-
**My 3D layer keeps popping in front of the one on top!**
Hi all – A few weeks back, I had a few questions about using the camera with 3D layers, and I got some great help (thanks, again!). There is one thing I still can’t figure out though, and I’m assuming the answer is pretty straightforward, but I just can’t seem to figure it out, so here goes:
I have a camera layer on the top, and two 3D (stills) layers underneath. I am trying to make it look like they are zooming towards the viewer (by changing the size from small to very large), and adjusting the path (bezier) so each layer whizzes towards the camera, then off-screen left / right. The top layer (camera) is tilted a little so it appears as if we’re looking down on the action (slightly).
My question is, when each layer reaches a certain point in my timeline, my top image no longer appears to be in “front”, it flips to behind the other image. In other words, LAYER ONE starts out behind LAYER TWO, but at a certain point in the timeline, it flips: LAYER TWO goes behind LAYER ONE. Incidentally, this only happens when I have changed them to 3D layers. If I keep them 2D, and get rid of the camera layer, LAYER ONE stays behind LAYER TWO. Once I switch everything to 3D, put a camera layer on top, and do the same move, I run into the same problem.
Is there some layer setting that I can select to keep LAYER ONE behind LAYER TWO throughout the move when they are 3D layers? Or, is this an impossibility…?
I hope this makes sense, and again, it’s probably a simple answer, I just can’t seem to figure it out, though.
Thanks in advance, everyone.
🙂 -
5 Replies
-
It’s a wacky “gotcha” in After Effects, but not a big deal to fix… when you create several 3d layers, they all originate from the same Z position, meaning they are exactly the same distance away from the camera. For some reason, when you start animating them, AE has a hard time knowing which one should be in front, because technically they are on the same plane. All you need to do is move layer 2 a little closer to the camera by adjusting it’s Z position property. Even just a couple pixels should do the trick.
Also, there are a million ways to do anything in AE, and different setups work for different projects. But I’d like to know if you expressly didn’t want to animate the camera, or if you were going for a certain something by animating the stills? The reason I ask is because it is alot easier to animate one object (the camera) than 2. The beauty of the camera is that you can set up your stills however you want them and then animate the camera to fly past them.
Let me know if I’ve helped or just confused you 🙂
Oh and by the way, almost nothing is impossible in After Effects 🙂
-
ahh… awesome! I’ll definitely try both (moving the layer a few pixels, but even better, I’ll do the animation by moving the camera instead – this makes total sense(!) (as you can tell, I’m relatively new to the “camera” layer / animation) I’ve had a very old version of AFX for a long time, and only recently upgraded to the (more sophisticated) camera CS3 version, so I guess my first instinct was to manipulate the layers, rather than the camera (!)- Thanks for the tip, Jeremy!!
-
also make sure that the one popping up does not have any layer styles applied to it, or that theres no Adjustment Layer in between 3d layers. those things tend to change toe rendering order of things in AE.
maltaannon.com – Free After Effects Video Tutorials and more
-
Better still, parent the camera to a null object, make the null into a 3d layer, and move the null to move the camera. This is easier than moving the camera itself because the view of a camera is defined both by its position and point of interest properties. I know this might sound like I’m making it more difficult than it needs to be (adding an unnecessary layer!) but trust me, it is much more efficient.
Anyway, Andrew Kramer has a tutorial on how to do flyby titles, so maybe you could check that out: https://www.videocopilot.net/tutorials.html?id=26
Some of his other titling tutorials talk more about parenting cameras to nulls etc.
Simon
-
Excellent (and, Andrew’s tutorial is great (!) – Thanks again for the suggestions – I’ll try the null object trick (another concept I’m a little new to, but it definitely makes sense…) Thanks, Jerzy / Simon. 🙂
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up