PDA

View Full Version : Photoshop or Shake type program for 2d composite


katekatesmith
12-03-2008, 12:05 PM
Hi,

Very beginners question - i've just began 3d modeling and would like to at some stage begin compositing these models with 2d photos as a final still image.

just wondering if i should start looking at learning photoshop more for such composites, or start looking a shake, digital fusion type compositing program.

thanks so much for your help,

love kate

Makaze
12-03-2008, 07:22 PM
Well, the first question would be, are you planning on compositing a still, or an animated sequence?
Because if its a still, I'd say get more in depth in photoshop.

But if its an animated sequence, you need to get deeper into compositing software. For quick composites I'd say After Effects is a good place to start, since its very similar to photoshop.

For a little more advanced compositing, Shake is probably the way to go (or Nuke, but its still quite expensive).
Fusion might be good too, but I don't have enough experience in that program to give a good answer.

So it basically comes down to what it is you are aiming for.

katekatesmith
12-04-2008, 10:43 AM
aiming to stick with still images...so photoshop and maya is my best bet?

katekatesmith
12-04-2008, 11:51 AM
i'm just sticking with still images - so would maya + zbrush + maya (my preferred 3d application) be the way to go? any other software i should look at

katekatesmith
12-04-2008, 02:11 PM
that was meant to be maya + photoshop for the best way for still image compositing.

Halford
12-04-2008, 02:56 PM
for stills it would be perfect ;)

theotheo
12-04-2008, 05:07 PM
I'm using fusion for all the compositing stuff. Only photoshop if I need to paint or retouch on stills. I like keeping things "live".

-theo

Makaze
12-04-2008, 07:23 PM
Yes, Maya and Photoshop sounds definitely like the best combination. As far as I know, no program beats PS in still image editing. You have a lot more features in PS that you wont get in other compositing programs for image editing.

katekatesmith
12-06-2008, 02:45 AM
theotheo just wondering if there is actually any real advantage with using fusion as opposed to photoshop, or can you get the same results and its just your preference?

katekatesmith
12-08-2008, 12:40 AM
anyone? fusion versus photoshop

chemkid
12-08-2008, 12:38 PM
hi katekatesmith!

first, i'm sure this post will confuse you, but i need to post it anyway.

for long i thought photoshop is the best application for still compositing. especially using passes rendered from a 3d-package. lots of professional tutorials (free and expensive) teach you the way to use photoshop with your favorite 3d-app. but...

recently i'm trying to use 32-bit floating data output from my 3d-app (xsi). to be precise: .exr format is the flavor of my choice. (a thread about gamma and linear workflow got me started - http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=2&t=610790&page=1&pp=15 ).
since i'm using mental ray for my output (i recommend using mr in maya, too) i tried mental images workflow for a composite of the mia-material-x output. it recommends keeping some channels floating in 32-bit... anyway, sorry for too much details, i cut the details here and come staight to the point!

for more control on a certain pass i've got two channels as .exr files and now have to multiply these images to get the final result. but photoshop can't handle the files.

- the .exr files seem empty! just blank rgb... nothing!
- after saving 8-bit images for testing in photoshop, i can't multiply them correctly. the result is always way off!!!

so, i downloaded the PLE-version (free-trial) of NUKE http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/
nuke is famous for handling the .exr format... i wanted to give it a try.

- the .exr files (photoshop didn't showed anything) worked just right. of course they contained my mentalray output.
- the multiply works as it should and combining the two channels is easy as cake.

now what... i think photoshop is way behind the schedule! why is the .exr file format implemented so poorly and after all these years the handling of 32-bit files so bad?!

to answer your question from my point of view:

take your renderings into a REAL compositor like NUKE or FUSION (nope, after effects is like photoshop.... layerbased and poor .exr format handling). and learn photoshop as well... because photoshop is STILL a good application for retouching your images. just like theotheo said:

I'm using fusion for all the compositing stuff. Only photoshop if I need to paint or retouch on stills. I like keeping things "live".

end of transmission...


chem!

Halford
12-09-2008, 01:51 PM
hi katekatesmith!

first, i'm sure this post will confuse you, but i need to post it anyway.

for long i thought photoshop is the best application for still compositing. especially using passes rendered from a 3d-package. lots of professional tutorials (free and expensive) teach you the way to use photoshop with your favorite 3d-app. but...

recently i'm trying to use 32-bit floating data output from my 3d-app (xsi). to be precise: .exr format is the flavor of my choice. (a thread about gamma and linear workflow got me started - http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=2&t=610790&page=1&pp=15 ).
since i'm using mental ray for my output (i recommend using mr in maya, too) i tried mental images workflow for a composite of the mia-material-x output. it recommends keeping some channels floating in 32-bit... anyway, sorry for too much details, i cut the details here and come staight to the point!

for more control on a certain pass i've got two channels as .exr files and now have to multiply these images to get the final result. but photoshop can't handle the files.

- the .exr files seem empty! just blank rgb... nothing!
- after saving 8-bit images for testing in photoshop, i can't multiply them correctly. the result is always way off!!!

so, i downloaded the PLE-version (free-trial) of NUKE http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/
nuke is famous for handling the .exr format... i wanted to give it a try.

- the .exr files (photoshop didn't showed anything) worked just right. of course they contained my mentalray output.
- the multiply works as it should and combining the two channels is easy as cake.

now what... i think photoshop is way behind the schedule! why is the .exr file format implemented so poorly and after all these years the handling of 32-bit files so bad?!

to answer your question from my point of view:

take your renderings into a REAL compositor like NUKE or FUSION (nope, after effects is like photoshop.... layerbased and poor .exr format handling). and learn photoshop as well... because photoshop is STILL a good application for retouching your images. just like theotheo said:



end of transmission...


chem!

I do agree, but is not needed.
I love nuke, use it at work and at home for my personal work, actualy I'm crazy about it.
But if you work only on stills, no need to use exr images with passes merged into the channels, you can save each layer on a different file.
You can use tiff files 32bit float with no problem, and they'll be just fine in photoshop.

budgetwhise, you'll be fine with photoshop, because the price of nuke is equal to the entire Adobe CS4 master collection

You'll have more freedom in photoshop then nuke for some "touches/painting" over your image to finalise it.

my 2c

Hal.

CGTalk Moderation
12-09-2008, 01:51 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.