Resolume Forum

Am I missing something in regards to the input masks workflow? I tried to use them on a show I'm doing in NY but somehow couldn't make sense of the process!

So I select the slice I want to mask and create a mask. I can see and modify the input mask (or crop) outline when I've got it selected but I can't see the end result but I can see the end result if I select output transformation or the slice the mask is in but I can't modify the mask (or crop). It seems like I should be able to modify the mask while seeing the end results the same way I can modify a regular mask slice, right?

Also, input masks are 4 corners only and I can't add mapping points which makes them difficult to use unless you're mapping to simple geometry.

Oaktown wrote:Am I missing something in regards to the input masks workflow? I tried to use them on a show I'm doing in NY but somehow couldn't make sense of the process!
So I select the slice I want to mask and create a mask. I can see and modify the input mask (or crop) outline when I've got it selected but I can't see the end result but I can see the end result if I select output transformation or the slice the mask is in but I can't modify the mask (or crop). It seems like I should be able to modify the mask while seeing the end results the same way I can modify a regular mask slice, right?

That's because in the input section you see the source texture for the input slices.
If you go back to mask transform you see the masks shape with a transparent "green" - which could follow the invert option to be more clear.

Oaktown wrote: Also, input masks are 4 corners only and I can't add mapping points which makes them difficult to use unless you're mapping to simple geometry.

If you double click on the mask outline in edit point mode you can add and remove points.
I would use output masks to mask an area of a mapped object, and the input mask to "crop" source from things I don't want to see in the output.

ravensc wrote:If you go back to mask transform you see the masks shape with a transparent "green" - which could follow the invert option to be more clear.

Now that you mentioned the transparent green I can see it but it's so faint, I never noticed it before!

ravensc wrote:If you double click on the mask outline in edit point mode you can add and remove points.

I use the double-clicking to add/subtract points with output masks regularly but for some reason it wasn't working on input mask until I tried again and now it's working!

ravensc wrote:I would use output masks to mask an area of a mapped object, and the input mask to "crop" source from things I don't want to see in the output.

I use inverted output masks to crop content to panels but it's not easy to manage when you have multiple slices because of how they stack!

And unfortunately you can only have one input mask per slice which is not very helpful to me. I would really like the ability to have multiple input masks on one slice.

Oaktown, could you let us know a use case where output masking is not sufficient for your needs?

I'm attaching the xml file for the advanced output setup of the show I described in this "Projector Galore" post.
If you take a look at the screen labeled "Datapath X4.1 [PANELS]" you'll see I have 4 slices (which are the 4 outputs of the X4) and 12 masks since each side was divided in 3 panels.

The main problem I had was to figure out where to put the masks in the stack so that they wouldn't opacify each other. My original inclination was to put the three inverted masks on top of the corresponding slices but that didn't work at all and I tried many permutations until I figured out that by stacking them on top I could use all of them. It worked but it was hard to manage! For instance if I disable of the masks 2-11 the whole thing goes black but if I disable them in sequence (1 through 12 or 12 through 1), it works.

Oaktown wrote: if I disable of the masks 2-11 the whole thing goes black but if I disable them in sequence (1 through 12 or 12 through 1), it works.

that's a bug for sure, I remember something like this reported, but can't find it right now. (5609 ?)
edit: adding to this:
Changing the output mask order(moving) does not update the mask evaluation until you toggle any masks state.
Enabled inverting output masks seem to evaluate fine only if all of them are in a continuos block- no disabled invert mask or slice is between them.

I see your point with the lots of masks.
there are 4 walls with 3 projection surfaces each, where you want to keep the aspect ratio of a wall and content positions while being able to mask out the non-surface areas.
But the output is not the same arrangement as the input. (1x4 vs 2x2)
The right click slice option to match to input/output shape would work for you if the in and out arrangement would be the same, and you would do the 3 surfaces/wall with individual slices.

Besides fixing that disabled mask issue, the keep in place shape match option I described here could solve situations like this.
Or a modifier key/switch which would make the input slices follow the output slice shape changes.
Having a lot of non inverting output masks would also solve your problem but would create a mess.
Multiple slice masks could be indeed a solution but the masks would have to re arrange on any output slice shape change - so not the best one.

the last option that comes to my mind now is to create a virtual output the size of your datapath output where you would arrange the 1x4 slices to 2x2, then use that virtual output as input for 12 individual slices...
but this is not working because the virtual outputs texture gets stretched to the composition size! instead of keeping its size and aspect. - which I would like to report as a bug, or sign up for the improvement list

ravensc wrote:Enabled inverting output masks seem to evaluate fine only if all of them are in a continuos block- no disabled invert mask or slice is between them.

This is correct and makes the workflow difficult to handle.

ravensc wrote:But the output is not the same arrangement as the input. (1x4 vs 2x2)

That's how the Datapath X4 units work

ravensc wrote:The right click slice option to match to input/output shape would work for you if the in and out arrangement would be the same, and you would do the 3 surfaces/wall with individual slices.

It has to be masks and can't be slices because changing the geometry of a slice modifies the texture and I need the artwork to be "as is" which is the reason why I need to use inverted output masks which used to be crops in Arena 4.

ravensc wrote:Multiple slice masks could be indeed a solution but the masks would have to re arrange on any output slice shape change - so not the best one.

Your comment is a great reminder that input masks and output masks (or the inverted versions) are not create equal and have very different applications but I actually think that having multiple slice input masks would be great as long as they don't have the same stacking vs. state issue.

ravensc wrote:the last option that comes to my mind now is to create a virtual output the size of your datapath output where you would arrange the 1x4 slices to 2x2, then use that virtual output as input for 12 individual slices...

That's actually a good suggestion/workaround which could work in my particular situation (without the virtual outputs step) but it does complicate the workflow quite a bit and becomes quite complicated for more complex installations!

In my case, I could easily do 12 slices instead of 4 without having to do any virtual outputs since it's all about position on the output to the X4.

I was thinking how easy it would be to draw a polygon slice in the Output stage - which we can't.
But try this:
create a polygon slice, then modify it in the output to match your projection area -add and move points, repeat for the number of areas.
go back to input, then match to output shape, now multi select the slices you have for one projector, and place the slices to the desired input area.

no masks would be needed at all

I was thinking how easy it would be to draw a polygon slice in the Output stage - which we can't.

Yes that would be great but still not quite what I am after.

But try this:
create a polygon slice, then modify it in the output to match your projection area -add and move points, repeat for the number of areas.
go back to input, then match to output shape, now multi select the slices you have for one projector, and place the slices to the desired input area.

That wouldn't work unless the output and the comp are the same size.

no masks would be needed at al

Slice modify geometry so I need a mask on top of a slice or possibly an input mask.

At the end of the day, what i need is something that works exactly like the Crop feature in Arena 4.

That wouldn't work unless the output and the comp are the same size.

Still I think that fixing the invert mask behavior would solve your problem, and that would give the same result as the crop in R4,
but let me show you what I mean: (I'm not saying this is a perfect solution for later work)