Cassius Marques
Forum Replies Created
-
My AE cs5 says
“Output file will be resized from 1080 X 1100 (1,00 PAR) to 1080 X 1080 (1,00 PAR) to meet format constraints.”
So I guess it’s a codec limitation and not a software bug.
-
you’ve got a very defined edge around the flower… if you have access to AE cs5, you should definitely go for the roto brush.
-
does the background change at any time? is it moving? if it’s not and the colors don’t match exactly, you can try and get a clean plate of that background and use a difference matte to key out the flower pretty much automatic. Even though it’s a bit rough effect for my taste.
A few screen shots of your footage could help us see the best option.
But I’m imagining that rotoscoping would be the way to go.
-
Are they clipping during motion or just zoomed in? If that’s the case, check if one of them has motion blur enabled and the other doesn’t.
By the look of your SS’s I presume that the white building stroke is beginning to show? is that it? If so, the layers don’t seem to be rightly placed in the same position on Z. They should have the same Z position so that what will determine what’s in front is the topmost layer in the timeline.
Follow Ted’s tips, also make sure you don’t have any photoshop styles applied.
-
He is referring to two VCP tutorials:
https://library.creativecow.net/articles/kramer_andrew/Demon_Face_Warp.php
and
https://www.videocopilot.net/tutorials/eye_replacement/But anyway… I can’t even start to imagine, how you can combine two organic feel/looking tutorials to achieve some robotic look.
You got to be more specific on what you’re going for.
-
you can’t precompose the particular layer with the logo. that has to stay 2d…so as w/e you’re using (null?) as a position value for the emitter.
as for going the oposite direction. Michael got it right, give something negative to velocity from motion. But I’m not really sure if that’s what you want, It will behave more like sparks than a trail.
-
well since by his screen caps the particle is at the same time behind and in front of the planet I’m afraid Brian’s approach won’t work.
A better way I can think of, is to set your CC sphere layer to 3d (even though it is meant to be 2d) and put some expressions on it to make it respond to your camera.
As for the particles, I suggest you switching to trapcode particular – if you can – so you could use the visibility options within it. So you will have 2 particular layer, one above and on below your Sphere layer. And then set the far and near vanish parameters to match the distance from the planet to the camera.
Masking can do the trick too, but will make you very limited depending on your final goal.
-
That was probably done with AE. Just some animated ilustrations. Ted said something about 3d elements, I failed to see them. It is all just vector with strokes and wipes. A simple camera and some compositions. You get the very same path you used in illustrator as a mask to reveal the shape with the stroke effect in AE.
-
Are you parenting to a layer that has some transformation already applied? There is some cases the skew is caused to compensate some math’s that’s going on prior to the parenting, usually with 3d rotation. (That’s my guessing)
Usualy what I do is keyframe the transformations (to keep what I had) move a frame in time, zero them all out…parent the layer and then delete the keyframes.
-
I would only sugest using photoshop 3d layer capabilities if you want to use the model as a simple 3d illustration, few colors and as a secondary element. Remember you can’t have it animated, so all possible transformations would be 3d spins and scale. And it’s kinda messy to send into after effects in a way it can be integrated in your project (camera and lightning wise).
I would prefer rendering a sequence from a 3d app in 95% of the ocasions.