problem with mixing 3d and 2d

[Lars Bunch]

Hi,

Instead of working in 3D space, would it be possible to set up multiple versions of each image and trim the background version of one image to end just as a foreground version comes in? This would avoid using the processor intensive 3D space and sounds like it might do exactly what you need.

If you had an image that was appearing from under one layer while covering another layer that was actually in front of the first layer, then you could use masks to control what part of each layer was visible.

It also might be helpful to create null objects to use as position controls; one for all the instances of each image.

You would certainly end up with a lot of layers and it might get to be a bit of a headache, but I suspect it would ultimately be easier to deal with than using 3D space.

I hope this helps,

Lars

[Mylenium]

[redfuse] “The problem I’m having now, is that when I use this ‘3d’-composition in another (2d)-comp, all the seperate layers in the 3d-comp shift, so I am assuming that it uses another camera to render the 3d-comp within the 2d comp than I am using within the 3d-comp, if that makes sense.”

No. Unless you use your pre-comp as a 3D layer this should not happen. The pre-comp layer reflects the flattened buffer as seen from inside thre pre-comp. Check that as well whether you are using collapse transformations or not. If you’re looking for a more elegant solution to your problam, use mattes – one reveals the part of the layer and a inverted duplicate cuts out the background layer. By animating opacity or brightness (for luma mattes) along with the “Blend with Original parameter” of the Invert effect on your matte you can get any result you want.

Mylenium

[Pour Myl

[Steven Fokkinga]

Thanks guys, for your response. I have found the solution already however, I had to enable the little asterix next to the layer, so the transformations are collapsed in the pre-comp.

About making copies of all the layers; that’s a good route that I usually take when dealing with this kind of problem, however, this time I choose the 3d route because I have 20 pictures that have to slide over and under each other all the time, and each time in a different order. So I would have been forced to make about 10-20 copies of every picture to make this work. Not very attractive. With lesser picture or layer order-transitions this would have been the best route however. Thanks anyway!

Steven

[Dan Ebberts]

If the pictures are all the same size, it should be pretty easy to do without 3D. Just add a null with a Slider Control and add this expression to the Opacity of the layers you want to control:

s = thisComp.layer(“Null 1”).effect(“Slider Control”)(“Slider”);
if (index > s) 100 else 0

Then just keyframe the slider value.

Dan