reply to your other comment about Natron but I cannot find it anywhere. Yep, Natron needs a Natron Foundation. Now it's just dead. No new versions. Nothing.
You may replace Nuke with Fusion and Substance painter with Quixel mixer
You are my hero!
Same comment twice within a few minutes! One in english and one in French! Thanks Blender Daily!
Channel has some quality content
Better than envil tutorial
after effect?! that laugh made my day :D
Well, I'm glad you liked the joke. Some guys didn't.
@@BlenderBobI'm watching your videos all day and learning new stuff. Even now while typing the comment. Thanks for your videos. Want more videos about blender. Specially driver and geometry node and some fluid sim if possible. after effects is good for 2D stuff.
This is incredible 😍
You rock, Blender Bob!
Thanks Danny! I hope everybody will think like you because I'm afraid I may lose some subscribers on this one...
Blender Bob, quality over quantity, brother. Keep producing valuable content and you’ll attract the right followers who appreciate your knowledge and experience.
Great stuff!
Love your video Bob!
Thank you so much!
Tu est mon nouveau Hero!! Spread the word!!
Wow! Deux fois ce soir! Merci, cousin éloigné!
Great vid! Loved the movie btw, Hoyte is one of my favorite cinematographers! :)
Yeah, the photography was awesome. Interesting fact, the DOP is rarely involved for the VFX part. And they take all the credits, like in Life of Pi.
Amazing! and Thank You!!!
You're welcome!
this is good
I have a question blender bob, can live action/2D animated crossover hybrids be done in Blender and DaVinci Resolve?
Of course. That's what we do all year long at Real by Fake. But for compositing you would need something better than Blender. Resolve, can do the job but it's not as powerful as Nuke
You're awesome sir
There are 2 blender users which might be able to pull this of in blender. One is Alvin, he has created stunning shots using blender. Second is mrdodobird aka ian Hubert. He creates stunning visuals.
Did you shoot that on Kubrick's set?
Awesome video !
Could you tell us what kind of hardware do you have to run blender this smoothly with a 1.5Gb ground texture ?
I tried on my machine at home, a more than 10 year old quad core i7 with a 980ti and 780 Nvidia card, 32 gig RAM and it worked! Then I tried at the office, the 40 seconds rendering part, and it's a 32 core AMD cpu with 64 gigs of RAM and a 2080ti. A beast. But the displacement map painting was actually done on my home machine. So, even my old machine could handle it.
@@BlenderBob OK, thanks for the answer !
Now I just have to choose between left and right, to know which kidney to sell, so I could afford such a beast... ^^
@@alexandreancel6423 Depends. Is it a hobby or you main source of revenu? If you have a company, it's tax deductible. If it's for your main job, you need a powerful machine because you need to deliver. If it's a hobby, so what if your renders take longer to run?
@@BlenderBob I was kidding (Is kidding about kidney... kidneying ??).
For now, it's a hobby, along with video games, so my rig is enough (Core I7-7700, GTX1070 and 16Gb ram).
But I'm hoping to make CG one of my revenues, so maybe I will have to invest, but with my company as you cleverly suggested...
It's more a motivating goal than a need.
Thanks for the videos Bob. I'm a long time Maya, Vray and Nuke user and I'm currently doing more of my professional work in Blender. My typical workflow with Nuke is to render multi-channel EXR files with either mult-mattes and/or Cryptomattes, shadow passes, reflections, AO, zdepth, etc. and then break them out in Nuke with shuffle nodes. I've found Cycles a bit lacking in the AOV department. Do you have any advice for multi-channel rendering workflows in Cycles? Thanks again.
You're welcome! I'm planing on doing a clip on the subject eventually. (I have a long list...). I work the same way as you do. I have template from Blender EXR comping in Nuke. The AOV I miss in Cycles is the point position but you can easily do it in a render pass. Which AOV are you missing?
@@BlenderBob Thanks for the reply. I do prefer vray's multi-matte (not sure if there is a Cycles equivalent) over cryptomatte and I've found the vector pass(post motion blur) and zdepth passes kind of finicky. It's probably my lack of experience with Cycles and Blender in general. I'm experimenting on projects that are not as deadline dependent in case I have to go back and render in Vray.
@@smoothprox The only way to get Cryptomatte to work properly in Nuke is to render EXR full res, not half, which is strange because half works perfectly with Arnold. Here's a great trick fir Nuke: No matter where the images come from, Cycles, Arnold or whatever, in Nuke, just read then and write them back without any changes. You will be surprised to see that the load time reduces enormously! Why? Go figure. But it works. I can't confirm for vRay though. For motion blur, I used the Arnold settings for the vector blur node in Nuke and I work as expected. But if you work in the film industry, motion vectors are not welcome. Nothing beats 3d motion blur. Vector blurs will give you issues with rotating objects and object that passe in front of each other in different directions. I pretty much never use vector blur. I heard a while ago that 3D motion blur in vRay slows down the renders like crazy. I don't know if it's still the case. Cycles has a beautiful motion blur. It automatically adds divisions to make sure that circular movements render properly. I just did a helicopter and I was happily surprised by the results. I couldn't find any settings for the amount of divisions and I was expecting something bad. Not! I love Cycles!
@@BlenderBob Thanks for the pointers I'll definitely try the re-write image sequence trick. I work in episodic television in the automotive genre so I can get by with motion vectors in a crunch. I will experiment with the 3d motion blur time permitting to see if it's faster than vray. I'm using a small render farm with vray and have yet to try any distributed rendering on Cycles. One step at a time. Again, thanks for the advice and I look forward to your next video.
As much as I love Blender, I'd have to agree on your other software preferences: Davinci Resolve, Nuke, and Substance are some of the best products I've used for content creation. As for Natron, it does enough for most compositing, although its keying can be meh unless you have expensive plugins (Nuke's keying is way better with the plugins too). Substance Painter and Designer is definitely the best bang for buck software I know.
Blender is a Jack of all trade, master of none, except maybe for modelling where it excels. Blender dans track too but it's not 3D Equalizer ( I forgot that one). But is really good for the vast majority of the VFX needed for TV shows and some movies I see a great future for Blender.
@@BlenderBob As a former layout and tracking artist at ILM, I'd say the tracking tools in Blender is pretty damn good for something that's free. At ILM they have their in-house ZENO software and the MARS tracking tool which is amazing. I have been using Blender's tracker in full manual supervised mode and I think it if you have a good foundation and understanding of matchmoving principles it can tackle some pretty complex tracks. I'm now trying to teach these techniques to my students, I just hope their head don't explode :D
@@weeliano I'm not too familiar with Blender's tracker. If you watched my latest clip you will understand why. ;-) Does Blender's tracker allow you to output an undistorted plate (and something to redistort in comp)?
@@BlenderBob Yes I believe it can, it has the ability to straighten out distorted plates in the Track Tab - Lens Distortion section, but in a more manual manner by adjusting the K1,2,3 distortion values. I also found a way to render out the undistorted plate as well by activating the render undistorted in the clip display options in the tracker. I think a lens test grid plate will have to be loaded for the tracker to be calibrated to get the best distortion values. I remember at ILM they have a library of distortion tables for all the cinema lenses they used for shooting the plates.
How realistic was moon surface shader in ad Astra, moon shading a consideration rendering especially standard dynamin range.
The dust on the moon is what's called non lambertian or you can say flatter than flat. If the sun is above a certain angle you'd probably crash a moon buggy because a hill or crater slope would have same brightness as flat ground.
In the film industry, nobody cares if it's physically accurate or not. As long as it looks good. That's the universal rule. The only thing they did correctly was not to add stars in the sky. Sorry to disappoint you. :-)
@@BlenderBob thanks. We get used to the principled shader in blender. The old diffuse based has a "roughness" slider. But even the moon isn't perfectly diffuse. Just saying at high sun illumination levels on the moon it would be wierd looking. Surface irregular but would perceptually appear uniform.
I really like this channel, so much useful information!
Wouldn’t it be more efficient to convert the 40k image into 10 Udim Tiles with MipMapping?
Maybe using Nuke with a tiny bit of python or even imagemagick?
Best
C
I suggest people to look at the work of Albin, I'm sorry for not remembering his surname. He jas doen amazing blender shots with tons of debrief and what not
Why not use fusion for composition? I use Fusion and a lot of Hollywood movies are also comped in Fusion. Plus Fusion is also kinda free.
Free in not an issue when you work for Hollywood. Fusion has some good stuff but it's no Nuke, especially for keying and rotoscoping. Cheers
Hi Bob! Do you know if it's the Maya poly count limits that hinder Maya to show the high pixel picture to live displacement view?
Maya didn't crashed because of the amounts of polys. There was only one polygon in the scene. Maya crashed because it's old code that is not optimized for the latest technologies and Autodesk just doesn't care anymore because they have 95% of the VFX market. Maya is a drop in the ocean for Autodesk. It's a very small part of the company. I loaded 8k textures in Maya and I crashed... I don't want to use Maya anymore. It's still better than Blender for UVs though. That's pretty much the only reason I still use it.
@@BlenderBob Yes, they, Autodesk, are experts of buying good software and forget to maintain it. Even a lot of excellent software is discontinued. So I agree with not use Maya any more. But I struggle with if its the right way to learn Blender s; r; g; or keep the industry standard w;e;r;?
@@stefan.holst65 Blender is highly customizable. My Blender feels like Maya. I use QWER just like in Maya, I just changed the hotkeys. It's a bit tricky because you can lose some functions in Blender so you have to resign then to something else. And the hotkey management system in Blender really sucks compare to Maya's. And that's why I don't want to make How To tutorials because my keyboard had been totally remapped. And I use a lot of pie menues too.
In a world where people are always looking for what is the best things like blender remind us that good enough is more than you need.
Blender is no nuke but if you need just basic compositing blender will do.
Same with substance and all the others, what matters more is what you need not what is the best.
You're right. But Blender Bob is all about the VFX industry and there, you need the best for everything. :-)
I mean... You could probably pull it off without Substance painter, maybe using some procedural materials with nodes and such, but it probably wouldn't beat what you can get from Substance painter.
Well, Blender Bob is about working in the VFX film industry. No way we would use procedural textures. :-)
@@BlenderBob so you wouldn't use substance designer for vfx?
@@samarthnimbargi5223 Of course I would. What I ment by not using procedural was the basic stuff in Blender, like noise, voronoi etc. :-)
This video was totally amazing!! I'm sharing this with my friends. We are actually working with blender, nuke, Da Vinci and substance!! I can't believe it we made the right choice jajaja
Thanks Dan! Yep, you made the right choice!
I just found a gem
Haven't fully tested blender 2.9 but huge huge issue regarding production ready has been volume open vdb motion blur.
Cycles has a flaw and I think it's deep in the base code regarding volumes so it can't be fixed without rewriting the renderer. Openvdb has motion vectors per voxel that can be used by other renderers to add 3d camera motion blur. Blenders cycles is blind to this and has been for years. I can't even get 2d motion vectors from my smoke Sims if I wanna motion blur with a filter.
I figured a workaround but it involves 8x time expansions and octupling vdb cache data and simulate time and having to use only half the files for a 180degree shutter. I'd pay for a add-on that fixes this.
VDB are pretty new to Blender. I guess they will need more time to implement the VDB motion vector. I never actually spent time on the matter. I'll check it out, if I can find the time. Maybe you can ask Blender directly. Submit a bug report. Somebody will have to reply and you'll know more. :-)
@@BlenderBob ua-cam.com/video/HODMomxZilc/v-deo.html this video explains the situation somewhat. I just get the impression cycles volume code is real old and wasn't designed for temporal sampling.
Give them time to implement it. I know at the office we use a Nuke plugin called Smart Motionbur that will creates motion vectors by analyzing the pixel movements on the images.
@@BlenderBob thanks. Technically blender can record what is called velocity grids. You could export to say render man and get true blur. Cycles is "blind" to velocity grids. Frustrating actually old blender 2.7 and the old blender renderer, actually rendered 2d motion vector layer and you could blur the smoke in the node editor. I'm extremely poor and didn't want to pay hundreds for smart motion blur add on. If there was a commercial blender add on even if I had to pay, they are usually much much cheaper.
@@michaelcooney9368 I will make a test by exporting VDBs from Blender and they them in Houdini to see if the MB works
Hi Blender Bob, you mentioned that you found the 40k moon texture online. Could you post a link to where you got it? I've been searching NASA and related sites but couldn't find an image like the one you used.
I'll give it to you only if you subscribe! ;-) It was hard to find, and it comes in a proprietary format that you have to convert. Just get it from my dropbox instead. www.dropbox.com/sh/wnud0z4mzki4lff/AABuTVQh1Hvl3sBE7PLNCf4na?dl=0
hmm, thank you sir, so i just need blender and davinci software and a free version of nuke to make short video for uploading fb? ⊙︿⊙
You also need talent :-) But actually Nuke is for advanced compositing. You may not even need it.
@@BlenderBob talent (´°̥̥̥̥̥̥̥̥ω°̥̥̥̥̥̥̥̥｀), last question sir, i follow Ian Hubert tutorial, i grab green footage online and remove screen green and turn it into image sequence, put it back into blender and build the enviroment around it, but something is not quite there, i want everything is dark blue tone but i cant change the coulor of image sequence so it looks pretty faky, as the question i asked you last night, does it mean i just need to learn Davinci sofware to do the final touch for the color.
@@ashdalat. you can do color corrections directly in the shader of your character. Try to play with brightness contrast and curves. Hubert is the only person I know that renders characters directly in his scenes. Nobody does that.
@@BlenderBob ヾ(*’Ｏ’*)/ thank you very much, sir, finally i know what to do next, good night
Hey bob, how do you track a helmet? is it manual tracking or can software handle it?
Well, that's like asking a contractor for the price of a house whit showing the plans. :-) Hard to say without seeing the shot. Can you tell me more?
@@BlenderBob for example the shots in ad Astra where the reflection had to be added on the visors, I'm assuming they were reflective in the clean plate too so it must have been tough to track it by identifying tracking points... So also the motion of the helmet is abstract, it's moving at a speed on the ground, how would one approach tracking this helmet?
@@amanthangellapally2067 Hi Aman! Funny you asked because I was thinking of making a new section of Blender Bob where people could ask me questions about CG in general. Ok, so for the helmets, there was no visor at all. I modeled the helmets and they were tracked by the tracking department. Then a camera was setup where the actors are in the scene and we rendered it with a very wide angle. We then used these renders as environment projections. That'a how you get the perfect reflection in the helmets.
@@BlenderBob wow, so I am hypothesizing a method to track the helmets, correct me if I'm wrong,
the helmets you modeled will be put on rigged astronaut models, the rover is first tracked and then the astronaut rigs are parented to the rover and positioned to match visually, then the movement of the head and torso are animated to keep the helmet in the right 3D space...
But then since the 360 video is captured, now I'm thinking we would not need the 3d movement of the visors in the direction perpendicular to the screen, it is already inherent in the video due to the motion of the rover so a 2d track of the visors would do the job too...
Which of these two approaches would have been used the tracking team or is it entirely different?
@@amanthangellapally2067 We didn't model, track and rigged astronauts for the helmet reflections. Only the visor was in the scene. The 360 camera is stable but moves at the same speed as the rover. The only CG astronaut is the one being pushed out of the rover (for closeup shots).
did you work at soho vfx in toronto
Nop! Atomic Fiction in Montreal
Why does every film have to be like this? I've only seen this one clip and I'm traumatized D:
edit:
now I've watched a bit further... I'm surprised your nightmares didnt involve throwing dead astronauts out of cars :O
But really, from the VFX side, it's amazing.
Well, I was part of the throwing dead astronauts out of the rover... for the layout...
@Blender Bob i didn't mean it as an offence, scenes like this are so shocking... i dont know how people can sleep after watching things like this all the time :)
Never took it as offensive. :-)
Heeeey there blender bob
Álvaro! Wassup?
@@BlenderBob blending around
Fusion is super powerful, and it is being developed further by BMD. Take a look at the power users over at www.steakunderwater.com/wesuckless/viewforum.php?f=16 who use it in production daily. You will get an idea about whats possible, that's if your interested to know more.
How funny, you start out naming what, $10K worth of software per year at the beginning. Please go though the entire pipline, especially modeling damage like dents.
Well, the entire pipeline is all Maya/Houdini/Renderman and no Blender involved at all. The point of this clip is to show that even if you don't have all these software it would still be possible to do AdAstra in Blender. And it's not like this is a one man job. A big part of the company was involved in theses shots so I know all the steps that were done. All the damage stuff was done in Houdini, as it should.