It's not really my own idea, i looked some tutorial and put together the parts that i loved. So the green particles are based on a Resolve template and i changed the font to a special matrix font. I also use some blur and light rays and a moving camera. The particle part is the first video in the timeline and my face the second. Blend mode in particles is foreground and my face has the blend mode luminance (lum). So i masked my face and put more contrats on it and the result is the face effekt. Hitfilm is only used in the outro, most work is done in Davincy resolve studio...
Check out my newest HitFilm video... Everything You Need to Know about the Timeline Cache in HitFilm 2021.2 (Version 17)
Clear and concise explanation! Well done!
Check out my newest HitFilm video... What's the Difference between Performance and Quality Proxies
I repeat myself too much, but...
Performance proxies should never be less than half rez. Quality tanks too much at 1/4 rez. Just remember all the playback quality reports on this forum,m when you find out their playback resolution was set a 1/4. All this given that performance proxy is the only available option fo rez reduction.
Although in a world where 8x exists, and where dev just needs/wants to clamp/control things, I think a cap at 1080 (aka HD) would still give a descent working edit quality. 1080 is good. So in this scenario, UHD and 8k would get a performance proxy at 1080.
Of course in an 8k world, FxHome would probably still have to clamp even on quality proxy. The encoder may not allow an 8k rez (level 6+). Or if you want 8k support you have to pay more for that, which can easily not be in the cards. Either way, the tools may not be capable. In this scenario an 8k quality proxy would have to be UHD. Not full rez as all others. Does not seem like a big deal at all.
One man's opinion.
@NormanPCN So your suggestion for Performance Proxies would be half rez up to 1080 vertical, then cap it there, unless it's a vertical video, then cap at 1080 horizontal? If so, that makes sense to me!
Forget the horizontal/vertical thing. Just think half rez. Why make things complicated.
Vertical UHD at half rez would be 1080x1920. 4096x2160 video, vertical 2160x4096 half rez => 1080x2048. 2048 is still less than 2160.
This goes for 1440 video. Common in screen capture. So this is 2560x1440. half rez is 1280x720. Kind of a recognizable video resolution. vertical => 720x1280 half rez.
Of course, encoder/decoder limitations can get in the way and force you to clamp simple design rules. e.g. If the Hitfilm Mainconcept AVC encoder is limited to 2160 vertical.
Really Hitfilm needs to use the HW encoders as well. At least as an option (due to AMD legacy or event current?)). NVENC has a 4096x4096 limitation on AVC. Likely the same for the decoder.
Now if one wants to clamp things for a more arbitrary reason, then an HD clamp limit makes more sense to me. 1920x1080 or 1080x1920. Really with even UHD, if you cannot get smooth basic timeline performance at HD (via proxy) then off proxy UHD+ performance is kinda unthinkable. You gotta rethink your project rez. To me 540 video is "unthinkable" for UHD projects. Buts that's me.
@NormanPCN What if you gave the user the ability to customize those settings? Maybe instead of High Performance and Quality Proxy settings, you had High Performance, Quality, and Customized Proxy settings. In the Customized option you could set the percentage of resolution and the top side clamp.
What if you gave the user the ability to customize those settings?
Okay, don't start getting logical on us here. 😁 But that opens a can of worms one probably wants to avoid. FxHome is using AVC for the proxy codec. The worms are the encoding settings including bitrate. Users cannot be expected to know how to set that up. Of course Hitfilm could easily have a lookup table over a/the range of supported resolutions and they grab the closest based on the user resolution selection.
Resolve provides such user control of resolution and bitrate quality for their "optimized media" setup. I stopped updating Vegas at 14. Proxy showed up at V12. Their proxy was fixed at 720p. I don't think I ever tested anything beyond HDp30 and HDp60. Vegas used/uses XDCAM EX as their proxy codec. MPEG-2. If Vegas is still 720 I don't think that is really truely acceptable for UHD. Still much better than 540.
Vegas, and others frankly, do have a feature Hitfilm should have implemented when they implemented the proxy this version. I mean seriously what the hell. It's a flashing neon sign.
In Vegas/others if you set the viewer quality to "Best" then it will not use the proxy if it exists. It only uses the proxy when present when the quality lower than the best/max setting. Hifilm does have a viewer quality setting. Given that the Hitfilm viewer quality feature offers user selection of on/off of various items, it probably should have a "Use Proxy if present" check box for a given quality setting. In Hitfilm you have no ability to do this. You have to remove the proxy. If you want it back then you have to re-create it. What the hell! Even a global use proxies when present in the viewer option menu is probably good enough. You just have to debate the best UI you like and user experience. Feature additions like superglow are standalone. No so with proxies, IMO.
What's the workflow. You want to do something precise. Like masking, checking focus and sharpening settings to name a few. So kick the proxy off, aka best quality or whatever. Do your thing. Kick back to a smoother/faster timeline via proxy. In Hitfilm the paused quality setting seems ideal for this. As long as features do not force paused quality and thus negating this viewer feature if/when you need/want something giving better perf.
Check out my newest HitFilm video... Everything You Need to Know about the Super Glow in HitFilm 2021.2 (Version 17) Pro!
I needed this!
@FilmSensei Great stuff! Makes me want to get back to my Enterprise shots again.
Not sure first timers will understand what the"Enterprise Emissive" layer is for. Can't remember if you already had a tutorial on that? Oh, looks like you did one a while back. I assume this is the same method you used?
@Stargazer54 Yes sir... that's the tutorial that I did. I think I will throw a card in for that in this newest tutorial. Thanks for bring that up!