Forum Replies Created

Page 169 of 594
  • Steve Roberts

    October 20, 2007 at 7:47 pm in reply to: accordion layers folding

    Holy cow. We have a perspective thing here: I thought you were looking at the face of the layers.

    Hmm. I seriously doubt that AE was used to create the primary effect. It sounds as if Maya was used:

    “VS: The fold-in transitions are all very seamless. How did you create them?

    MT: The actual execution of the fold-ins was a delicate balance of live-action and CG work, preceded by a period of meticulous planning. It starts in-camera, with us shooting two different camera moves of the same scene. We design these camera moves so that they match exactly, except one is the reciprocal of the other. So, for instance, one move goes right, and the other goes left. Then we composite those shots together in a way that brings the perspectives together. After that, we replace the center section with CG, using the textures and materials we shot in live action in order to create a believable setting. As the scene folds, we use entirely CG objects to flatten and fall into the fold. The final little touches, like the dust on the chalk scene, falling dirt, and candy exploding from the pinata, really make the difference in fooling the eye that it’s all actually happening.”

    https://www.videostatic.com/vs/motion_theory/index.html

    And at https://www.studiodaily.com/filmandvideo/projects/f/musicvideos/4508.html

    “In post, the center section of the shot was replaced with CG in Maya and After Effects, using textures and materials from the live-action shoot to enhance the realism of the backdrop. As the scene folds, the physical objects become entirely CG just before they flatten and collapse into the fold like so much cardboard. Finally, the eye is tricked into accepting the movement by the addition of such visual flourishes as particles flying, puffs of dust, and candy emerging from a pi

  • Steve Roberts

    October 20, 2007 at 7:28 pm in reply to: accordion layers folding

    If I understand you …

    … you need to move the anchor point of each layer to the point where it hinges. The inner layers need to have their anchor points located where they meet, and the outer two layers need to have their anchor points where they meet the inner two layers.

    Also, the outer two layers, since they need to follow the middle two, need to be parented to the middle two layers.

    All layers are 3D layers, rotating on their Y-axis.

    You could search the COW for “paper airplane” for more info on folding stuff.

  • Steve Roberts

    October 20, 2007 at 7:23 pm in reply to: AECS3 and C4d 8.5

    There is a new one on the Cinema 4D site for R10. I hope that it works for you, as I’m not sure of any issues with old C4D (8.5) and new AE (CS3). I hope you don’t have to upgrade C4D.

    https://www.maxon.net/pages/download/plugins_e.html

  • Steve Roberts

    October 20, 2007 at 7:20 pm in reply to: Mac / PC compatibility issues

    Did he try a QT codec such as Animation or Photo-JPEG at 100%?
    Did he try rendering as a TGA sequence?

  • Steve Roberts

    October 17, 2007 at 8:37 pm in reply to: Swish Pan (is that what it’s called?)

    Directional Blur?

  • Steve Roberts

    October 17, 2007 at 6:28 pm in reply to: Kona preview problem

    Belay that — it turns out I don’t have that problem after all.

    I think it’s a case for Kona tech support, sorry.

  • Steve Roberts

    October 17, 2007 at 6:26 pm in reply to: Kona preview problem

    I have the same problem. The current workaround is to deselect “mirror on computer monitor”.

    Hmph.

  • Steve Roberts

    October 17, 2007 at 6:20 pm in reply to: AE Crash when Hiding the Application

    This was a bug in versions previous to CS3. A workaround was to hide by double-clicking the app’s name at the top of the window or switch between apps without hiding.

  • Steve Roberts

    October 17, 2007 at 3:19 pm in reply to: AE/FCP/Animation Codec workflow problem

    🙂

  • Steve Roberts

    October 17, 2007 at 3:06 pm in reply to: If StoneHenge was in an Earthquake…

    Less force, more gravity?

Page 169 of 594

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy