Cineversity

Hello,
I have tracked complicated shot with automatic trackers and I have one object rotating in the scene.
Automatic trackers did a great job and even on that rotating object.

Now I would like to select those auto 2D trackers on the rotating object and exclude them from camera solve but keep them for object tracking. Is that possible?

I did the camera solve and its fine but I lost those moving 2D trackers on the rotating object.

Thank You.

Hi, grgart,

I have not found any information that automatic trackers will be used for Object Tracking. I do not have any information available that resulting Nulls can be selected to be added to the Object Tracker list.
https://www.cineversity.com/vidplaylist/motion_tracking_object_tracking_inside_cinema_4d/motion_tracking_object_tracking_inside_cinema_4d_motion_tracker_object_03

In fact, if you leave the tracking features on the moving object for the Camera Tracking, then the Solve of these features might be less precise in some cases.

I would clean up the automatic features before solving them. Then lock the solved camera features. Explore those if they produce useable camera data and then set up one or more Object Tracker

All the best

Well, I added manual trackers and it was a little bit time consuming but it is solved.

With 2D Auto Track, it was the case that I got perfect 2D autotrackers on the rotating object in the scene. But those need to be deleted to avoid bad camera solve.
It would be fantastic to have an option to bake auto trackers to manual trackers and exclude manual trackers from 3D camera solve.
Hope developers can implement something like this :D

Best Regards,

ZG

Hi ZG,

Yes, this would be certainly nice to have. Perhaps using the Mask Constrain Tags to provide the information to the algorithm what belongs to the object, and what not. Since we can have many objects in a scene, the mask itself needs an option to specify this.
For a suggestion, please use the following link.

https://www.maxon.net/en-us/support/suggestions/

However, typically the objects are smaller than the scene itself. If you used the Blaster-Walk footage, you might have seen how quickly the tracker jumps all over the place.

A while ago, we had a question here in the forum where the camera was locked-off, but the truck in the scene was on a revolving platform. My suggestion, in that case, was to exclude everything, except the data from the tracking process of the vehicle itself, and it worked nicely. In this case, the object was larger than the remaining scene.

https://help.maxon.net/us/#TPHCONSTRAINTMASK

All the best

Hi, just got the answer on cgtalk, that feature is already available:

“Sure, just create the Object Tracker object, select all tracks that should belong to it and hit “Assign Selected” in the Object Tracker’s “Trackers” tab. Once they are assigned they will be ignored by the camera solve.”

Best Regards,

ZG

Hi ZG,

If that works for you, great. You need to work with a mask then, which needs to be animated, etc. See link.

https://help.maxon.net/us/#TPHCONSTRAINTMASK

I never had luck getting an automatic 2D track in the quality I like to have, while at the same time a sufficient number of trackers for an object are available as well. To have from start to finish the needed amount of features, I add trackers, and after the first iteration. However, the 2D features on the moving object disappear as expected (… no mask!). Hence, why I mentioned the mask feature, for a suggestion. Since more than one object can be tracked, this would need a better handling than we have now.
I assume that they are seen otherwise as a mistake as the camera tracking is the prime target. If they are kept with equal weight (concerning value), I would have little trust in the following solution.
https://help.maxon.net/us/#TPHCONSTRAINTMASK
Anyway, I have the best results with manual trackers, so I have maybe a blind-eye for the mask based workflow. *Having said that, I invested a few hours, made different traveling mask and had even close the results that I get with manual trackers, given the “blaster scene”. I do those things as everything changes, and for the current version, I would go again with manual trackers from the start, instead of wasting a lot time to make a good traveling mask. But, each scene is different of course.

My best wishes for your project.

P.S.: Since I know the developer, of this part of the app, since long, I have sent him an email to clear this point. I love first-hand information.

Post is edited* 8:47 pm PST

Hi ZG,

I got an answer from the architect/developer of the Cinema 4D tracker.  In short, it is preferable to get the camera information first, and as precisely as possible. The precision of manual tracking features has such an advantage over automated tracking, speaking of smaller moving objects than just a little cloud of automatic features used for the given object.
If you go with the training here, the blaster-footage, you might notice how much refinement is given by the instructor, to get this sci-fi gun adequately tracked. Imagine this with an automated tracker, with no supervision on the track.

He pointed out a post that I wrote a while ago,
https://www.cineversity.com/forums/viewthread/3149/#12100
Yes, I’m that happy with the tracking here, even I’m professionally biased of course.

All the best