Return-Path: Received: from mail-ie0-f169.google.com ([209.85.223.169] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 4995596 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 20:02:47 +0100 Received: by mail-ie0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 13so9975220iea.14 for ; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 11:09:35 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=47xJV2MoFMfAbWSOp2Y96wuymkxDjcM6UuI+BzHBme0=; b=EdO89at+detuDTrELn407yK8WfVbHflb8zRazT4Jl/pMeXiVrYs2OLjyPjorY2+lc6 Rq5jXkVYEd8BVLMYuyw2no7B60G36rbTUcB6EPe+dA94wDlGq0NQJNdwkH5Gsv8hy5jb /+ndSXJhMR2MFshdklgjRFbRLcM7dWo/9g7VZM9YgI/TZ6+l3lFbvN7YHI9SFxGhylLz 0jBtksswgEkFYUIFVpOHNFJ6OZ+6vRCk3q5iqResg8vIr+fG8Bxk8UKkezP2CsdfrnRG e/4vRW0NIuT7MuSTXiM0C26hllxPfhvVNegr4jqskb9PqdVsuPNtJ2G5GYvaurYanTg3 EwcQ== X-Received: by 10.50.195.134 with SMTP id ie6mr11688361igc.6.1362596974888; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 11:09:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.64.55.106 with HTTP; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 11:09:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Walter Soyka Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 14:09:13 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [AE] editable AE text output from photoshop? To: After Effects Mail List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae9340b45a921c704d74654c1 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm3mF5VR+SRQjfwjkxaz5JIL1+I6dYlxoh578eMd+e5SZniqSnRfgohn+9+pqsdUgCKVPAD --14dae9340b45a921c704d74654c1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Layer styles are a totally valid approach in Photoshop, but they do complicate interchange with Ae. I'd love to see Photoshop take a more procedural, less destructive approach, but I wonder how much a big conceptual redesign like that would upset existing users. If the Ae team promoted layer styles in the render order (though who knows what this would break), or if they added effects for each layer style and provided translation upon PSD import, that might help -- but I think Ae and Ps have sometimes subtly different approaches that are just plain hard to bridge. When animating PSDs designed elsewhere, I invariably end up doing a bit of prep work in Ps: at a minimum, re-organizing elements in Ps, collapsing groups into smart objects. Sometimes, I do a lot of prep work: larger-scale re-organizatoin, more extensive use of smart objects to contain layer styles, masks, etc., renaming the layers to contain blending or positioning information, using the Export Layers to Files script, and re-compositing the outputs in Ae. Personally, I vastly prefer to do design work in Ae rather than Ps, even for stills. In my view, Ae's parametric/procedural approach trumps Ps's destructive approach (smart objects, smart filters, and layer styles notwithstanding), and I find it vastly easier to generate new design elements from scratch in Ae. Sometimes this makes extra work for me at the end if I need to deliver a layered PSD, but I like the flexibility upfront. Basically, my rule of thumb is Ps for heavy paint work (or when mandated by the client) and Ae for everything else, but note that I'm posting on an After Effects list and not a Photoshop list :) -- Walter Soyka On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 1:15 PM, scott.aelist wrote: > I don't understand why they don't drop Layer styles completely and replace > them with Effects. Effects are more powerful and versatile, and photoshop > users would find a smoother transition when learning AE. > --14dae9340b45a921c704d74654c1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Layer styles are a totally valid approach in Photosho= p, but they do complicate interchange with Ae. I'd love to see Photosho= p take a more=A0procedural, less destructive approach, but I wonder how muc= h a big conceptual redesign like that would upset existing users.

If the Ae team promoted layer styles in the render orde= r (though who knows what this would break), or if they added effects for ea= ch layer style and provided translation upon PSD import, that might help --= but I think Ae and Ps have sometimes subtly different approaches that are = just plain hard to bridge.

When animating PSDs designed elsewhere, I invariably en= d up doing a bit of prep work in Ps: at a minimum, re-organizing elements i= n Ps, collapsing groups into smart objects. Sometimes, I do a lot of prep w= ork: larger-scale re-organizatoin, more extensive use of smart objects to c= ontain layer styles, masks, etc., renaming the layers to contain blending o= r positioning information, using the Export Layers to Files script, and re-= compositing the outputs in Ae.

Personally, I vastly prefer to do design wor= k in Ae rather than Ps, even for stills. In my view, Ae's parametric/pr= ocedural approach trumps Ps's destructive approach (smart objects, smar= t filters, and layer styles notwithstanding), and I find it vastly easier t= o generate new design elements from scratch in Ae. Sometimes this makes ext= ra work for me at the end if I need to deliver a layered PSD, but I like th= e flexibility upfront.

Basically, my rule of thumb is Ps for heavy paint work = (or when mandated by the client) and Ae for everything else, but note that = I'm posting on an After Effects list and not a Photoshop list :)

--

Walter Soyka

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 1:15 PM, scott.aelist <scott.aelist@gmail.com> wrote:

I don't understand why they don't drop Layer style= s completely and replace them with Effects. Effects are more powerful and v= ersatile, and photoshop users would find a smoother transition when learnin= g AE.

--14dae9340b45a921c704d74654c1--