masking FX

aldred wrote on 3/25/2003, 7:01 PM
Hi
What options do I have for masking effects in V4? I have a simple landscape sequence with a straight horizontal horizon and I just want to apply stuff to the sky. The mask must have a blurred edge.
Is there any way I can directly mask an effect, or do I have to work with duplicate layers? It says in online help that I can 'limit the effects of a filter' using compositing in conjunction with a mask, so I'm guessing I maybe have to. And what's the 'mask roll' mentioned in online help?
Thanks
Mark
PS Is it just me, or is the online help not very helpful? I keep getting sent round in circles.

Comments

Cheno wrote on 3/25/2003, 8:39 PM
Mark,

You've got quite a few options for masking in Vegas, two of them are 1. using a black to white gradient fx and 2. using the cookie cutter fx with a soft edge (your blur) - both of these should work fine for you. If you're horizon changes, you can keyframe both of these fx.

mike
Tyler.Durden wrote on 3/26/2003, 6:31 AM
YOu might also consider chroma-keying the sky to create your mask...




HTH, MPH

Tips:
http://www.martyhedler.com/homepage/Vegas_Tutorials.html
JackHughs wrote on 3/26/2003, 9:35 AM
Aldred,

Take a look at page 204 of the Vegas 4 manual. I think the information presented should help clear up any questions regarding the meaning of "mask roll".

JackHughs
aldred wrote on 3/26/2003, 10:42 PM
Thanks.
So 'mask roll' just means an A or B roll containing a mask? Not a separate special roll called the 'Mask Roll'?
The thing that confuses me about this is ....
A mask in a track in A/B roll mode still functions as a mask. But what's the point of calling it a 'mask roll' (online help 'Mask Generator Filter') when mostly it will be a track not in roll mode?

Mark
JackHughs wrote on 3/27/2003, 11:06 AM
Mark,

I understand your consternation. My advice is - don't try to take everything presented literally, to do so will drive you to madness. All of the help entries and all the manuals represent the best efforts of an expert to communicate his knowledge of a given topic to those who have less knowledge of that topic.

Sometimes the communication is successful and sometimes it is less than successful. Most of the time, the reader has to decide which parts of any given communication to accept and which parts to be wary of. Of course, making these critical distinctions is very difficult for one who is low on the learning curve. Oddly enough, highly knowledgable persons often have the same problem - but for a totally different reason.

Most of us, deep down, want to believe what we read, especially what we read in technical publications. Authors are, after all "authorities" and, a technical education breeds faith in the written word. Therefore, we often go nuts trying to conform our understanding of the subject to what has been written.

Communication is not a perfect science. Just because a person knows a subject inside-out, doesn't mean that person will automatically be able to make that subject understandable to others. Remember that awful minority of really bad teachers you had to endure?

JackHughs