you probably mean the ridges per segment work the opposite. as a workaround, how about transformation of the shape group's scale X axis to -100? you will need to reverse path if your first vertex is to the right. here it's to the left so I don't need revers
if you believe it should be exactly like illustrator, I would suggest you let the team know about it here:
it appears that in Ai you have one path that is duplicated many times with specific repeated set of parameters. you have a similar shape path operation in Ae called "Repeater". try to work with it with that same one shape. more about it here: Shape attributes, paint operations, and path operations for shape layers in After Effects
that's exactly what i was doing in AE,
but failed because of the different zigzag behavior.
Will work more on it
can you upload the illustrator file? I can take a look-see
ok. firstly, if you don't need to animate the zigzag operation, you can simplify this by not using it and bringing your path already at the proper shape. I do this by just copy pasting the path from Ai to Ae.
now I see the settings you set in transform but reduce the copies so I can see what is happening:
after I reset my repeater's default position to 0 and just use the same -8 degrees rotation from my Ai transform effect it looks like this:
I can see that Ai's anchor point for the rotation is different so I scrub my repeaters anchor point until I get it right. after a few trials and error it looks almost the same
so try to work your way up like this. I would say this is pretty close:
there are some differences but it's pretty close. maybe shape pro's in this forum will have some other ideas. this could be something that maybe a plugin could do or set of expressions to get it to behave exactly the same.
i also believe it's doable - with enough sweat and tears
but it seemed strange to me that both programs handle the same operations differently.
will spend some more time on it in the evening.
i was trying to get this effect
thanks a lot - some good ideas here
Roes's suggesting is one pretty good way to approach the problem. Another approach, and one that I use all the time for the kind of morphing line animation, is to do all of the animation in Illustrator using by expanding the shapes and then releasing to layers. Something along the lines of this:
If I get some time this morning I will give you a step by step for preparing the artwork in AI.
One other note - your stroke is only one point - That's not going to scale or compress well when dealing with video. I"d make the stroke at least 2 points. That's just the way video and compression work and you need to deal with it in your design to achieve success. A 1 pixel black stroke in an HD comp that is played in a media player that is half the size of the comp - Typical You Tube theater mode - will flicker between gray and dark gray as it moves. A 2 point (pixel) stroke has a better chance of staying black.
it's just an experiment
I was playing with guilloche in AI and had an idea to animate it.
Good point about the stroke - i didn't think about it
I know i could expand, release to layers and import - but it's way faster in AE.
I made a fast experiment in AE (still works differently than in AI, which bugs me) just to make it work.
AEP and a render in there.
I see now what you wanted to achieve. it appears that illustrators transform effect's rendering order is different than Ae's repeater
you can see it here: Scale, Move, Rotate
in Ae it's Move (Position), Scale, Rotate
this explains why they work different. you have shown a case where you have to make some kind of special setup to make it work.
You can stack up repeaters in AE to change the order of the calculations. I have not played with this example but I've done it many time before on other projects.
You can stack up repeaters in AE to change the order of the calculations.
but wouldn't that be repeater on another repeater? I believe we need it to be in the same instance of repeater, so it will be one path that's duplicating - but for its transform rendering order to be different. for example if you have path with repeater that's scaling 90% each copy, then if you repeat that you get a double. we actually need to stack up "transform: Repeater" but that's not possible. if you can, take a gander at the Ai file, I am curious how you will approach this. it's my guess that this will have to be done through expressions based on index or something changing the render order to scale position rotation and not through repeater.
as i said - it's just a play
but an interesting one, I think.
Maybe someone will make a good use of it - I'd be happy
I came up with kind of a workaround - together with rotation I animate the anchor point - so that the tail doesn't stick to the same position but seems to be stretching out. The pickwhip could probably be scripted for easier customization. Or even better a control layer with sliders could be added. Anyway - that's what i got now.
my files here:
Nice not the folding leaf though... guess this one will remain a mystery for now. I am sure with a few more hours we could have come up with something...
2 people found this helpful
I did not take the time to play around with repeaters but I did take the time to show how the transitions you can do in Illustrator can be animated very quickly by using blend, blend options, expand blend, and release to layers - then opening in AE as a comp and sequencing layers. Takes about 4 or 5 minutes and offers many more options like custom strokes and gradient fills and color changes.
Great thanks Rick for taking the time.
Guys, thank you both for taking your time,
i'd probably just leave it as it was using lack of time as an excuse
Rick - how do you usually ease such animations? by adding more frames by hand in AE?
1 person found this helpful
Nest the animation and time remap then experiment with the frame blending options. I have done a lot of these kinds of things for animated graphs and charts as well as changing boundaries on maps. I usually make a 30 step blend, then if the animation is quick add CC Force Motion Blur to the nested comp.