PF Track vs. Boujou with XSI

[Kris Rivel]

Anyone have any personal recommondations of Boujou vs. PF Track in regards to XSI?  I've only dabbled in Boujou here and there and that was quite awhile ago so I'm looking to beef up my tracking skills a bit.  The price difference is pretty extreme it seems with Boujou costing about 10k and PF track about 5k.  I saw PF track demonstrated at our last NYC get together and was impressed but was curious how well it really works with XSI vs. Boujou.  Thanks.

Kris

[Joe Laffey]

Get SynthEyes. Save money, and save time. It works incredibly well with
XSI. You can track almost anything with it. There may be a few scenes
where you may need PFTrack (and other scenes PFTrack won't track that
SynthEyes will). But SynthEyes is tough to beat for accuracy and ease of
use. The support is wonderful. The author is very responsive. I am not a
Boujou fan. We encountered too many scenes that we had trouble with, which
tracked perfectly in SynthEyes in about 10-20 mins. SynthEyes takes full
advantage of our 8 proc machines for solves. It is available in a 64 bit
version to load more frames into RAM as well. It also has a killer 3D
stabilizer that kinda has to be experienced... and built-in distortion
tools as well.

http://ssontech.com/

--
Joe Laffey | Visual Effects for Film and Video
LAFFEY Computer Imaging | -------------------------------------
St. Louis, MO | Show Reel http://LAFFEY.tv/?e06394
USA | -------------------------------------
. | -*- Digital Fusion Plugins -*-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail here will be rejected --> "Real Trap" <r_t...@laffeycomputer.com>
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majo...@Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi

[Kris Rivel]

Ah yes...forgot about Synth Eyes.  Thanks!

[Kris Rivel]

I was reading their tips section upon registering for a download and it mentions that the footage needs to have some translation and may not work great for shots with a lot of panning and very little tracking.  I may be dealing with a lot of crazy hand held shots so how does SynthEyes stack up to this kind of stuff?

Kris

On 8/9/07, Joe Laffey <j...@laffey.tv> wrote:

[Raffaele Fragapane]

PF works fine with xsi, we just pumped an odd 70 shots through it, as
does boujou4 anyway.
Out of the two though, I would choose a third, syntheyes.

Last time I used syntheyes over 2 years ago it was already preferrable
to Boujou's most recent (that was a plague to fight with during a recent
job), and PF (which I only used to toy around with and to do a grand
total of one shot) only seemed marginally better then syntheyes was a
while ago to me, I would be surprised if the most recent version of it
wasn't a good deal better.

PF has a really nice set of 3D helpers though that I haven't had a
chance to explore, kinda the same of boujou4, except they probably work.

Nick Petit might have a fairly informed opinion to offer about both if
he reads this, and if he ever leaves his drunken stupor.

******************************
| Raffaele Fragapane |
| Rising Sun Pictures |
|"The only way, is all the way"|
******************************

Kris Rivel wrote:

>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.0/927 - Release Date: 7/30/2007 5:02 PM

[Joe Laffey]

On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, Kris Rivel wrote:

> I was reading their tips section upon registering for a download and it
> mentions that the footage needs to have some translation and may not work
> great for shots with a lot of panning and very little tracking. I may be
> dealing with a lot of crazy hand held shots so how does SynthEyes stack up
> to this kind of stuff?

It does well with the same types of shots that any other 3d tracker does.
Consequently, it does poorly with shot that other 3d trackers do poorly
with.

A tracker needs parallax to calculate in 3D. SynthEyes can also calculate
a pan, but the camera needs to be on sticks for this for best results.

Handheld shots are actually often some of the easiest best shots to track.
They are much more forgiving to slipping and bouncing. A smooth dolly, on
the other hand, must be a dead-on track.

If you are not up on supervising tracking shots I would suggest reading up
on it (Tim Dobbert has a decent book, though it is a little basic). Also
the manual and tutorials are quite good. It may behove you to get an
VFX super experienced with matchmoving on-set. You need lots of good
points or natural points to track on, and they need to be at various
depths. Outdoor scenes usually track quite well with no trackers.
Greenscreen shots, need trackers at different depths, etc.

It can be very advantageous to shoot your footage with a clip shutter (90
degree or 45 degree instead of 180). This reduces the motion blur (that
you then add back in later with Reel Smart, or by hand.) Unless your DP is
experienced with VFX he or she may object to this, as it changes the look
(and requires more light). So don't push too hard for this. (You also have
to know that the shot is conducive to adding motion blur back in with
something like Reel Smart, or you will waste your own time cleaning that
up later.)

Good luck.

--
Joe Laffey | Visual Effects for Film and Video
LAFFEY Computer Imaging | -------------------------------------

St. Louis, MO | Show Reel http://LAFFEY.tv/?e06395

[Joe Laffey]

On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, Raffaele Fragapane wrote:
>
> Last time I used syntheyes over 2 years ago it was already preferrable to
> Boujou's most recent (that was a plague to fight with during a recent job),
> and PF (which I only used to toy around with and to do a grand total of one
> shot) only seemed marginally better then syntheyes was a while ago to me, I
> would be surprised if the most recent version of it wasn't a good deal
> better.

Syntheyes 2007 or so (the versions are by date) is indeed significantly
better than the last version. The autotracker is much, much improved, and
yiou also get the 3d stabilizer, better 2d tracking, and a number of other
things.

--
Joe Laffey | Visual Effects for Film and Video
LAFFEY Computer Imaging | -------------------------------------

St. Louis, MO | Show Reel http://LAFFEY.tv/?e06396

USA | -------------------------------------
. | -*- Digital Fusion Plugins -*-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail here will be rejected --> "Real Trap" <r_t...@laffeycomputer.com>

[Andy Jones]

I like PFTrack and Syntheyes both a lot better than Boujou, but I've got more experience with PFTrack.  I think Joe's comment about shooting with a smaller shutter angle is a really good one, especially for hand-held shots.  The biggest problem I've encountered with hand-held shots is that you can get really inconsistent blur from frame to frame, so you're constantly having to switch back and forth between tracking a streak or a dot, and the pattern-recognition software sort of falls apart.  But like Joe said, whether or not you can actually get a DP to shoot that way is a whole other matter, and depends on how much motion blur you're going to have to reintroduce, as well as the amount of light available, and how much depth of field you want.  If you're shooting with a digital camera that has a smaller CCD, it may be okay to open up the aperture a bit, since there's more depth of field anyway.

I think the key to getting tracking software to work well is to provide it with a healthy serving of manual tracks at any given moment, then use the auto-tracks for statistical significance.  Also, be sure to get accurate lens data and set the camera film back appropriately.  It's helpful if you can shoot a distortion grid too.  PFTrack has some lens distortion capabilities built into it, and I've found that it can make a pretty big difference in how well a shot tracks.  It seems to be particularly helpful when you're tracking an unknown lens.

- Andy

On 8/9/07, Joe Laffey <j...@laffey.tv> wrote:

[Kris Rivel]

Thanks everyone for the recommondations and tips.  I'm pretty comfortable I think with the on-set part of it...just haven't done much tracking.  I may end up farming it out to someone else to do in the end though...we'll see.  In the meantime, I'm going to try out this SynthEyes...sounds like a winner to me.

Kris

[Gene Crucean]

Kris, talk to Tim at QM. He'll have some good advice and tips for you.

[Andre DeAngelis]

We have tried both and had a lot of success with PFtrack.  

 

PFtrack has much better innovation IMO.  Boujou 3 and 4 have offered very little in that regard.

 

AD

 

---

[Todd Alan Peleg]

ok.. w ell.. to put my opinion into the mix..
i was at that demo of pftrack... and i was thoroughly impressed..

but then i just did a job where we needed a bunch of tracking done.. and me and Phill tried boujou4 and pftrack on the same scene..
and they tracked exactly the same..

so.. nothing helped there..but i wasn;'t actually in love with the way pftrack worked... meaning,.. the interface... and there were a few things that i just didn't love..
that said.
.. i have used boujou a lot for the past couple of years.. off and on.. and maybe i am just comfortable with it.. but i have been able to (especially in boujou 4) get tracks on just about anything i need... within reason..
i have a couple of shots that i think are just nearly impossible to "track" short of eyeballing it.. i would love to see how syntheyes handles those.. if it can't then i really feel that MOST of these packages work basically the same.. and the benefit to one or the other lies in the additional features provided..

i am really happy in boujou.. but i think when you compare any of these (not to be obvious.. but) you must compare the latest with the latest to be fair..

one other thing.. boujou apparently in 3 and definitely in 4.. have taken care of the after effects factor.. they output DIRECTLY to after effects.. which we did a lot on this job.. and it is easy and flawless as i;ve seen.. and quick.. tis just an option to save.. and it works.. done..

and thats important to me.. here.. where i am now.

not sure if that info helps..
thought i'd share..

todd

oh.. and yes.. boujou is expensive..

[wind...@nyc.rr.com]

Becareful of adjusting the shutter. If you reduce the shutter and pan
quickly or something moves thru the frame side to side you can get strobing.

It used to be called the seven second pan rule.

db

[Joe Laffey]

On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, wind...@nyc.rr.com wrote:

> Becareful of adjusting the shutter. If you reduce the shutter and pan
> quickly or something moves thru the frame side to side you can get strobing.
>
> It used to be called the seven second pan rule.

But the nice thing is that you can always add the blur back in the post.

--
Joe Laffey | Visual Effects for Film and Video
LAFFEY Computer Imaging | -------------------------------------

St. Louis, MO | Show Reel http://LAFFEY.tv/?e06400

USA | -------------------------------------
. | -*- Digital Fusion Plugins -*-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail here will be rejected --> "Real Trap" <r_t...@laffeycomputer.com>

[wind...@nyc.rr.com]

Its not about blur but lack of information between one frame and the next.

db

[Raffaele Fragapane]

when boujou works, it's great.
It's when there's a shot that it doesn't agree with that some other
applications let you beat things into submission more often then not,
while boujou will just flip a finger in your direction and laugh at your
misery.

If you want to compare it to other apps you have to do it on shots it
doesn't agree with, not on the ones it tracks succesfully at the first go.

******************************
| Raffaele Fragapane |
| Rising Sun Pictures |
|"The only way, is all the way"|
******************************

Todd Alan Peleg wrote:

>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* owne...@Softimage.COM [mailto:owne...@Softimage.COM] *On
>> Behalf Of *Kris Rivel
>> *Sent:* August 9, 2007 12:24 AM
>> *To:* XSI ListServer
>> *Subject:* PF Track vs. Boujou with XSI

>>
>>
>>
>> Anyone have any personal recommondations of Boujou vs. PF Track in
>> regards to XSI? I've only dabbled in Boujou here and there and that
>> was quite awhile ago so I'm looking to beef up my tracking skills a
>> bit. The price difference is pretty extreme it seems with Boujou
>> costing about 10k and PF track about 5k. I saw PF track demonstrated
>> at our last NYC get together and was impressed but was curious how
>> well it really works with XSI vs. Boujou. Thanks.
>>
>> Kris
>>

>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.0/927 - Release Date: 7/30/2007 5:02 PM
>
>

[Todd Alan Peleg]

well. bu tby the same token.. one can say.. the "hard to track" shots..
may do well in one and not other.. but.. it can vary.. pftrack may not
do well to something that boujou does ok with..

my only point is..

if you can't have all the packages you want... love the one you're with.

they all have pluses and minuses.. and i think mostly.. their all on the
same ground.. and if you use one.. thats the one you'll tout

if anyone wants.. i have a great shot thats a bitch to track that i keep
around to test various trackers...

todd