Return-Path: Received: from mail-gg0-f169.google.com ([209.85.161.169] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 4753118 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Thu, 21 Jun 2012 03:03:03 +0200 Received: by ggm4 with SMTP id 4so60082ggm.28 for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:05:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=subject:references:from:content-type:x-mailer:in-reply-to :message-id:date:to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :x-gm-message-state; bh=X7jbcUFHVlibfH/PcaQP61jcGwsKcS+59NSVPO+5C7E=; b=A5QaBQAxkuhruBB2rXg+SZqcl2sZFPQktcwlFVrE7ilwLBY7666zBLcwJzxOdDcxgw CpXEVH/1sTlFmsGe7ClOd2KVdHlstcafbksi8XT+yIfA1YS3P8a/WKzU43/0TRAFQ3Ot dgp//G8mHbF6PwEF/t6VKtBRmZmb3e/FDZYrck5JVzrJ2VH7sU6pFliYD0ZLGcYvM9kg zSAHDjAHvcsjvhRN1OqPDUZHYAPdZpCdnVA9Gq2GS9tF3Gaid3SZjtHNDwdZ98PRhFwx 8XCtk4C7yyjf0OcYwJc01oP6DD2FDuMBcuf+aJCZGLtzTebzUVBTB86Ku/lw+AoJZryE q66Q== Received: by 10.236.78.200 with SMTP id g48mr29963577yhe.124.1340240758277; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:05:58 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from [10.15.144.60] (mobile-166-147-100-235.mycingular.net. [166.147.100.235]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x7sm43222977ang.7.2012.06.20.18.05.56 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:05:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [AE] Link Trapcode particle size to camera position References: From: Brian Higgins Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-85A3E2FA-51BD-4B29-B3F9-36C33971FDA8 X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9B206) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 20:05:52 -0500 To: After Effects Mail List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnn5nxCn6kWVc2kwe1Jv1e3FJn6j3GrIdFMFw3h+jbtPXL9lNPqhrzlaWhN8jyn8NoUOdB8 --Apple-Mail-85A3E2FA-51BD-4B29-B3F9-36C33971FDA8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I think he wants the fake Star Trek TNG-style stars.=20 Sent from my iPhone On Jun 20, 2012, at 7:34 PM, Darby Edelen wrote: >=20 > If your stars come close to the camera they'll almost certainly look wrong= even if they're small. >=20 > Sorry, that should've been ESPECIALLY if they're small :) >=20 > -D >=20 > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Darby Edelen wrote: > I'm confused about the goal. >=20 > Should they ALL look like distant stars? If so, then is there a reason yo= u're not actually making them all distant? You could use a spherical field f= or that. Although normally I'd just use Horizon to create a distant starfiel= d >=20 > If your stars come close to the camera they'll almost certainly look wrong= even if they're small. >=20 > -D >=20 >=20 > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:15 PM, jarret langmeire wr= ote: > Ok, just ran through those options but no cigar. The problem is that the c= amera is moving through the star field resulting in those very unrealistic B= IG particle stars. With regard to the near vanish and fade, that simply adju= sts the opacity as opposed to the size. What's been working really well for t= he "classic" warp fly-through is to use a straight gradient and mapping it a= cross X/Z on the size layer map. That scales up the stars in the distance an= d whilst scaling the foreground stars down. However, once you apply "dispers= e" and a fractal displace it mixes up the direct relationship to the gradien= t.=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 t= he gradient over a specific axis.=20 >=20 > Jarret >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-85A3E2FA-51BD-4B29-B3F9-36C33971FDA8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
I think he wants the fake Star Trek TNG-style stars. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 20, 2012, at 7:34 PM, Darby Edelen <dedelen@gmail.com> wrote:


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 <dedelen@gmail.com> 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 <langmeire@gmail.com> 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


--Apple-Mail-85A3E2FA-51BD-4B29-B3F9-36C33971FDA8--