Eric Sanderson
Forum Replies Created
-
“valueAtTime()” is what you’re looking for
delay = .2;100+(thisComp.layer("Soundkey").effect("Sound Keys")("Output 3").valueAtTime(time-delay)/7)
-
figuring out which is selected is where it got messy. Had a slew of if else if’s. Then manually added all of the scale[0]s and manipulated with linear’s. Thats when i decided all each layer really needs to know is the combined scale[0] of the rest of the layers, and what it needs to do accordingly in relation to the predefined “value”. Was hoping there some for while, or any iterator method sequencing through making sure all of the parameters added up to “value”.
-
relief. Yes the second one is working. I’d imagine i could find in AE Help how that toComp and coordinates are working? Have a feeling this wont be the last time i could use that.
-
So i told myself wouldnt come back on here for this, but after losing almost a whole workday trying figure it, or work arounds out on my own, ive hit a wall. Each one of these boxes this is for contains text in the bottom left corner, so the text obviously needs to move with the boxes, anchored at the bottom left where it is. Parenting is out because of the boxes scaling, and (value+) pick whipping to the boxes layer.anchor almost does it but the boxes anchor point is in the center. Moving the anchor to the left edge of the box seems to throw everything off. I even resorted to parenting and trying to counter the boxes scale with a linear negative scale on the text, lol, not a very precise result. Guess i just need to figure out a way to get the boxes anchor on the left, which is confusing because with the code it does seem to be physically anchored on the left (so then my moving the actual anchor point looks like the code runs another width/2 to the left of the shape) by the way it scales, i just need the coordinates to be that way too so i can reference it. Hope that is making sense and is an easy tweak, i poked and prodded at the code all day with no luck. Swear its the last one lol.
-
How hard would this be to modify to reference the scale[0] instead of width, but still move the amount of width. I took a few stabs at it, combination of simply swapping out the .width for scale[0] in the code, which obviously resulted in moving my tiles from 0-100, so figured from there i could simply linear the whole result, with thisLayer.width being the upper output, buuuut thats doing nothing for me. Am i close? lol.
-
Yesss. Threw me off a little at first until i realized you needed the code on the master layer and that it snapped it to the 0 of the comp, but i can definitely work with that. This is going to save me maaany hours over the next few months, i owe you a donation. Would like to dive into how that works, i recognize and for the most part understand the meaning of each individual thing thats there, how its actually working is a little beyond me though. Thanks again.
-
Not able to get it really working for me, shouldve mentioned ive separated dimensions since im just focused on the X so i just got rid of the “y” stuff and the array, that parts not a big deal. What i had “almost” working was what was turning out to be a huge stack of “if else if” statements, at which point i thought thered be a better way. My conditions were as follows, not written in actual code obviously:
(just using 2 different sizes for the example for simplicity sake)
If thisLayer.width is 236 && index-1 layer.width is 236, xPos+236 (or maybe even thisLayer.width)+gap
else if thisLayer.width is 236 && index-1 layer.width is 476, xPos+236*1.5+4 (this 4 is because the 476 size is the size of 2 236 tiles side by side including the gap)+gap…
….and then visa versa and every combination of the 2 (or what in my real case would be every combination of 4 or 5 size variables), this ends up being a long list of if else if’s. Ill just go back to doing that for now unless theres a painfully obvious simpler way, i cant follow your previous code enough to rig it into what i need.
-
Well it made the comp responsive again so thats a win. For the “(check)”, does it just default to checking if thats true or not if you don’t actually write out a condition, defaulting to a boolean i guess it would be right?
-
Thats great thanks! i was worried that sampling image would be the only way.
-
figured it out never mind.