View Full Version : Keyframing blues...

09-24-2008, 01:46 AM
At my wit's end, here. Just spent the last 2 hours trying to get a camera to move in a PURELY linear fashion between 2 keyframes: don't want Beziers, Hermite, or any other fancy "extraneous ease around the keyframe motion." Just a straight linear move. Tried setting camera for all things Linear in graph editor, and I still get Bezier curve type motion along the Y-axis (and the camera zooming completely off the page I'm highlighting, too).

Is there a setting that sets Linear as default keyframe interpolation?

Thanks for any help. :)

Stunt Pixels
09-24-2008, 01:51 AM
Open the graph editor. Hit "o" for options. Change "default incoming curve" type to linear. Should get what you're after.

09-24-2008, 02:24 AM

You can also do the following to tidy up what already exists in the camera's movement......

Select your camera. Open the graph editor. Hit 'SHIFT+g' [this will show all animated properties in the graph editor]. Then press 'a' [to frame all]. Now right click and marquee select all of your keyframes.
Down on the right of the window [just above the TCB number editors] is a drop-down menu, set this to 'linear'.

The above, in conjunction with Stunt's suggestions should have you on your merry way. Isn't it.

Hope that helps.


09-24-2008, 02:32 AM
Right click over the key in the graph editor and select "stepped". That eliminates any curve between 2 keys.


09-24-2008, 03:12 AM
Thanks for the tips, guys...much appreciated. I'll implement them ASAP. In the meatime, i worked around the issue by placing an extra keyframe of the same type adjacent to the one that was giving me trouble. PITA, but worked.

Thanks again.

09-24-2008, 03:26 AM
Thanks for the tips, guys...much appreciated. I'll implement them ASAP. In the meatime, i worked around the issue by placing an extra keyframe of the same type adjacent to the one that was giving me trouble. PITA, but worked.

Thanks again.

That's basically what using either linear or stepped does...


09-24-2008, 05:53 AM
Except that the extra keyframes might give you spikes in subframes depending on the surrounding motion.

09-25-2008, 02:18 AM
Here's why this issue was so critically important to me...

Several weeks ago, a famous non-linear editing software company came to our TV station and installed a certain name-to-be-withheld software update. The computer on which I had been working went from a superpowered workhorse to a crash-and-burn boat anchor.

Combustion doesn't run without at least one crash per session on it now (some might say that's pretty good for Combustion, but it was never this unstable until the "upgrade"!)

Photoshop CS3 has become a crash-fest since the "upgrade, too, and even the name-withheld's own marginally useful pan & zoom plug-in for animating digital stills has become useless.

Set the wayback machine to last Friday, when I was tasked with editing one of our 5+ minute news "special projects" pieces, which always call for a lot of motion graphics. The only reliable tool I had left for animating scans and digital photos for this very scanned document-heavy piece, was Lightwave 3D 9.5 on the trusty laptop from which I am typing this message right now.

It is no exaggeration when I say that Lightwave saved my ***** on this piece (a franchise for which I've won 6 Emmys). I needed to keep the graphics simple, clean and easily readable in the relatively short amount of time each would be on the screen, and Lightwave came through like a champ, even impressing the hell out of the reporter and show producer, who had never seen graphics like these in a piece before. (When i get a chance, I'll upload a few screen grabs).

Workflow on motion graphics was to tidy the scans up in Photoshop CS3 (of which I own a license as well) and make note of the documents' finished image sizes. For instance, one of the docs was 2927 x 4257.

For the above document, I opened Modeler and created a box the was 29.27 x 45.27 x .25, with a smoothed, rounded edge having 3 radius segments (I wanted something with a little depth, due to the fact that some of the document edges would be visible), then image mapped the doc onto it using the automatic sizing feature, which preserved the aspect ratio of the document perfectly.

Then i just saved it and pulled it into Layout, applied a pre-produced QT motion background the art department had made, and animated the camera around the doc, simulating the effect of a mo-control rig. Guys, the results were quite satisfactory and the speed and ease at which I was able to get several of these effects shots done today, before the piece aired, was priceless. I'm used to having to live with less than perfect results from bad documents scans when "blown up" in Combustion or AE, because they just don't seem to have the rendering power Lightwave does. When I saw the finished renders on these docs, I fell in love. Lightwave may very well replace Combustion for most of my motion graphic needs.

Hats off to Newtek, and thanks to all here who gave this newb the feedback I needed to save this project.

09-25-2008, 02:27 AM
Awesome. :D

Glad to have been part of the help.
Any chance we all now get to share a photo of one of your Emmys? :p


09-25-2008, 02:37 AM
Sure...I'll even post a pic of those you can all share! :)

BTW, I rendered out with all raytracing turned off, with minimal motion blur (.5) and PLD 9-pass to a QT Animation file. Probably overkill, but the results were worth it.

The Dommo
09-25-2008, 04:23 AM
I'm guesing the unamed were either Autodesk or more-pleasing-for-me, Apple. :D

09-25-2008, 05:27 AM

Nice tale...


09-25-2008, 10:16 AM
I'm guesing the unamed were either Autodesk or more-pleasing-for-me, Apple. :D

Wrong on both counts, but it does start with an "A". :thumbsup:

09-25-2008, 11:17 AM
Ugh, Adobe. :)

09-25-2008, 10:55 PM
The other "A". lol

09-26-2008, 12:46 AM
Here's a couple of screen grabs I took from the finished QT Animation files. As noted before, these are some of the best renders on documents I've ever seen. Will definitely be using Lightwave for this kind of work in the future. :thumbsup:

The finished animations look just as good. :)

The thing I liked most about using Lightwave for this (aside from the fantastic renders) is that even though I had to protect the 4:3 image for people still using 4:3 sets, the perspective I can apply here - with almost no aliasing whatsoever - makes the 16:9 viewer glad he spent the big bucks on a widescreen TV. It's just a win-win for everyone! :)

P.S. I always scan at as a high a res as I can afford to work with, and always save those as uncompressed TIFs.

09-26-2008, 03:10 AM
Yup - they did turn out nice. Very crisp.

On the note of 'The other A'..... are we talking about Avid?
Man, I've never got on with their systems - good job I'm not an editor! :p


09-26-2008, 03:53 AM

09-26-2008, 04:17 AM
They look really good and clean - good story as well about getting out of that hole.....I guess Avid sort of did you a good turn in having to do those shots with LW :)


10-31-2008, 08:00 AM
For anyone interested, here is where you can find recent samples of how I'm using Lightwave in my work as a news editor:


The first url is the most recent work done with Lightwave, the second represents the story originally discussed in this thread.

So far I'm only using it to model (image map) and animate documents and web pages in these problem solver pieces, but have now used it to create some transitions for sports (see http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90886 for those).

Anyway, hats off again to Newtek for helping me tell these stories in a fresh and compelling way! :)

10-31-2008, 08:29 AM
Glad it all came through good - nice work Dude! :thumbsup: