| ||||||||||
| On 18/01/2014, at 8:02 AM, Teddy Gage <teddygage@gmail.com> wrote: > That's actually a pretty interesting way to do a piece like that. Can I ask why you moved the set parented to a null vs. animating a camera? I love insights into the "why" questions… FWIW I did an animation this way about a year ago. A scene had been created in Maya where the camera was static, and a 3D model was animated. As the model animated, its outlines were traced - these moving points were exported as nulls from Maya and I imported them into AE and used particular to trace the outlines (using lights as emitters…. lots and lots of lights…) Because the model was animating in relation to a static camera, the camera in AE also had to remain static or else the moving lights didn't outline the 3D object anymore (they looked like very cool smears. pretty but useless). So all of the scenery and background that was comped in was animated in relationship to a static camera. Not something you encounter every day, but that's one niche reason why a scene might be built that way… -Chris |
