Thanks for you reply.   So I have different versions of After Effects installed and different verisons Adobe Bridge. When I select Adobe Bridge from After Effects CC2020 and select preferences from that Adobe Bridge it says to run scripts from AE CC 2020 to AE CC 2017 and bridge from CC 2018 to CC 2021 automatically on application start-up. Though I didn't think it was to do with scripts that are run on application start up since it's what's run when I select "apply in CC2019" that makes it place it in the wrong After Effects (CC2020).   Are you saying for the Adobe Bridge that gets called from After Effects CC2020 that in the preferencs of Adobe Bridge I should uncheck everything about versions of After Effects that aren't AE CC2020 and in Adobe Bridge that gets called from AE CC2019 in the bridge preferences I should uncheck everything about versions of AE other than CC2019? And it will work okay (even though it's talking about startup scripts that run automatically)?   Can I continue to have mutliple versions of After Effects installed and run any of them that I have, eg. After Effects CC2018 will work okay with it's version of bridge, same for AE CC2019 and AE CC2020? if I uncheck the start-up scripts I specified above in each version of Adobe Bridge? ... View more

Thanks. I edited the post to say it started working again after closing the project, trying a small project with just a small test comp in (and that worked) and then re-opening the proper project and trying again on the comp in that and that time it worked.   So for some reason it had got into a state where it wasn't working (wasn't going above 4K) but doing the above made it work. Thanks for your help. If there's still a small bug in it that caused it not to work the first time it would help if that was fixed - though closing, exiting and re-opening the project seems to have allowed it to work. ... View more

Thanks. Though that doesn't have an automatic adjustment option based on points within an image. But maybe I should try something in that.   But I've looked at "colour stabilizer" and "colour link". Maybe colour stabilizer might be closest to what I want (colour link basically justs gets 1 colour average for the whole frame) but I had a quick try and stabilizer just works on black points, white points and mid points for the specified positions. Something like that where it automatically made the adjustments would be what I'd want.   eg. some option where I could click in points of the background that aren't moving (eg. door handle, door frame, wall) and it looks at the difference (rgb-wise) between those same points in the new clip and adjusts the brightness/colour balance to match those points, interpolating the adjustments over the whole frame. For precise adjustments, more matching points could be specified on the 2 clips I assume (or a whole area could be selected that's the same on both, or eveything apart from a specified mask). ... View more

They've said After Effects by itself doesn't use many cores and that it's best to get a chip with the fastest clock speed rather than one with many cores. Though I think if you use something like RenderGarden (or RenderBoss if that also works) that will utilise more cores. Some people have said you don't need that much RAM but if you work on 4K comps it can be worth having 128 GB RAM (I'd prefer more), though not all chips support that much I think. Some of the latest chips they recommend seem to get quiet hot (and if they overhead they may reduce their clock speed if they have turbo modes I think) compared  to some others. ... View more

I don't think illustrator would work for it because that's for vector work. You could use After Effects for creating the mosaic but it might be tedious done manually, unless there's a way of scripting the positioning of each photo (if it's made up of many photos). Other software (such as Studio Artist 5) that has a mosaic option would make the creation of the mosaic easier, and you could still create the animation of the zooming out etc. in After Effects. Though creating it with other software would create a huge image - you might want to add layers with the initial image(s) separately in After Effects (eg. placed over the position of the output of the image software - maybe like suggested previously) so the image you start on (in closeup) can be clear without having to use a very big mosaic image. It could also be done if you can use a programming language (eg. going through each of the mosaic piece images looking for the one that is closest in average rgb values to the different points on the image. Or a more accurate/slower way that looks through scaled down versions of the  pieces, comparing the rgb differences with those of the image you want to make the mosaic out of and picking the one with the least rgb difference). ... View more

The project opened but actually rendering it to a file at full size as a png with the composition 3D settings set to "Cinema 4D" gives the error (29360x11160 @ 32 bpc (4.9 GB exceed internal lmits)... 12804. (maybe something in the Cinema 4D renderer makes it end up being 32 bpc). Same with a tga sequence or psd sequence or tiff sequence I tried with media encoder too and that didn't work. -- * Changing it to "Classic 3D" in composition 3D settings allowed me to output it as a png in full size * ... View more

Yes you could give a link to the file to test. ... View more

I've added 2 solids in 3d space and a camera with the composition at 29360x11160 pixels with 8 bit pcc (didn't work in 16 bit). This is in After Effects CC 2018. Though I've got 128 GB RAM (and also using Windows). That might be something to do with it. edit: I've just tried it in After Effects CC 2019 too and that worked (same machine) and that also worked with 8 bit pcc. So this was with the 29360x11160 pixels composition and after adding 3  solids in 3d space (1 the size of the comp), and a duplicated image in 3d space (1600x1600 pixel image), with a camera and a light. This was also with GPU acceleration. Maybe it makes a difference whether GPU acceleration or software is used. But maybe all this adds to the RAM and it gets used up quickly or there might be an issue with the Mac version of CC2019. edit: You could also check your 3D settings in the composition settings panel and see if altering those may make it work (eg. are you using classic 3D?). ... View more

I tried creating a project and composition in AE CC 2018 with those dimensions with 8 bit  per colour channel and it worked (no error). It only gave an error when I tried changing the project from 8 bit per channel to 16. You could try exiting After Effects and then restarting AE and setting the project to 8 bit per channel (or checking it is) before then creating the composition. If it still doesn't work could there be RAM in the GPU could be limiting it - or possibly it could need more standard RAM than 16 GB if there's not much free? If it's a bug in the latest AE, you could try one of the other versions. ... View more

I'm also getting the message in AE CC2019 "After Effects Warning: Effect control conversion required in effect "K". Some effect controls will be reset". This is when loading an After Effects CC2018 project into After Effects CC2019. The only effect used in the project is "Keylight (version 1.2)". ... View more

If you (and client if applicable) can use quicktime+jpeg2000 (eg. in CC 2017 but not  CC2018 and later) that should give good enough quality and have a quality slider+likely be lower file size than some other methods (may be smaller than png sequence+alpha or possibly pro res with alpha & goprocineform with alpha). ... View more

You could try converting the videos to another video format in some other application (eg. handbrake?) before importing the converted files into After Effects. ... View more

I don't think we are anywhere near having software that can look at a scene, decide what needs to be done, and give you a time estimate or set a budget But a simpler version of that could just ask the user what is in the shot and details about the shot and give an answer based on that (eg. ask the number of people in the shot who need rotoscoping, the number of animals (such as horses) that need roto, ask how much each move, it could ask whether or how many things were in the shot that change very frequently (such as a flag flapping frequently in the wind which could require many keyframes), maybe it could ask if/how much very fine detail was in the shot that need to be preserved (eg. fine hair strands would be complex). In theory if the right info is asked for and it can be done quickly enough it should be able to give faster, more accurate quotes than it otherwise would. All the motion prediction in the world isn't going to be able to figure out which motion is the actor and which is the background, and what parts need to go and what parts need to stay Though recently it's been the shots with a lot of motion complexity (eg. horses galloping with multiple horses and people, people running, flags moving rapidly in the wind, sword fighting with multiple people), that are also long duration (up to 46 secs at 4K), that are more complex than simpler videos. These videos I think would have motion vector complexities that were indicative of actual complexity. The program could ask if the overall motion of the video was indicative of the main things that needed rotoscoping (eg. foreground subjects), and it could take that answer into account when determining it's calculation (of roto time/complexity and maybe the price to quote). ... View more

I agree that with many vertices on a mask it can be difficult. Sometimes it needs a lot of vertices for when it's closeup but really needs less when it's in the distance (though if possible it's probably best to split the clip into sections I assume for that). I agree that where possible more masks with fewer vertices per mask should be simpler to work with than a mask with many vertices that covers multiple joints since that should make the joint rotations a lot easier. Though it can also mean you end up with many masks and many masks on screen simultaneously. I think other software can hide masks where After Effects doesn't have that option (an alternative for fewer masks shown could be to duplicate the footage I suppose (and have some masks on different copies of the clip). But Adobe could make it easier to quickly organise masks (eg. so you can have parented masks for simpler organisation and finding the right mask to change.  In theory rotoing things like people or horses etc. could be done using a joint type system for the masks. That should make it faster. I personally don’t think that running a clip through some kind of analysis software is going to be anywhere near as efficient as a little experience and just taking a look at the shot. If the auto-analysis type software isn't best software could still help in giving a good estimation based on a few things you typed in or selected (maybe a spreadsheet calc could be used instead). Sometimes a quote is needed for a video (or maybe multiple videos) before you see the video and only know a few things (such as the approx duration and the resolution). Maybe such software (or spreadsheet calc) could give a series of quotes/expected times based on different assumed complexities of the (as yet unseen) video(s) eg. "if the video contains x/y/z the quote would be X and time Y". But such software could also be used to give a fast, more accurate quote/estimated time when you have seen the video (even without the motion vector complexity value, even though I assume that would help), just by selecting/typing a few values for it.  Though it probably isn't a simple calculation. Maybe neural network software could determine which factors (about the videos) affected roto time and complexity and how much, or maybe data/statistical analysis could, based on past work. But those factors that affect it and approx how much should be relatively common to all roto artists (eg. it should be common info that could be used if we can determine that data, so we shouldn't have to wait to have worked on a similar shot before before giving as accurate quotes/times as possible for it). ... View more

But surely if there is software that gave a complexity level of motion vectors that could be used in a calculation to help determine roto time. Or maybe it could be used as an indicator of maximum roto time. edit: Maybe the motion vector info already stored in a H264 video is shown by some software or could be used in some calculation to give an average motion vector complexity figure for the entire video which could then be used in a calculation for estimated rotoscoping time. There was one program years ago that could remove an object from video by just placing a rough mask on the object (though I think it depended on the shot). Maybe it would need a trained AI program to auto-separate particular objects and they aren't really available yet. But maybe there could be a best procedure (if not software) that could give the likely best method for a particular shot. You're not going to like this answer:  experience. Part of that could be from knowing what a particular shot contained and how long it took with particular methods. In theory some of that info could be put into an algorithm/calculation to give an approx roto time as well as maybe a best method for a particular shot. ... View more

I assume the lines on the grey background could be done in Adobe Illustrator to keep it resolution-independent (though I've never used it). It could in theory be done with a normal image editor with large enough images but I think it's more likely been done in something like illustrator. The dark grey background with no detail could I assume just be a solid in AE. ... View more

Thanks. In the end an image background was used at his request (though I don't think he was that satisfied and would likely have preferred being able to automatically place over any web background). Though your suggestion is useful for in future. I don't have Adobe Animate currently and cost is an issue. I do think it could probably be vectorized. A problem is A) the complexity of the facial animation (it might have been done in something like Crazytalk with a sort of 3d face talking - probably a 2d cartoon type image placed over the program's 3D model face/mouth) and the fact that there are thousands of colours used. eg. an Inkscape tracing with many scans (due to the many colours) couldn't get it looking quite the same but might have been acceptable. I think a simplified version of the character animation could probably be done in Adobe Animate and that might have been acceptable since that should have allowed it to be placed over any background on the web. I just wish it would be cheaper though. ... View more

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Warren+Heaton  wrote What is the person using to code the web content?  What you describe is supported and easy for something like the Shcokwave Flash web browser plug-in or for wired QuickTime movie files, but not for HTML alone.  Of course those browser plugins are going away or gone.... He hasn't specified how he's coding it, he just said he wanted the background from the animation he got done removed so he can "drop it on the web-site so you only see the character.". and more or less the same thing in similar wording.  But not mentioning how he's coding it. If there was a way to export as flash with transparency in AE CC 2017 or higher I might send that too but I don't think there is and like you say flash is going. I think it's disabled by default in Firefox, and I read it doesn't work on mobile devices. Thanks. I think I'll either send him what you mentioned or ask him first to see whether he still wants to go ahead or maybe cancel. ... View more

Is it worth sending a version in webm (vp8) format + alpha transparency, quicktime png + alpha, png sequence (with alpha) and maybe h264 with separate video files main and alpha channels or is that likely going to not what they want? It seems like the animation is probably too complex for doing with the "bodymovin" extension. Should I just explain the different options to the person and see what he wants to do? Is sending what I specified above (webm etc.) likely to be no use or is it workable if enough browser checks are done and the best format for a particular browser are used? ... View more

Am I best using the "bodymovin" After Effects extension, with maybe converting the cartoon video to vector with the help of Inkscape (though that might be complex/a lot of frames to convert to vector with Inkscape for the face animation). Or is there something a lot simpler? eg. am I better using one of the above non-vector methods? ... View more

In File->Import File, when you select the first file in the sequence, make sure the checkbox to import a sequence is checked. ... View more

Isn't there some particle system that could do something like that (or would it be not that difficult to create?). eg. if particles/circles/ovals were created for the overall shape (maybe in a way that there were no gaps) and then as the line moved into them it created a force on the "particles" it came into contact with which created a force on the others which then moved outwards from the line that was moving into the shape, maybe with a bit of randomness. Some effect could be applied to the particles/circles to blend them into each other. Maybe the puppet tool could also be used to distort things or mesh warp or masks or images with masks that could be moved about to make them move in the directions you wanted. ... View more

I happen to run CC 2017.  No problems. I mostly use CC 2017 too but that still occasionally says "sorry - stuff not in the right bin" or something like that multiple times when trying to close various projects (not every one, I think mostly bigger projects). So CC 2017 is still buggy. ... View more