Cassius Marques
Forum Replies Created
-
Have you tried to do the linking by accessing its borders?
For example, if you create a null and paste
L = thisComp.layer("text");
rect = L.sourceRectAtTime(time,false);
x = L.toComp([rect.left+rect.width,0])[0];
[x+width/2+value[0],value[1]]
on it’s position, then position it by where you would like for your word to be. When you increase the text (or animate the end), the null should move along with it.Cassius Marques
http://www.zapfilmes.com -
Your description is a bit confusing, I have no idea what you actually have in your timeline when you mention rows and columns. I imagine you want to do some sort of line scrambling in an image. If that’s the case, I can’t imagine any other way but to break down the image into 1080 horizontal lines, so AE may not be the ideal software to make that. (It seems to be a job for an image processor program that accepts custom code libraries)
Cassius Marques
http://www.zapfilmes.com -
yeah me too, but that would require it to affect layers that may be above it on the timeline thus breaking the compositing logic. There’s several “buts” with that existing if we think about it, but indeed I’ve wished for it many times.
Once you get the hanging of duplicating with connections its very fast to get this node based compositing behavior into AE’s pipeline.
Cassius Marques
http://www.zapfilmes.com -
In simple steps it would be:
Duplicate comp, tint the floor plane white (without alpha), tint everything else black (the floor layer with alpha also – above the plane). Use as luma matte for a blur.
This may require extra steps to account for any possible problems that can arise. But I’d have to see them before addressing them.
Cassius Marques
http://www.zapfilmes.com -
Do you have any extra options in your c4d camera that AE can’t match? like lens offsets?
You have to try to pinpoint what is wrong because you’re the one with access to the data. If layers are in the same position with the same scale it has to be a camera mismatch. You should try to export a single frame with a new default camera and see if things match. Also compare project resolution, FPS and so on.
Cassius Marques
http://www.zapfilmes.com -
I meant increase the overall resolution of the e3d layer.
If it was a hdr it could be misinterpreting it (bug) or it just had overbright pixels there that were causing the problems. Because I can clearly see a difference in the white levels between the first and last gif.
I’d had to have access to the files to see if it was a bug or more of a hidden feature. Fireflies are pretty common on GPU renderers so I’m guessing there must be a mathematical necessity for them to exist.
But as you’ve seem to correct them, there’s not much need to dwell on it. So good luck.
Cassius Marques
http://www.zapfilmes.com -
That seems to be caused by the averaging of the DOF calculations and the current resolution of the layer. e.g. blurring occurring on a bright reflection pixel vs a darker one on the next frame.
Try to increase the layer/comp resolution, the multiplier settings or reduce that contrast on those reflections.
Cassius Marques
http://www.zapfilmes.com -
Both examples kinda overlap in areas of expertise. Any decent professional of those areas (all but sound) would have little problem solving them. Perhaps the second one wouldn’t be suitable for an editor, but reproducing neon signs with the current available templates is straightforward. The first one may not end up flawless at the text/hand overlap on the 8s mark.
But take my advice with a grain of salt because I’ve never heard of a 3-B designer 😉
Cassius Marques
http://www.zapfilmes.com -
I use mostly Trapcode’s Particular. But there are cases that I need to switch to Stardust.
Cassius Marques
http://www.zapfilmes.com -
You should get only the basic color correction from you 3d engine, leave the bloom and the rest of the post for AE. If you’re leaving the luma so your clients can change the BG in the template, you won’t ever get it right on the half visible pixels. light that composites fine over black wont do the same in a lighter color.
If you’re not sure what is happening now, its simple. Your current workflow (since there is no alpha before you apply the luma) gets as much black as it gets the “light” from the grey luma pixels in the matte. Since the pixels there in the beauty are a combination of “light” and black bg. When you extract, lets say, 50% of that, and reapply over black you essentially took 50% of your light off, thus the dimming.
You should either do it in post or save with an imbued alpha.
Cassius Marques
http://www.zapfilmes.com