HF3 and a HF2 Shot Planning Questions
I got into Hitfilm through the Hitfilm for Mac Kickstarter. I used the software only once, and that was to track some text into a video. I saw a lot of potential for the software but it has been sitting unused in my drive for over a year. I’m now working on a project in which I intend to add atmospheric particles to a few shots, in the exact same manner as the Hitfilm “atmospheric chaff” tutorial. I now see that Hitfilm 3 Pro has been released and this has brought on a lot of questions for me. First let me say I love the new look, the darker pallet and new layout makes the software look professional. That type of stuff may not matter to many people but it does matter to me.
- I know the advertise better performance, but do you, the users agree? Using the same computer that I’m running HFU2, can I reliably expect better performance on HFP3?
- Does HFP3 interface support retina resolutions?
It is a shame the upgrade price makes it so I can’t justify the purchase. I can see the software well worth the price for people who will use it a lot, especially if this is also your editor (I edit in FCPX). I do feel the $200 upgrade price, (but not the full price), is high. An upgrade price in the $80-120 range would have made a lot more sense in my mind as “the consumer”. However “the consumer” has no working knowledge of what it takes to keep a software company profitable; and I would much rather see Hitfilm 3 exist even I can’t afford the upgrade, than to have FXHome join the race to the bottom if it does not make fiscal sense for them, and then see them go out of business. It makes me mad I’ve spent probably around that same $200 upgrade fee in FCPX plugins, though this has been several small purchases in the span of about 2 years. I wish I could uninstall them and get refunded so I can get Hitfilm 3, which looks to have nearly the same functionality of the plugins I have plus 1000% more stuff. But alas, the HF plugins did not exist at the time when I needed them, and now I’m committed to get my money’s worth out of my past purchases.
Now onto my project:
I’ll probably have around 10 shots with the atmospheric particles. I plan on using Mocha Hit Film for all those shots except one. That one shot will be untrackable, since it is a steadicam shot circling around the main character. All shots take place in a forest. Since I can’t build a circular track on the ground to get an exact move, I plan on marking a 6-foot radius on the ground around the actor. The plan is to use a handheld gimbal and walk the marked circle while somehow managing to keep the actor centered in the frame. I’ll need to keep one eye on the ground to walk the circle and somehow another on the monitor to get correct framing. My insistence on getting a perfect circle is of course because since I can’t have Mocha generate the camera path for me, I will have to generate the path myself in Hitfilm. Do you think this will work? I worry that I will inevitably get a little tilting motion while walking the circle, and that I will undoubtedly not walk a perfect circle. The perfect circle worries me less, since that may not be too noticeable. But small tilts the live action footage with no corresponding tilts in the particle composite will definitely be noticeable. I wonder how easy it will be add, and correctly match, manually, that inevitable small tilting motions. Also I’m thinking throwing 2 or 3 high quality digital 3D trees (of I can find them free or very cheap) in there will enhance the shot since the particles can interact with them.
Anyone here who can share experience with manual camera motion matching I would love to hear your stories. Any ideas or suggestions to my planned shoot and post processing are very welcome.