James Roberts
Forum Replies Created
-
Hmm. That runs counter to what I’d heard from someone I know that had just Photoshop CS4. He had to pay for the upgraded version in order to get it working with his newer mac. He’s isn’t the most tech knowledgable, though, and may have been given bad advice he just followed.
I’d like to move to a more recent OS. I use Blender a lot, but I can’t get the latest updates because they dropped support for below 10.6. And now Apple is offering their OS for free, but if the $1700 suite I have gets locked out, that upgrade is $600 – $700 last time I checked
-
Oops. I was just reminded to try trashing the plist for Motion by looking at another post, and it seemed to work. At least it opened normally after.
Kind of went into panic mode there, but I’ve already reinstalled the whole Final Cut suite once, and it’s a lengthy session of sitting there waiting for progress bars and swapping discs for about 2 hours. Not what I was in the mood for.
-
Ok, it’s starting to become a bit clearer. It’s not perhaps the most intuitive function in Ae, but I think I see why it’s set up that way.
It’s never as simple as importing a Photoshop file that’s 3D, then dropping it into an Ae comp and flying the camera around it at all angles. It has to be rotated within it’s own sub composition, and is then brought into other comps as a 2D representation of the 3D object.
At least that’s where I’m at with it now. It would take a little more planning and setup to use these items the way I had in mind, but I see how it could be done.
-
I guess I asked for a basic answer, but since I’m not finding it easily achieved, the real question is can it be rotated or rotated around and be interpreted as, say, a six-sided box shape with proper depth when the camera is animated. What it’s doing now I could achieve by importing a regular flat Ps image and clicking on 3D. I’d like to create objects in Ps that can placed in a composition then animate the camera around them.
-
That was it. As soon as I increased the expansion number they hit the road. Thanks, Todd! I have plans to use this process for a number of things, but that would have spoiled it. Now I’m good to go.
-
Thanks again.
Good to know I was already pretty well on track, I just didn’t want to work up a few dozen image files only to find out I have to redo them all at a higher resolution.
Isn’t all the help in the Adobe apps only online and not actually in the software? It presents a small problem currently with my Pro. I’ve been having difficulty maintaining an Airport connection with it. I’ve got an iMac that almost never loses the feed, but the Pro spends more time telling me my password is invalid or there was a “connection timeout” than it does online. At the end of my long workdays (just a job,I do all my creative work on my dime), I have to choose between getting a little work done or spending a bunch of time on the phone with Apple care. Of course I can’t summon up help on the iMac because the Apps aren’t in it. I’ll eventually get the Airport sorted out when I get a little time. It is nice not getting distracted by incoming emails and updates while working, though.
-
Thanks, Dave. I figured as much. I think dpi matters more when scanning, which I do a lot of, that may be why I tend to have these 600 dpi images.
With the layer names I’m trying balance between being organized and keeping things concise. In Flash I’ve had problems with length limits on names (not sure if that still happens in CS4), I wouldn’t be able to preview a scene if it’s name was too long, and too long seemed to be around 10 characters. So I wanted to avoid crowding those fields. Maybe After Effects is designed to handle more text.
Perhaps a better question about image sizes is what is a good practical maximum? This would be for a background image intended to panned across or otherwise used in a way that you only see a part of it at a time. I don’t want to design large, scrolling backgrounds and then find out they’re choking After Effects, but I’d like them to have detail that will stand up.
Not to say everyone’s so careful. Some of the shows Radical Axis does for Adult Swim do reveal their Photoshop nature in close ups. They had a shot that zoomed into a character’s eye, and the last several frames were quite chunky.
-
Thanks Kevin. I hope that’s what it was, though the project didn’t seem much different than the last time I added a light to something and it was fine then. I’ll have to see how the lighting works in Ae, since that’s where I’ll really be using the setup I was playing around with when it happened.
I guess it’s a matter of finding out what each app’s specialties are, and using them accordingly. There’s significant overlap of features with all that I’ve got, so maybe Motion is best for certain things, Shake for others, and Ae for yet more. I stocked up on all this within about two months, so it’s been a sudden flood of learning each app’s strengths.
-
Too simple a topic? If this is very basic issue for Ae, does anyone know where it’s covered? I always look in the documentation first, and check online topics, but some things are hard to find unless you know just the right search terms.
I’m also curious if there’s any significant difference between an image with a high dpi or one at 72 at a larger scale. I know Ae ignores dpi and that all video is 72, but an image at 600 dpi behaves more like one at 72 that’s several times larger in dimension.
Is it better to stick with 72 and scale them large enough for the intended use, or is mixing different sizes and matching irrelevant, and the only thing that needs to be addressed is that the image is large enough to work at the scale desired without pixelating? -
Good to hear. Everything seems fine here as well. I did have one issue over the weekend, but I don’t know if I can attribute it to the RAM. I was setting up an experiment in Motion 3 and when I added in a light, the whole app went into wonky slo-mo. As soon as I removed it, I was working in real time again. This could be the result of many things, but I hope it’s nothing to do with the RAM. Everything else I’ve tried is fine so far, if not a bit quicker.