Xavier Bonet
2
AE Expressions Coins
30
After Effects Coins
42
COW Coins
12
Maxon C4D Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
Hello, Sam, I know I’m about 1 year too late to this party… but it seems there’s no way to get the texture method to affect the visible light, it only affects the luminance itself, i.e. the results of the noise texture are only seen on the surface receiving the light; the light source itself continues indivisible, and if you activate its visibility, the light “cone” or “halo” (because you can also pop a texture on a point light) remains solid, rather it shows no noise, which is the wanted effect.
Stuart, I’m wondering if you were ever able to find a way to loop the noise on a visible light?
-
Hi, Mathieu, did you ever find an easy way of solving this? It’s now 2020, 4 years later, and this is still and issue. Honestly, this is just sloppy and/or <font face=”inherit”>lazy on Adobe’s part. It takes one a lot of time and hassle to do this manually, and it would really be a ver easy fix for Adobe–even if keyboard layouts differ–, really. For such expensive software, too. This just </font>demonstrates<font face=”inherit”> that Adobe can’t be bothered.</font>
-
That’s great, Bret! I was in fact starting to search for Dolby Atmos to see if there was an Adobe Audition plug-in. I understand from the specs that the DAPS only works in Pro Tools, right? I’m currently working on Audition, so I’ll have to look into that. I’ve also found the Sennheiser AMBEO Orbit VST plugin, which is free on the Sennheiser website; and although the DAPS software seems much more user-friendly (as you can actually move stuff around in a 3D environment), that other plugin does hold its own, I must say. For now I’m also trying to figure out why my Philips Dolby Atmos Soundbar connected through eARC isn’t making be hear sound all around me… just plain flat sound, even when my simple MBPro speakers do give a little of the effect—weird. Thanks again!
-
Hey, Jim, thanks for taking the time to respond! I’m glad to see it’s not only me that feels this function could be better designed. Normally, when a situation like the one I describes arises, i.e. that I feel a good render is due to show my progress in a more like-end-result way, I do use PV. But just hitting CMD+R is so much faster, not to mention that the render itself is much faster as it’s by default a less detailed render. Anyway, when these things happen it’s no doubt my fault for wanting to take the short way around. But it’d be great if Maxon would consider adding a choice in the preferences whereby the rendered image doesn’t just vanish into thin air. I would even prefer there to be a little X you have to click to quit the preview. Oh, well…
-
I’m trying your fix and it still doesn’t work for me. However, just by adding the framesToTime() expression to parse the temp of my levels value, it does the trick.
Your idea of driving the opacity is interesting… Hadn’t thought of that. But now you said it, it gave me the idea to perhaps add some intermediate frames, where the next light gradually gets brighter, thereby obtaining a more fluid, realistic animation. Cheers for that!
-
Of course! Now that you say it it sound so evident. Thanks for your response. This did the trick.
-
Hi, Andrea!
I have no idea whether this framework has changed (or exists as such) in Mojave, as I am still preferring Sierra.
Moreover, your issue is considerably different to mine (and any other I’ve seen so far in this thread), so I couldn’t say if even the same process will help you out.
That being said, I shouldn’t think there should be any (permanent) issues with at least trying it out. What I would do is copy the framework you have to your desktop instead of deleting it; then, I would put the “clean” framework from my Sierra machine.
Considering I ran my computer with that file deleted from the folder and had no issues, I would say that worst-case scenario: putting a Sierra framework in place might impact how your computer connects to your mobile devices and, if that happens, you can just pop the old one back in place.
Not-so-worst-case scenario: it won’t fix your issue.
Best-case scenario: it will! ????
Good luck with your issue! Hope you can solve it soon!________________________________________
…So this is how I managed to bungle it up today. -
Hey, Tomas! Thank you very much for your answer!
I hadn’t noticed that it’s faster directly through the Render Queue. I used to use it exclusively and then I tried out AME and like the fact that I could continue working while exporting. But, then, even when exporting over night I started using AME and never actually tested speeds. So it’s good to know about your experience on this.
As to the other thing, about what is better, rather than faster: AME crashed about 3/4 of the way while downscaling… I don’t scale (down or up) that often, so I have less experience with that; but knowing scaling puts a big strain on GPU, I guess it was my GPU that just couldn’t cope.
In the end—and half asleep—I reexported as an image sequence in the original scale with the idea of importing that sequence into PPro, slapping on the audio and exporting that via AME, downscaling the output (no Max Depth, couldn’t be bothered any more!). And that finally did the trick and I only just arrived before the deadline! ????
But hopefully I’ll be able to test out the different possibilities we’ve mentioned to see which one works best in this scenario.
________________________________________
…So this is how I managed to bungle it up today. -
☹️ Unfortunately, I sang out my victory too soon! Because although this method works perfectly for controlling “physical” particles created using objects, it seems to completely bypass the particles themselves, so that if you’re using PyroCluster to create the actual “snow” particles, nothing happens… Is there something I’m missing? There probably is…
________________________________________
…So this is how I managed to bungle it up today. -
Oh! Great! Just after responding to Emir’s post I thought to myself: what if I played around with the Plain’s falloff? (Yeah, I know: should’ve thought of that before I responded! ????) And I managed to get what I needed!
I just activated the falloff, set it to invert and sphere, and voilà! A snow globe with snow magically fading in and out inside the globe!
So thanks a million Emir for your push in the right direction! Very much appreciated! (And right on time, too, as this is a Christmas project and those jingle bells are already starting to ring!)
P.S. Unfortunately, CC’s upload system isn’t allowing me to upload the edited project file, so I can’t share a working copy.
________________________________________
…So this is how I managed to bungle it up today.