-
scaling a smaller comp into a larger comp involving cameras,rasters and vectors…
Let’s say you are working in an sd comp with complex cameras,
3d layers and all vector art. Everything rasterised in order.
You work you animation till satisfied..Then you want to place your sd comp in an HD comp, rasterise,
and scale to fit….But then everything breaks..
Basically, its not matching the sd comp with the camera.
Obviously there is a camera problem here..Why is this?
I tried to place the camera in the hd comp as well, but since the comp sizes are diffrent things dont match..What can be some solutions for this issue..
Are there any camera settings that can compensate for the comp size diffrence?I hope its clarified..
I want to do this because I have a project coming up
that will have to be 3x hd size (almost 6k)
and was designing a work pattern to work in hd size then bump it up
and rasterize to the output size.thanks for any help.
Danny Kamhaji
http://www.betaclan.net -
3 Replies
-
[friction] “Basically, its not matching the sd comp with the camera.
Obviously there is a camera problem here..Why is this?
I tried to place the camera in the hd comp as well, but since the comp sizes are diffrent things dont match..”No, you’re wrong, there is no problem. Your logic is flawed. Since AE always calculates in pixels and not in realworld units and the camera is tied to the composition window, changing the composition size effectively changes the projection area of the frustrum. Just like Dave said – rebuilding from scratch is about the only satisfactory solution.
Mylenium
[Pour Myl
-
Thanks for the responce to all,
Yes, I was suspecting an explanation as I got…
It’s not that My logic is flawed, its just a diffrent way (and not a technical one)
to explain it from my point of view.
Luckily, This is regarding a future project I’m starting, and I have decided to
do the same strategy, but no cameras and just nulls.
This way Im not attached to the “projection area of the frustrum”
And scaling the comp and rasterising is no problem.But Anyways, even though I suspected a dead end on the camera issue,
I thought that (in my case) since everything is scaled by 3 times…
That I could go in the camera properties and multiply something in there x3 to get the right perspective and correct the view. or get some expression for a null or some
gnarly run-around..but truly,
thanks
Danny Kamhaji
http://www.betaclan.net -
[friction] “But Anyways, even though I suspected a dead end on the camera issue,
I thought that (in my case) since everything is scaled by 3 times…
That I could go in the camera properties and multiply something in there x3 to get the right perspective and correct the view. or get some expression for a null or some
gnarly run-around..”No, that wouldn’t work. The change in camera curvature is not linear and you would have to set up quite complex expressions to find the right scaling factor for each element (basically a lens in computer graphics is a part of a sphere). In addition to that you get much stronger distortions with smal F-stop lenses (e.g. fisheye effect) which can make your object appear out of location even if your magic formula gives mathematically and technically correct results. Unfortunately the matter is more complex than it appears and even then you have to be happy that AE uses the most simple camera model (pinhole cam) as there are even more complex systems.
Mylenium
[Pour Myl
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up