8 Replies Latest reply on Jun 15, 2015 2:15 AM by Mathias Moehl

    Continuously Rasterize in Ae makes no difference.

    HeyItsMoses

      Hello everyone

       

      I have a few vector art in Ae, and I have the continuously rasterize button selected for each image, but it makes no difference.

       

      Am I doing something wrong?

      Screen Shot 2015-06-12 at 6.12.59 PM.png

        • 1. Re: Continuously Rasterize in Ae makes no difference.
          Mylenium Most Valuable Participant

          I'm not clear what you are asking. Your view is set to 200% and looks juts fine. It seems you misunderstand how this works. Unlike in AI, continuous rasterization is not used for display purposes. It's really only relevant fo transforming your layers.

           

          Mylenium

          • 2. Re: Continuously Rasterize in Ae makes no difference.
            Mathias Moehl Adobe Community Professional

            What Mylenium says is correct.

            In other words: At 100% resolution, your vectors should always look sharp with continuous rasterization, no matter how large you scale them. But if you zoom in your preview, AE will just render the project at 100% resolution and scale the result for you.

            • 3. Re: Continuously Rasterize in Ae makes no difference.
              Rick Gerard Adobe Community Professional & MVP

              You also have position and width errors. I can tell by the aliasing on one side of the letters and not on the other. Even with CR turned on edges must precisely line up with the pixel grid to avoid aliasing. There is no perfect solution with text or diagonal lines but you can make edges of vector art line up with pixels in AI by turning on snap to pixel. Check your artwork. Video is different than print because it always has to be rendered into pixels and the edges must line up precisely to avoid interpolation of pixel values.

               

              Here's another hint... White against a fully saturated color like your red background is guaranteed to have compression problems with anything but lossless codecs. This means that you'll have to adjust your color values along with the position and size of your white letters to get a clean h.264 or any other mpeg render. The compression artifacts on the edges of your letters will only get worse as they move across the screen unless the movement is in exactly whole pixel values. You can hide compression artifacts with motion blur if you are careful with the color values.

              • 4. Re: Continuously Rasterize in Ae makes no difference.
                HeyItsMoses Level 1

                Are you guys sure?

                 

                Zoomed in at 200% in Ae, it looks pixelated, but when I zoom in 6,400% in Ai, it looks perfect.

                 

                I'm just trying to create an intro for my youtube channel, and I want it to look as professional as possible when a person is viewing my videos at 1080p from screens ranging from 4 inches all the way up to 80 inches (TVs).

                 

                The type is created in Ai, but I have some of the letters elongated.

                • 5. Re: Continuously Rasterize in Ae makes no difference.
                  Rick Gerard Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                  There's a difference between zoomed in an scaled up. Scaling is not zooming. Your letters have aliased edges because they are not precisely lined up with the pixel grid in video. When you take the zoom factor in AE up to 200% then each pixel in the composition window is a block of 4 original pixels so it is easier to see what's going on with the pixels. When you adjust the zoom factor in Illustrator to more than 100% the pixels in the screen display are not multiplied so you still see the vector edges because Illustrator does not work on a pixel grid. Change the display in Illustrator to show pixels and you'll get the same kind of display that you see in After Effects.

                   

                  As I said in my original post, by the time you compress that brilliant red with white and hard edges, especially if the white letters are moving, you are going to get compression artifacts that are going to be much worse than the pixel resampling on the vector edges that are not precisely lined up with the pixel grid. The only way to get perfectly lined up edges is to have your work in Illustrator set to Snap to Pixel turned on. Take a look at this from Illustrator viewed at 400% with pixel preview turned on. The rectangles both have a single pixel, or 1 point stroke applied to the edge. One rectangle has been aligned to the pixel grid, the other has not. The difference is completely obvious.

                  Screen Shot 2015-06-14 at 9.37.16 PM.png

                  If this were my open designed for YouTube the first thing I would do would be to adjust the color scheme to one that will work with compression. The second, would be to create the artwork in it's final resting place inside Illustrator with Snap to Pixel turned on and with the artboard precisely sized so that the comp created from the AI file was exactly 1920 X 1080 pixels. I would then animate the intro so that the artwork ended up in it's original position by setting keyframes for everything that is going to move in their resting position and dragging those keyframes to the resting position in my animation, then animate from there. There is NO WAY you can have perfectly hard edges perfectly matched to the pixel grid while they move unless you carefully adjust the timing so that everything is lined up precisely on the pixel grid in every frame so you just have to accept a little blur.

                   

                  As for your color choices, noise in the red and white would help and values that are not pegged will also help. This gives the color compression a chance to do a job that cannot be done effectively when you are trying to compress color blocks of fully saturated primary color values to MPEG formats.

                  • 6. Re: Continuously Rasterize in Ae makes no difference.
                    Mylenium Most Valuable Participant

                    Zoomed in at 200% in Ae, it looks pixelated, but when I zoom in 6,400% in Ai, it looks perfect.

                     

                    That's what I told you right off the bat - AE is not AI and zooming has nothing to do with actually transforming the layer. You are obsessing over something without recognizing that the programs simply work completely differently.

                     

                    Mylenium

                    • 7. Re: Continuously Rasterize in Ae makes no difference.
                      HeyItsMoses Level 1

                      I think I'm starting to understand this, I'm still new to Adobe.

                       

                      The wallpaper that I have designed in Ai is set to 2560x1440p. This is the size that YouTube recommends for your wallpaper.

                       

                      Screen Shot 2015-06-15 at 1.25.39 AM.png

                      I just went to Window > Transform and when I clicked on the options, I have it checked where it says 'Align New Objects to Pixel Grid'.

                       

                      Screen Shot 2015-06-15 at 1.26.08 AM.png

                      When it comes to Ae, I imported the background because I had a hard time creating the same gradient effect in there. I was also importing each letter individually. In Ae, there is no option for 2560x1440p, it's just 1080p, so when I import the background, it's bigger than the space given in Ae...am I making sense?

                       

                      I personally like the color scheme, a lot. It's 3 of my favorite colors. I just want my wallpaper to be animated for an intro (15 seconds, most likely way less), but I want it to look professional, not blurry.

                       

                      Is it possible for me to start a new thread, and if someone can help me walk through this? I've researched several YouTube videos, and I'm still having a hard time with this.

                      • 8. Re: Continuously Rasterize in Ae makes no difference.
                        Mathias Moehl Adobe Community Professional

                        What you need to understand is that in its core, After Effects is pixel based and not vector based. That means when you start your project, you commit to a specific resolution and then every effect etc. is only computed in exactly this resolution. Your vector images are converted to a bunch of pixels before any effect is applied. The only difference that "Continuously Rasterize" makes is that if you have a vector graphics layer and scale it (or apply other transformations), then the scaling is still done before converting to pixels. But everything else is still pixel-based.