Return-Path: Received: from mail-yw0-f53.google.com ([209.85.213.53] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 4753101 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Thu, 21 Jun 2012 02:31:35 +0200 Received: by yhp26 with SMTP id 26so71890yhp.26 for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 17:34:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=j5A9KLA82vWx4Gckp3YbybQrd8RQCrxE/FJomlb43Xc=; b=oBNyWUOmbizI9j4X1TwuIEphleuGtopkGNrX4qwz6GEtVD9YCX4ZZSatReCFjXrTEH 7ETD2w1BOYuUF8mRLTyJH0/wVTwBNwrSbKyg8U8DPeO5ufD6Wea5WS+k3TIqKeLmCZNR 5d6YYCnVXpaGzKUebx0DymyMuM0PMRWTaR5KGLu4j48ZDbFj2MU/X5tBJwz3BAMPCqEW Glcek9MRqVMp0l4lok0Ov+arXlVU0r3Ysh4KlNVz3qPTcxPo6pNqZvxXg1k/1qlLmsoZ L+cZ+15iGMDHxMl3I20BvHS7dFe86ftX1khFqYc3byxvJo+8ti3AqBX6ERCpoCJrgKfF sMeA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.87.138 with SMTP id ay10mr6062215igb.43.1340238870693; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 17:34:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.17.200 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 17:34:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 17:34:30 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [AE] Link Trapcode particle size to camera position From: Darby Edelen To: After Effects Mail List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f3ba673cd455c04c2f0adea --e89a8f3ba673cd455c04c2f0adea Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 *If your stars come close to the camera they'll almost certainly look wrong even if they're small. * Sorry, that should've been ESPECIALLY if they're small :) -D On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Darby Edelen wrote: > I'm confused about the goal. > > Should they ALL look like distant stars? If so, then is there a reason > you're not actually making them all distant? You could use a spherical > field for that. Although normally I'd just use Horizon to create a distant > starfield > > If your stars come close to the camera they'll almost certainly look wrong > even if they're small. > > -D > > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:15 PM, 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. >> >> 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. >> >> Jarret >> > > --e89a8f3ba673cd455c04c2f0adea Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

If your stars come close to the came= ra they'll almost certainly look wrong even if they're small.

Sorry, that should've been ESPECIALLY if they're small = :)

-D

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:29 PM, D= arby Edelen <dedelen@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm confused about the goal.
Should they ALL look like distant stars?=A0 If so, then is there a rea= son you're not actually making them all distant?=A0 You could use a sph= erical field for that. Although normally I'd just use Horizon to create= a distant starfield

If your stars come close to the camera they'll almost certainly loo= k wrong even if they're small.

-D

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:15 PM, jarret langmeire <langmeire@gma= il.com> wrote:

Ok, just ran through those options but no ci= gar. The problem is that the camera is moving through the star field result= ing in those very unrealistic BIG particle stars. With regard to the near v= anish and fade, that simply adjusts the opacity as opposed to the size. Wha= t's been working really well for the "classic" warp fly-throu= gh is to use a straight gradient and mapping it across X/Z on the size laye= r map. That scales up the stars in the distance and whilst scaling the fore= ground stars down. However, once you apply "disperse" and a fract= al displace it mixes up the direct relationship to the gradient.

I was hoping that using a complex OBJ model to generate= a mixed star field would do the trick but unfortunately that option does n= ot allow me to map the gradient over a specific axis.=A0

Jarret

--e89a8f3ba673cd455c04c2f0adea--