PDA

View Full Version : Post CG vs Character Generator



deejay
01-07-2005, 05:34 PM
Here's something I've noticed on my system...

I created 2 projects that are exactly the same with the exception of how I created text ....
I created one with Post CG and the other one with the Character Generator.
The project made with Post CG upon first loading ... background renders before I get the green play light.
The project made with the Character Generator doesn't background render at all and gives me the green play light right away.
Why is that?
And
Why do Post CG files have a .cg extension?
As you know Character Generated 'Project' files have the .cg extension and the files it creates are .png.
Does this have anything to do with Post CG created text requiring more system resources?
Can someone else do this and confirm my observations?
Thanks!

ScorpioProd
01-07-2005, 08:43 PM
What you're saying makes sense to me. Logically, it would have to background render out the actual CG pages when using the CG POST, while from the regular CG, you have already rendered them out.

Ivan
01-07-2005, 10:45 PM
If you grab a .CG file that was created in CG and drop it on the timeline you will notice that it displays the last page of the .CG project. You can go to Control Tree and change the settings on that last page. There may also be a way to get to the previous pages but I have not found that yet.

Ivan

deejay
01-07-2005, 10:49 PM
Ok, thanks Eugene...
Your reply got me to think about what CG Post is doing and I now have a better understanding of what's going on.
Personally I don't see too much advantage to using CG Post over the Character Generator.
I've had different projects which used the same text so it was easy to go get that text in a Character Generated Projects folder ... you can't do that with CG Post especially if you blew away the project with CG Post embedded text.
And...
I don't like the idea that my VTP has to background render because of text.
Thanks for your thoughts ..... C ya at NAB!

ScorpioProd
01-08-2005, 02:53 AM
Here's my view on CG POST versus the real CG...

There are only TWO reasons to use CG POST:

1) If you want to animate your text, with moves for the individual lines and reveals and such, it's the only way to do it. CG POST does handle this adequately.

2) If you are looking to do a one-off text page, you can jump into it right in VT-Edit and create it there. This should be an easy one for CG POST to do adequately as well, but I honestly feel it fails badly at this. The reason being the complete LACK of the necessary global controls to prevent you having to dig deep into control trees for SIMPLE, NECESSARY normal things like kerning settings for instance. No global controls with all that blank GUI real estate? Having to manually set them for EACH line of text?!? Now that's stupid, IMHO.

So, except for case number one, I do all my CG in the real CG program, which I've honestly learned to enjoy as reliable and acceptable.

Scott Bates
01-08-2005, 08:25 AM
I'm not disagreeing with anything you say above Eugene, but I've found that CG Post does work well for me in the following "simple" situations.

Needed a bunch of lower thirds in a home movie film transfer project along the lines of "1964 - Florida Vacation with the Smiths", etc.

1. Determine which lower third was going to require the most space in order to set kerning, line spacing, desired font, color, shadow, etc.

2. Create that lower third with CG Post with all the necessary parameters set and place it in the appropriate spot in the project.

3. Control-drag (copy) that CG to the location at the beginning of the project where the first lower third was needed.

4. Edit the text to meet the needs for that location; all the CG attributes remained as I originally set them, only the text changed.

5. "Rinse and Repeat" for all the other needed lower thirds.

Yes, I could have done it in the CG Program and saved out all the pages as .pngs, and yes, it did require some background rendering if I reloaded the project later, but I didn't find that rendering time significant for the 20 or so CGs in the project. I tried it this way the first time just to see if it worked, found it did, and have used the same process a few times since.

Just my experience, FWIW..... :)

deejay
01-08-2005, 09:18 AM
That works Scott...
I keep thinking that if one ever has to rebuild a project then he'll really have to rebuild the project .... CG and all if CG Post was used :(

Scott Bates
01-08-2005, 10:51 AM
Yup, unless we drag those CG post "clips" into a file bin and back up that bin somewhere off the system? Maybe, haven't tried doing that....

ScorpioProd
01-08-2005, 01:05 PM
Cloning like that seems like a decent workaround. But global settings would still be better. :)

wvp
01-10-2005, 08:23 AM
I believe your comment on global settings was for applying settings to each line on the same page.
Having to manually set them for EACH line of text?!?. Yes, it would be nice to be able to apply settings to multiple lines.
"Cloning" a clip is not really a work-a-round but rather a useful feature when you want to create several pages that are identical, except for the wording.
Haven't tried it yet, but I would imagine you could also create presets in the tool shed & apply these as needed to other clips

ScorpioProd
01-10-2005, 01:09 PM
Good point, you are correct, the cloning wouldn't alleviate having to set each line manually in the first place, but at least once you did it once, well...

But again, I will be avoiding CG POST till these deficiencies are addressed.

UnCommonGrafx
01-10-2005, 01:32 PM
You are such a YOUNG curmudgeon(sp?), Eugene. :o

You are absolutely correct on the idea of global controls; or, expressed a bit differently, a MUCH better UI that actually EXPOSES the power of the tool Right now, the interface is so... dos.

I do love CG Post (is that it's name?) for the animation capabilities it has. And when this new UI comes along we will still need the individual line control as that's some great power.

I've always advocated for a flash engine within the CG toolset and this is getting closer and closer. The inability to save ANYTHING drives me Nuts - As Deejay says, you have to rebuild it ALL. Saving settings of motion from kerning, text, artwork moving around would seem to be a common thought of need for such a complex tool whose sole purpose is repeatability of quality work. :mad:

This is what has deterred me in playing with it, to some degree. It does get used as it's quicker than going into DFX or Mirage for animation...

ScorpioProd
01-10-2005, 06:17 PM
Is CG-POST currently toolshedable???

Could I actually create a preset for "three line CG still with this font this size and this kerning???

UnCommonGrafx
01-10-2005, 06:21 PM
Never thought of THAT, Eugene. I will try tonight.

Ivan
01-10-2005, 09:02 PM
Nope, comes up "nothing to save"

Ivan

ScorpioProd
01-10-2005, 10:31 PM
Well, then I stand by my assessment.

There are a lot of good things in VT[4] that are promising, but just not there yet.

I mean, just look at Toolshed. Some really cool tools have been added, but there's stuff that's been there since VT[2] that is just nostalgic and non-functional. Audio types, for instance, for those that remember these from the Flyer third-party days. If a function isn't going to do something, I'd rather not see it sitting there, IMHO.

SCS5
01-20-2005, 07:37 AM
CG Post.........PLEASE TAKE ALL THE TEXT ADJUSTMENT TOOLS OUT OF THE CONTROL TREE!!! & PUT THEM WHERE THERE USEFULL, NEXT TO ALL THE OTHER TEXT OPTIONS on the main CG post page..It would cut my text animation time 10 fold!... Right now, when a client wants quick chnges to complex CG pages it takes forever to make the changes to 1 line of text, nevermind 5 or 10 lines! I'm just digging through layer after layer in the control tree to do simple things. This program now has so much potential, but, it's been hobbled by poor implimentation. ALSO ADD a SAVE PAGE, or PROPERTIES (Animated Kerning, Moves, Rotation, Etc.) OPTION!!!

Thanks NT

Scott