Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Subject: Re: [AE] Link Trapcode particle size to camera position
From: Chris Zwar <chris@chriszwar.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-4753052@media-motion.tv>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 10:25:08 +1000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E5791C5B-EE52-4E74-835B-982229251194@chriszwar.com>
References: <list-4753052@media-motion.tv>
To: "After Effects Mail List" <AE-List@media-motion.tv>

How big is your world?  The near vanish/fade should fix your problem by =
fading out stars before they get too large.  Perhaps you need a few =
different layers of Particular with different settings - the larger, =
distant stars can be set to fade down early, and smaller particles can =
be set up on another layer with different visibility settings.  You =
might not be able to do what you want to do on a single layer.

-Chris

On 21/06/2012, at 10:15 AM, jarret langmeire wrote:

> Ok, just ran through those options but no cigar. The problem is that =
the camera is moving through the star field resulting in those very =
unrealistic BIG particle stars. With regard to the near vanish and fade, =
that simply adjusts the opacity as opposed to the size. What's been =
working really well for the "classic" warp fly-through is to use a =
straight gradient and mapping it across X/Z on the size layer map. That =
scales up the stars in the distance and whilst scaling the foreground =
stars down. However, once you apply "disperse" and a fractal displace it =
mixes up the direct relationship to the gradient.=20
>=20
> I was hoping that using a complex OBJ model to generate a mixed star =
field would do the trick but unfortunately that option does not allow me =
to map the gradient over a specific axis.=20
>=20
> Jarret