Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Adobe After Effects Still particles

  • Still particles

    Posted by Marko Gogić on March 13, 2014 at 11:26 pm

    Hey, guys.

    I want to know if there’s a way to create a particle field that’s permanent. Without birth and death of particles. I just want them to be there in a field, still and not moving through the whole composition 🙂

    Thanks,
    Marko

    Marko Gogić replied 12 years, 2 months ago 4 Members · 7 Replies
  • 7 Replies
  • John Cuevas

    March 14, 2014 at 11:48 am

    Depends on the emitter, but there are a couple of ways of doing it. With particular, you want to throw your particles out there, by setting a high initial particle count and quickly moving to 0, and using a high velocity. Then using hold keyframes, animate the Physics Time Factor to 0. If you have particular you can see this done in the Star field Static Preset. (You can get a free trial of particular from Red Giant)

    With CC Particle World, you would set up a large particle emitter, animate the particle count from from a high number to 0 over a few frames, like particular. Just set the velocity and gravity to 0, and the particle life to the length of your comp. You also will want to adjust the particle opacity to be a constant rather then the default curve.

    I made a couple quick example star fields showing how to do this. 7230_particlesystems.aep.zip

    Johnny Cuevas, Editor
    Thinkck.com

    “I have not failed 700 times. I have succeeded in proving that those 700 ways will not work. When I have eliminated the ways that will not work, I will find the way that will work.”
    —THOMAS EDISON on inventing the light bulb.

  • Marko Gogić

    March 14, 2014 at 11:58 am

    I thought it could be done with keyframing birth rate from high to low value and particle life the opposite way, but I couldn’t manage to do it.

    Thanks a lot 🙂

  • Mike Smith

    March 14, 2014 at 12:48 pm

    Or make it in Photoshop or similar …

  • Marko Gogić

    March 14, 2014 at 1:47 pm

    I need the 3D field, with depth. I didn’t know that’s possible in Photoshop? Is it?

  • Ridley Walker

    March 14, 2014 at 2:04 pm
  • John Cuevas

    March 14, 2014 at 3:21 pm

    Are you not able to do it in the way I suggested? What issues are you having?

    Johnny Cuevas, Editor
    Thinkck.com

    “I have not failed 700 times. I have succeeded in proving that those 700 ways will not work. When I have eliminated the ways that will not work, I will find the way that will work.”
    —THOMAS EDISON on inventing the light bulb.

  • Marko Gogić

    March 14, 2014 at 6:30 pm

    John, I didn’t have time to try it yet. But I don’t see why it wouldn’t work.

    Thanks to you all.

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy