Compositing necessary for short film

#1

I’m wondering if it will be necessary to use compositing software to edit render passes for a short film I am making. I want to avoid it if possible.

The film will be less than 5 minutes long, all CG (no live-action integration) in a single outdoor scene. Lighting will be dim light from the sky in the first few shots, and then bright sunlight in later shots. There will be only one character.

I read in this thread that in past films Pixar would often do everything completely in-camera without editing individual render passes:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/archive/index.php/t-887987.html

I will need video editing software though, for video encoding and sound, so I may need to buy something like Premiere. From what I have read, After Effects doesn’t work well for things like editing cuts, encoding, and adding sound.

#2

I’m wondering if it will be necessary to use compositing software to edit render passes for a short film I am making. I want to avoid it if possible.
If you can get the result you want in the render - no, not necessary. However it’s usually easier and faster to tweak render passes iin post then rerendering the whole frame in 3D.

From what I have read, After Effects doesn’t work well for those things.
So does Nuke. Both are pieces of software and don’t do anything on their own. Yes, Nuke is the industry standard and it has some clear advantages when it comes to EXR, but to say “doesn’t work well” is plain BS, it’s the operator that creates results, not the software.
Some find layer based compositing like in AE easier to learn and use, some like Nuke’s node based compositing better(I always miss features in AE that I have in Nuke. And the other way around). It’s a matter of personal preferences and probably resources.

#3

I meant that After Effects is not intended for video encoding and adding sound, as Premiere is. But this is not based on personal experience, so I don’t know that for sure.
However I am certain that some software is worse for certain tasks, and so slows the process down a lot, or in some cases is so poorly suited for the task that the operator’s skill becomes irrelevant.

#4

After Effects and Nuke encode just fine, but they are more shot-based applications. Definitely not editing software. Premiere, Final Cut Pro X or Avid are good for editing.

Like Scrimski said, if you have the render power to keep tweaking your lighting just right you do not need any compositing. Pixar indeed didn’t use any compositing for a long time, but they have a pretty powerful render farm at their disposal, not to mention a custom build renderer.

Setting up your passes, mattes and such might take some time, but my experience as a compositor is that it is pretty handy to be able to tweak things in Nuke or AE. Its easier to see the shot in motion, or judge it in a sequence then just rendering frames in Maya.

It also depends on the people you’re working with. If there is not a proper compositor it wouldn’t make sense, and might as well do it all in lighting.

#5

Thanks for the replies! Since I will be working alone and I am pretty happy with the basic renders I have been getting, I don’t think that I will be using compositing on this project.