7 Replies Latest reply on Aug 12, 2016 2:00 PM by Roei Tzoref

    Frame blend (optical flow) Composition so I don't have to Collapse Transformations?

    tristansummers Level 1

      HI

      So I think I get that if you want to time stretch a comp you need to set pixel motion to the footage in the preComp then Collapse Transformations and set it to Pixel Motion, because you can't FrameBlend a Comp anymore.

      But what if I don't want to do that, as it would break other animations?

      Is the only way to use Timewarp effect?

      Is there an easy way to link this to Time Remapping then, so it can be applied to an existing, built, time remapped comp with nested pre-comps that use effects I don't want to collapse?

      Or is it a new way to think about it.

      Is there a tutorial somewhere about this?

       

      Tris

        • 1. Re: Frame blend (optical flow) Composition so I don't have to Collapse Transformations?
          Roei Tzoref Adobe Community Professional

          because you can't FrameBlend a Comp anymore.

          to my knowledge, it was never an option to use the native frame blending for a pre-comp. only to footage.

           

          if you want to time stretch a comp you need to set pixel motion to the footage in the preComp then Collapse Transformations and set it to Pixel Motion

          if you want to use the native frame blending (Time Remapping, Time Stretch) then YES

          But what if I don't want to do that, as it would break other animations?

          Is the only way to use Timewarp effect?

          you can always render you composition and re-import it (also called Pre-render) and now it's a footage that you can use native frame blending on. if you don't want to use Timewarp, you can also use a 3rd party plugin like the critically acclaimed Twixtor - RE:Vision Effects .if you actually need more control, even if you have a frame blending option, you would use Timewarp or 3rd party plugins.

          Is there a tutorial somewhere about this?

          for TimeWarp and Twixtor - more than you can count. about TW - this is my personal workflow:

          1. first - I set the timeline to show Frames and not Seconds

          2. then I add Time Remapping to the layer

          3. add the TW Effect and set it to Frames, not Speed

          • 2. Re: Frame blend (optical flow) Composition so I don't have to Collapse Transformations?
            tristansummers Level 1

            So really it is either render and import to use "easy" pixel motion switch with native time re-mapping / stretching.

            Or Timewarp or other effect can be used on pre-comp.

            Or go back to the default answer for better quality / ease of use (use Fusion/Nuke!)

            • 3. Re: Frame blend (optical flow) Composition so I don't have to Collapse Transformations?
              Roei Tzoref Adobe Community Professional

              I was in the middle of the post and you "corrected" me this is my fault I always post and then add more information. about the "easy" part - I know what you mean - it may seem complicated at first. let me show you my workflow and show you it is pretty easy.

               

              1. set the timeline to show Frames and not Seconds

              2. add Time Remapping to the layer

              3. I take one frame back of the last frame of Timeremapping and set a keyframe

              4. delete the last keyframe

              5. Add TW effect - Speed/Time Stretch

              if I want "time stretch" I select use the default "speed" - this is in reverse from Ae's Time stretch. i.e speed 50 is 200% time stretch.

              OR

              5. Add TW effect - SourceFrame/ Time Remapping

              if I want to work like the "Time Remapping" technique, I select source frame

              add a key frame parallel to the TimeRemapping effect. key frame at the beginning = 0, and at the end - whatever it reads in the TimeLine

              and use it like regular time remapping. only now I have more controls to adjust the pixel motion when I need to

              • 4. Re: Frame blend (optical flow) Composition so I don't have to Collapse Transformations?
                tristansummers Level 1

                Thank you for taking the time to explain this. I have not used TW that much but yes that is how I would duplicate TimeRemapping, as I did in Kronos. I usually do that way anyway as have never had a none tearing effect from using PixelMotion alone.

                Ideally though , I would like to be able to frame blend a comp anyway, even for artistic purposes.

                e.g. If you slow down, frame blend, render, speed up, frame blend, render etc. you get some very organic trails that even work well as stills, and it would be great to use this without the intermediate render stages. But we are as ever stuck with the order of operations I guess.

                Anyway, back to moaning about native scopes and and a much more efficient renderer, and full filter controls so I can use sync to scale down... and true float processing throughout, and and incremental naming, don't get me started on incremental naming! Oh there's the chime(or was it a baa?) back to work...

                • 5. Re: Frame blend (optical flow) Composition so I don't have to Collapse Transformations?
                  Roei Tzoref Adobe Community Professional

                  thanks for sharing.

                  be able to frame blend a comp anyway, even for artistic purposes.

                  I would love to have this feature too. try here Feature Request/Bug Report Form

                   

                  native scopes

                  everybody want's those. Lumetri Scopes like premiere I think would be the way to go.

                   

                  much more efficient renderer, and full filter controls so I can use sync to scale down

                  please elaborate. I can't quite get what you mean

                   

                  true float processing throughout

                  you mean that 32bit has many limitations in Ae?

                   

                  incremental naming

                  explain exactly. yes I want you to get started

                  • 6. Re: Frame blend (optical flow) Composition so I don't have to Collapse Transformations?
                    tristansummers Level 1

                    In Shake you could take a large comp and it would render quickly, because of its scan line renderer and because it would only process the pixels it needed to. AE has to load every pixel of every frame of every pre-comp. It can't just load in the pixels it actually needs. This means a lot of things end up being slow, or even impossible.  Shake was a pure linear application, but AE is an 8bit app tweaked to use 32bit but lots of it is still really 8bit. It is still a lot easier to key using Keylight in Nuke than it is in AE, I guess becaus the granularity is still pretty course in AE. You still don't get to pick from all appropriate filters for sizing, only one bicubic and one bilinear option.

                    I have another thread that Rik abandoned about the incremental filenaming as he refused to understand why it was a problem. I have layers, comps, illustrator files where the number is actually important, it tells me what the file is and what it relates to, but this gets f***ed up when AE adds numbers to names. I need to reimport things sometimes as Layer size not comp size, but when I do AE adds a number to it so I can't find it. Some comps have hundreds of layers, sometimes I need to copy hundreds of them and keep the numbers the same so I can work with them AE renames, ir realy really really screws tings up and I really really really need to be able to turn it off. The old "Copy1" approach was fine. I hoped somebody had found a hack to allow this but instead I just got questioned why it was a problem or why I couldn't just rename things. You have to be able to find something to rename it!

                    • 7. Re: Frame blend (optical flow) Composition so I don't have to Collapse Transformations?
                      Roei Tzoref Adobe Community Professional

                      I have read the thread. I am now impressed by your experience and knowledge . it appears as if I was laying down stuff you already know - I mostly do this for my own reasons to make things clear to me as well, and see if others do the same or different. also head to head with Rik can be exhausting so kudos for hanging in there.  I recently added a bug report about other issue with increments in the project panel. I guess you have this kind of workflow that really benefits from Ae naming the old way. I hope you get what you're after and assume you have made a feature request (probably more than once huh?). maybe there is a script that could work for you eventually. good luck with your efforts buddy and be in touch. you are welcome to check out my channel