:3Megamom wrote:Dark....
We've seen your rig; now let's see your timeline.
- Enigma
- That jolly ol' bastid
- Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:55 pm
- Status: Free
- Location: California
Re: We've seen your rig; now let's see your timeline.
- CodeZTM
- Spin Me Round
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 6:13 pm
- Status: Flapping Lips
- Location: Arkansas
- Contact:
Re: We've seen your rig; now let's see your timeline.
My homework, almost in the beta testing stage..
- Megamom
- Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 1:05 pm
- Status: Old Forces
- Location: Costa Rica
- Contact:
Re: We've seen your rig; now let's see your timeline.
I thought you used W7... I feel cheated, but nice homework
NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE
- Mastamind
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:35 pm
Re: We've seen your rig; now let's see your timeline.
Just cuz I'm exporting as a lagarith and will pick up editing from there to make it easier, so I won't be using this timeline anymore:
^Main layers
^Last layers (362-394)
And the first 34 layers, and the next ones up to number 67, if you're interested.
This is my Akross video. Yeah, 394 might be a ridiculous number of layers but I feel every single one of them was necessary.
^Main layers
^Last layers (362-394)
And the first 34 layers, and the next ones up to number 67, if you're interested.
This is my Akross video. Yeah, 394 might be a ridiculous number of layers but I feel every single one of them was necessary.
- AaronAMV
- eating that e. coli spinach
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 7:54 pm
- Status: (◔ ◡ ◔ )
- Location: (◔ ◡ ◔ )
Re: We've seen your rig; now let's see your timeline.
there is no way every single one of those layers are needed
- Mastamind
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:35 pm
Re: We've seen your rig; now let's see your timeline.
No, maybe it wasn't necessary but it certainly is more comfortable and effecient... In some particular places I used 10+ layers on a single scene. On many of these scenes using track motion, where the layer itself moves, was necessary. Technically yes I could fit all that track motion in the same layer but it'd be all crammed up and too confusing. On those scenes where track motion was not used, I did reuse those layers.AaronAMV wrote:there is no way every single one of those layers are needed
- Pwolf
- Friendly Neighborhood Pwaffle
- Joined: Thu May 03, 2001 4:17 pm
- Location: Some where in California, I forgot :\
- Contact:
Re: We've seen your rig; now let's see your timeline.
Organization is always goodMastamind wrote:No, maybe it wasn't necessary but it certainly is more comfortable and effecient... In some particular places I used 10+ layers on a single scene. On many of these scenes using track motion, where the layer itself moves, was necessary. Technically yes I could fit all that track motion in the same layer but it'd be all crammed up and too confusing. On those scenes where track motion was not used, I did reuse those layers.AaronAMV wrote:there is no way every single one of those layers are needed
- MystykAMV
- Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 3:17 am
- Location: Hungary
Re: We've seen your rig; now let's see your timeline.
I can't understand how can people use so many layers, okay track motion, but that much?? wouldn't it be easier to make it with AE then? I can imagine using about 5 layers but omg, my timelines usually consist of 1-4 layers maybe, so nah I would be lost in all those layers xD
- Enigma
- That jolly ol' bastid
- Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:55 pm
- Status: Free
- Location: California
Re: We've seen your rig; now let's see your timeline.
Mastamind: U give me nightmares
- Ghet
- Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:02 pm
- Status: >.<
Re: We've seen your rig; now let's see your timeline.
http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/4131 ... picjou.jpg
will probably fill up at some point.
[MOD 403: Large image turned into link]
will probably fill up at some point.
[MOD 403: Large image turned into link]