Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Subject: Re: [AE] why isn't masking treated as an effect?
From: Brendan Bolles <brendan@fnordware.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-5084078@media-motion.tv>
Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 15:44:24 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9335A774-4FA1-4D07-A1B4-F89075CC8C43@fnordware.com>
References: <list-5084078@media-motion.tv>
To: "After Effects Mail List" <AE-List@media-motion.tv>

On May 25, 2013, at 12:30 PM, scott.aelist wrote:

> it was simply a question that occurred to me: "Why can't
> masking be an effect like everything else?"


You can access a layer's masks in certain filters, such as Fill.  I can =
think of a hack using Fill and Set Channels to get the result you're =
looking for.  You can also apply Keylight and use the Outside Mask =
parameter to get this result.=20

This is not going to work if you have multiple masks with different =
modes, but I agree a straight-forward "Apply Mask" filter would be nice. =
 File a feature request.


Onto the bigger issue.  The order of operations in AE is 1) effects, 2) =
masks, 3) transforms. To do things in a different order, you generally =
have to precomp.  There's also adjustment layers, Stencil Alpha, and the =
Transform effect.

We know that with Nuke it's much easier to change the order operations, =
but that's really because every node in Nuke is a precomp.  Every =
transform and every mask adds another node to your graph while in AE =
they're just properties of a layer.  I'm just saying the AE approach has =
advantages too.


Brendan