[Bartek Skorupa]

It would be best to create a null object, then create expressions for CC Sphere’s rotations to connect this rotation to the null’s rotation.
Then parent whatever you want to this null, and when you rotate the null – the sphere rotates accordingly, and the child of the null rotates as well.

Animate the null instead of animating CC sphere’s properties

Bartek Skorupa
Warszawa, Poland

[Bartek Skorupa]

No. I can’t help you with that.
Let me put it this way:
You are asking the cook how to produce shoes.
There are some cooks, who know that, but I’m not the one.
You’d better ask shoemakers.

In fact you answered your question yourself: You want to make a menu in Encore, so why don’t you use Encore. If you don’t know how – refer to Encore’s manual or ask Encore experts.

Bartek Skorupa
Warszawa, Poland

[Bartek Skorupa]

After Effects is not giving us any interactivity. This is the application for motion graphics. The end result of the work in After Effects is a piece of film.
Film, defined as: images that appear one after another.

Interactivity is gained in other programs, like Flash for example.
You can use AE to prepare some footage, but not to make full interactive application.

After Effects doesn’t have any buttons. You can create a button, but can’t make it interactive.

Bartek Skorupa
Warszawa, Poland

[Bartek Skorupa]

Well, What can I say, just forget about my solution and use Viacheslav’s.
I must admit: My “solution” is a crap.

Thank you very much, Viacheslav.

Bartek Skorupa
Warszawa, Poland

[Bartek Skorupa]

Oh yes, how many times did I have this kind of requests…
I always say that to the client (It sounds better in Polish, but I’ll try to translate it to give you the main meaning):

“If you have a fresh egg, you can make a scrambled out of it, but what would you say to someone who wants you to make a fresh egg out of scrambled?”

Bartek Skorupa
Warszawa, Poland

[Bartek Skorupa]

I recommend you watch this tutorial by maltaannon:

https://maltaannon.com/tutorials/AfterEffects/GrowingVines/

Although it is about somethong else, I found a solution to your problem there.
Using the ideas from there I came up with something like that:

1. Create a light, and call it “Motion Path 1”
2. Animate it. This will be the source of the motion of your particles.
3. Settings for particular:
Particles per second 25
Position: Set it exactly as the position of your lamp at the first frame of a comp. (Set it manualy, or use an expression, using “valueAtTime(0)” statement)
Velocity: 0
Particle type: custom. (Select your video)
Time sampling: Start at birth – Loop (this does the trick)

Now go to physics, select Air, and select Motion Path “1”.

You have to use motion path instead of animation the position. I don’t know exactly why, but it works in this situation.

Bartek Skorupa
Warszawa, Poland

[Bartek Skorupa]

I got Leopard 10.5.6 and CS4 works fine.

Bartek Skorupa
Warszawa, Poland

[Bartek Skorupa]

But if you don’t need vectors try this:

Solid 1200×1200 square pixels

1. Effect -> Generate -> grid:

In the grid menu:
anchor 10, -20
Corner 50, 1220
Border 20

2. Effect -> Distort -> Polar Coordinates:
interpolation 100%
Type of conversion: Rect to Polar

voila

Bartek Skorupa
Warszawa, Poland

[Bartek Skorupa]

Ok, so let’s start:

1. If you use “perspective corner pin” method – you can’t apply the results to null, because it won’t do what it supposed to. What do you get from applying “corner pin” effect to the null? Nothing. You have to apply your results directly to the footage.

2. If you have problems with dimensions of your footage – precompose it and play with the scale of the layers in nested comp, and the size of that comp.

3. Make sure you have your scene set up correctly: take a look at the positions of your pencils. Aren’t they a bit further from the camera, than the surface you want your text to appear on?

4. I would’t use “perspective corner pin” for that in a first place.
I’d rather use simple track with position, rotation and scale without any pencils. Try to attach your tracks to where peak is attached to the cap.

(Hope you know what I mean… English… well, it’s not my native language)

Bartek Skorupa
Warszawa, Poland

[Bartek Skorupa]

wiggle itself won’t cost you anything.

wiggle is a pure math. Math is easy for the computer.

“154795421.466845 * 12433.2464 / 0.00054745 – 12” is impossible to compute by human’s brain, but for computer it’s a piece of cake.

However if your wiggle causes anything that increases rendering time, i.e – motion blur, or anything similiar – well… it will cost you.

But pure wiggle? No way.

Let me put it this way: We have 100 frames animation of solid standing still.
What will be rendered longer: The composition that has 100 position keyframes set to the same value, or the one without any keyframe?

Answer: The time of rendering will be the same.

What if you put “wiggle(0,0);”?

Nothing.

So let’s put “wiggle(120,50);”

Any difference? NONE.

Unless you activate motion blur of-course.

Calculation of the value of the cartaint parameter caused by wiggle is done before anything time consuming happens. Wiggle only set’s the value. It doesn’t do anything else.

Bartek Skorupa
Warszawa, Poland