[Filip Vandueren]

So the two lock together like cogwheels, correct ?

But when the big ball scales, the small ball doesn’t, though they will keep touching.
Then, when the big ball rotates, they still match in ‘contact’ speed ? (oh-oh 😉 )

Hmmm…
This is a tougher problem.

There is no direct relation or formula between the current diameter of the big ball an the current angle at which it has rotated.
The expression would have to re-calculate all the previous frames, every frame, so it could become quite slow.

What are you trying to achieve ? perhaps there’s a better way.

[Filip Vandueren]

So the two lock together like cogwheels, correct ?

But when the big ball scales, the small ball doesn’t, though they will keep touching.
Then, when the big ball rotates, they still match in ‘contact’ speed ? (oh-oh 😉 )

Hmmm…
This is a tougher problem.

There is no direct relation or formula between the current diameter of the big ball an the current angle at which it has rotated.
The expression would have to re-calculate all the previous frames, every frame, so it could become quite slow.

What are you trying to achieve ? perhaps there’s a better way.

[Filip Vandueren]

I’ve never tried it,

but you should be able to import that premiere project in After effects and replace footage there, using the alt-drag trick.

[Filip Vandueren]

Your small ball is probably still parented to the big ball.

break the parent-link.
Joe’s script takes care of the parenting, unless your bigball is again parented to something else.
BTW: the last line of Joes script should also be “[a+x,b-y]”, otherwise the ball would turn counter-clockwise.

if the bigball is indeed parented and it needs to be parented, use this script:


bb=thisComp.layer("bigball");
dia=400;
bb.toComp(bb.anchorPoint-[0,dia/2]);


this will even work if the bigball is a 3D layer and rotated at any angle in space.
Just keep the small ball unparented and 2D

[Filip Vandueren]

Your small ball is probably still parented to the big ball.

break the parent-link.
Joe’s script takes care of the parenting, unless your bigball is again parented to something else.
BTW: the last line of Joes script should also be “[a+x,b-y]”, otherwise the ball would turn counter-clockwise.

if the bigball is indeed parented and it needs to be parented, use this script:


bb=thisComp.layer("bigball");
dia=400;
bb.toComp(bb.anchorPoint-[0,dia/2]);


this will even work if the bigball is a 3D layer and rotated at any angle in space.
Just keep the small ball unparented and 2D

[Filip Vandueren]

Theoretically if you Wiggle a property that has a start-value of 50, with an amplitude of 50
you should get values of 50, plus or minus 50, so that would be 0-100

But in reality, you’ll find the value will sometimes drop beneath 0 and over 100, particularly if you use more than one ‘noise-octave’.

Again in theory, this:

wigfreq = 5; //wiggle frequency
wigangle = 45; //wiggle amplitude
wignoise = 3; //octaves of noise
just = wiggle(wigfreq, wigangle, wignoise, 0.5);

(the multiplier defaults to 0.5 I believe, but you can set it explicitly as a 4th parameter in wiggle)

would give values plus or minus 78.75
->
45 + 45*0.5 + 45*(0.5*0.5) = 78.75

so to have a range of 0-100 you should set the default (keyframed) value to 50,
and use an amplitude of about 28.57.

because:

28.57 + 28.57*0.5 +28.57*(0.5*0.5) = 50

In reality the chance that you get values that are near 0 or near 100 will be very low, because this only happens if the 3 random numbers from each of the octaves are all equal to 1 or equal to 0.
So perhaps it’s best to use only one octave, the wiggle will be smoother, but also you will get more extreme values.

an alternative is to set the multiplier to 1, and amp to 16.66 (50/3 octaves)
wiggle(wigfreq, wigangle, wignoise, 1);

you’ll get 16.66 + 16.66 + 16.66 = 50

this will give a harsher more aggressive wiggle

If this multiplier & octaves stuff is a bit confusing, do a google on “Perlin noise”.
In essence it’s the same as ‘complexity’ in the fractal noise plug-in.

[Filip Vandueren]

Theoretically if you Wiggle a property that has a start-value of 50, with an amplitude of 50
you should get values of 50, plus or minus 50, so that would be 0-100

But in reality, you’ll find the value will sometimes drop beneath 0 and over 100, particularly if you use more than one ‘noise-octave’.

Again in theory, this:

wigfreq = 5; //wiggle frequency
wigangle = 45; //wiggle amplitude
wignoise = 3; //octaves of noise
just = wiggle(wigfreq, wigangle, wignoise, 0.5);

(the multiplier defaults to 0.5 I believe, but you can set it explicitly as a 4th parameter in wiggle)

would give values plus or minus 78.75
->
45 + 45*0.5 + 45*(0.5*0.5) = 78.75

so to have a range of 0-100 you should set the default (keyframed) value to 50,
and use an amplitude of about 28.57.

because:

28.57 + 28.57*0.5 +28.57*(0.5*0.5) = 50

In reality the chance that you get values that are near 0 or near 100 will be very low, because this only happens if the 3 random numbers from each of the octaves are all equal to 1 or equal to 0.
So perhaps it’s best to use only one octave, the wiggle will be smoother, but also you will get more extreme values.

an alternative is to set the multiplier to 1, and amp to 16.66 (50/3 octaves)
wiggle(wigfreq, wigangle, wignoise, 1);

you’ll get 16.66 + 16.66 + 16.66 = 50

this will give a harsher more aggressive wiggle

If this multiplier & octaves stuff is a bit confusing, do a google on “Perlin noise”.
In essence it’s the same as ‘complexity’ in the fractal noise plug-in.

[Filip Vandueren]

Thanks for the kind words.

I’ve found that using either a URL or a Chapter will add the little Dot. Short of that there are the obvious comments.

You could of-course add comments like “1” “2” “3” “4”, but it’s not as compact as that little Dot.

I sometimes make a few Null Layers: one with measures, one with beats, one with eights etc.

[Filip Vandueren]

Could you do a sketch or a mock-up in photoshop ti clarify the look you want this to have ?
How would it animate ?

[Filip Vandueren]

there are a lot of lines in the beginning of the clip that were done with 3D strokes.

the orange and darkblue real arrows (with the arrowhead I mean), were probably done in a 3D application, they really bend, there’s no easy way to do that in after effects.

There are some 3d plugins like 3d invigorator, maybe that could help.