Your understanding of transitions needs a little working on.
This all used to be more obvious and clearer in NLEs when it took two layers of Video (physically) overlapped to create a transition. Modern LEs use single layer transitions to "automate" this ..and in doing so..hide the actual process.
Bill Hunt has frequently posted the fundamental diagram of the Overlap and how handles fit into the process.
You need to study that in depth..then you need to think about exactly what is happening at an image level.
Regarding Dissolves /fades :
A full density (100%) image fades to a no density (0%) image over the duration of your transition (ie a fade out)
(NO density is transparent film like cellophane)
Inversely : A no density image fades up to a 100% image density over the duration of your transition (ie a fade in)
If the two are overlapped (handles) they are allowing 0-100% transparency progressively over duration of time.
Same principle applies even when you are manualy creating OPACITY
BTW - do not get caught out by the weird way OPACITY works in PPRO. It automatically creates a keyframe as soon as you adjust it. This can create unknown and unwanted KFs.
Here's what I'm thinking now...
My situation is: I have a still image on video 1 layer...text from psd layered (transparent background so all I have is text layer) on video 2...the text is right on top of still image on video 1...and I also have another still image on layer 1 butted up against the first still image...they dont overlap.
I fade in still image on video 1, then fade in text on layer 2, then fade out text on layer 2, then fade out image on layer 1...and the pixelation is happening ( sometimes, not always ...and it varies as to obviousness of it I think depending on the time it takes to do the fade )...on the still image.
Sooo, what I'm thinking is maybe if I put the still on layer 2 and the text on layer 3..and black video on layer 1 ( under the still image ) then maybe whatever's going on mathematically re: fade and pixel resolution from one image to other (since there's nothing under layer 1 maybe the image fade gets confused and doesn't know what it's fading to or from ????...and you see the blotchy stuff ???) ....is a matter of the programming ( math ...all of a sudden there's no reference to an underlayer to "go to" ?)...
I don't know, will do a test...put black video on 1, image on 2 and text on 3 and then do just the image on 1, text on 2, and see if there's a difference.
know what I mean?
Thanks for what you said, I think I "kinda" know what's up with what you mean about overlap and handles , but that's not my situation in this case...although it is definitely related. Interesting situation..
Have you sometimes got pixelation or blotchy sorta areas in transitions for fades on text and video on layers? Or is it just me ?
Post a screen shot of the timeline if you can. That would help us understand how you have set it up.
Thanks much for helping and I will have to get back to this later on. I
deleted everything with that safari project (except some source assets I can
use again later...and the folders and so on for workflow later ). I'm
supposed to get new video source files next week from captured tape and
start the project over - and I can upload screenshot then...
Deleted all the project and scratch disk stuff ...
Thanks again and will revisit later.
I'm thinking that if there are 2 clips butted together and you do a transition maybe it's smoother if you have black video or something "behind" it ??? something for it to fade from and to --- in between ---those frames in the tweening process ---like "behind" ( lower level of video ? ) the transition.
Provided that the Opacity of the combined Clips is 100%, you do not need anything for the other to "fade into."
Maybe you are setting your Opacity (assume that this is how you are doing the fade), in a non-equal, non-linear fashion, so that you are not getting a sum of 100% for the two, at certain points. You cannot exceed 100%, but if your "ramps" do not match up perfectly, you can certainly go under 100%.
For Cross-Dissolves between two adjacent Clips (still, or video), I use the Cross-Dissolve Transition and then alter it, as I need for Duration. I usually Keyframe Opacity, on over-laying Clips, where there IS a still, or motion Asset below that. Titles and PiP are two such cases.
Thanks Bill...everyone...I don't have anything on timeline now...but used psd to draw rough diagram of what it is...
still on bottom, title on top, using opacity to fade in/ out..
Between the stills I sometimes get varying degrees of blotchy areas like pixelation.. weird...
Seems to depend on the image a little and maybe how fast the fade is...I'm not sure..
I'm just trying to get it real smooth if possible....so you don't see that blotchiness...but I wont be starting a new project till after tue or so as I'm gonna install ram and hd monday and get source video material sometime after that...
So long as your Opacity Fade-out ramp matches your Opacity Fade-in ramp, things should be smooth.
Does the application of the Transition>Cross-Dissolve yield better results? The Ramps will match with it, and you can adjust the Duration of that Transition, as is required.
I kinda want the still to fade in first, then the title, then the title
fades out, then the still fades out...in actual fact, I have 2 titles per
still in the last project (that might change)..but it was as follows..
still fade in
title fade in , title fade out
title fade in , title fade out
still fade out
next still fade in
since its the still doing the weird stuff, I'll try using the effect cross
dissolve and check if that is better...good idea...apply the cross just
between the stills...
Thanks...will try ! Wont try till I get new video stuff....probably next
The application of the Cross-Dissolve to the stills (Video Track 1) will get you what you want. Then, you can animate your titles, as you require.
Good luck, and let us know how it goes.