Forum Replies Created

Page 462 of 594
  • Steve Roberts

    December 18, 2005 at 2:57 pm in reply to: Odd pulldown

    (chirp, chirp)

    Nope, it’s 4 singles, one double. Odd. And I have no idea what this thing was before it got to me, except that is was part of a jungle-themed assembly of 3 or 4 clips with dissolves.

    I haven’t contacted NGS because they take a long time to return your calls even when you’re buying! Geeeez.

    As for our simian friend, I tamed him by time-remapping the clip. I found that the count went 0-1-2-3-4-4-6-7-8-9-10-10 … so I kept the TR key at 0, then added one at 4 and 6, and deleted the last KF. Next, I dragged the KF at 6 back to 5, then added a loop(offset) expression to keep it going. It worked quite well.

    Thanks anyway, Jon!

    Steve

  • Steve Roberts

    December 18, 2005 at 3:31 am in reply to: Fairy dust with shatter effect?

    There should be a “sand” tutorial using Shatter on the COW. It should give you an idea.

    … but Fairy Dust is probably better done with Particle Playground or one of 6.5’s particle effects or Trapcode’s Particular, or Boris, or …

    Steve

  • Steve Roberts

    December 18, 2005 at 3:29 am in reply to: Separate media drive for After Effects?

    Yes. Having sources on the system drive will slow down your renders somewhat, and separating work files from the system drive is always good organization.

    It’s not a rule, by the way, just a practice that can make your system run more smoothly and avoid crashes. Ignore it at your peril.

    It’s just more crucial when attempting real-time playback in an editing app.

    Steve

  • Yes, nice topic header. 🙂

    Consider, from a strictly visual standpoint, what that sort of page would look like.

    1. less than 100% opacity
    2. Possibly some kind of bevel.
    3. some kind of reflection that moves, either on its own (like footage) or with the page as it moves or rotates.

    #1 is easy. #2 can be faked with one of the bevel effects. #3 is not easy. AE doesn’t do this (raytraced reflections), so you have to fake it by compositing another image layer over the web page layer, and using a copy of the web page layer as a matte to cut out the “reflected” image.

    Now, to make it move … hold up a CD and rotate it. It’s as if you were looking at the image from a panning camera, yes? So to do this in AE, take an image of your choice and make a movie of it panning … maybe just place it in a comp, slide it in that comp, then drop the comp into the main comp and matte it there. The tricky part is synchronizing the page motion with the “reflection” motion. This step should probably be done only after you’ve animated the web page to your liking.

    If you search “raytrace” and “after effects” you may find a tutorial.

    Hope that helps,
    Steve

  • Steve Roberts

    December 16, 2005 at 5:10 pm in reply to: Field Rendering Problem

    Did you separate fields when you imported the footage? It sound like you should have, if you didn’t. Check the AE help on “interpretation”.

  • [queenkellee] “unless your shatter layer you’ve made into a 3D layer with other 3D layers in the scene–but then the shatter pieces wouldn’t be moving in tru z axis-3D space anyhow”

    The shatter layer would look like a “shatter” movie on a flat movie screen that floats in 3D space.

    Steve

  • Steve Roberts

    December 16, 2005 at 1:01 pm in reply to: animating a circle

    Try this:

    1. Make a new solid.
    2. Add a circular mask to it.
    3. Apply effect>render>stroke to the mask. In the effect settings you can make it show the stroke only.
    4. Animate the size of the solid or the size of the mask.

    If you want the animation to follow music, look into Trapcode’s SoundKeys plugin.

    Steve

  • Steve Roberts

    December 16, 2005 at 12:10 pm in reply to: AE render problem

    Are you rendering out to 720×486? You should be.

    Steve

  • Many questions like this can be answered by doing your own test. 🙂

    However, I’ll go out on a limb and say that I always have “advanced 3D” checked. But … that renderer affects the way AE’s layers interact in 3D space, say, if two or more layers intersect. Shatter has to be applied to a 2D layer, so the renderer probably doesn’t come into play there.

    But I’d leave it on “advanced” anyway. I think that the basic/advanced choice is a remnant from the days when you needed a plugin to do advanced.

    Steve

  • Steve Roberts

    December 15, 2005 at 8:19 pm in reply to: KCHR Resource not found?

    Hee. 🙂

Page 462 of 594

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