So glad someone finally explained all this. I've used AE for years and I sort of understood the matte features, but having you lay it out like this really helped. It's a system that isn't necessarily self-explanatory, so thanks for the tutorial!
The problem with this set matte that it doesn't work 50% of the time. Sometimes it ignores, sometimes the size is weird and it all ends up with many pre-composing to make it work which is not convenient and time-consuming as well for a single layer. I demand a better Set Matte from AE. lol
I agree. The layers must be the same size or it starts to not work so well and if you want a true luma matte you must add a black to white fill keyframes. But for a lot of my use cases it's a no brainier.
As Mike said, the layers need to be the same size for it to work, so it's actually really great for shape layers, which render as the size of the comp. But I agree, it would be cool if there was a setting where you could "pre-render as comp size" or something.
I thought the same thing because this effect worked great when I was using only shape layers, but not when I was using pre-comps and a shape layer (as matte) but then I learned that to get the effect to work for pre-comps, I had to have collapse transformations/continuously rasterize turned on and then the set matte effect works perfectly!
@@staciegregory3520 Thanks for mentioning the continuous rasterize element here - saved me from the headache I was having trying to get this to work on a non-text/shape layer! AE is amazing but can be so frustrating when things like this cause a 30 minute detour down a weird internet rabbit hole.
What a badass find! Thanks for sharing this, I've recently had an issue on a project where this kind of thing would have come in handy. Liked and subbed.
For the overlapping circles, I’d rather control their lightness/saturation than opacity. And then use an adjustment layer of them with any of the numerous effects to get alpha from brightness or saturation, if it really needs opacity anyway.
This looks really good, and I think I understand how it's different from track matte. Thank you! I'm trying to create an intro title where I have a name of a company filled with 3 different videos we've done scale increase, pause, and then scale out towards the viewer. I can do all that with track mattes, but I'd really like the video that's behind the text in the center of the name become the actual video you're about to watch, at the proper scale of the video. That is, I want the name to still be cut out, only revealing the video behind the letters, but as the letters get bigger and bigger, you see more of the video underneath until it fills the frame. But as far as I can tell, mattes attach the cutout and the video to each other, meaning that as I scale the name in or out, the video behind it scales as well. I hope this makes sense. Thanks!
Please read the full comment. Ok that set matte bounced over my head. If possible please explain a bit in depth and reply to this comment. Question: are you saying that set matte is better than track matte or does it depends on case to case basis? I ask this because people easily say it depends on what your are making but we as inexperienced students or those starting out in their jobs don't know in what situations/ different situations, which matte to be used. How does one tackle that. Please help
This would be great but it ignores 3d properties of the matte layer : ( so i cannot use it. I need to apply 2 mattes from 3d layers to one 2d layer. Any Idea?
Nice vid! Just one question. :) Let s say that I have a lyric video with many verses, each on a track. And let s say I want to add that grid thingy as a set mat to all of them. Do I need to duplicate that grid track for every verse, or how can I do it to add that grid to all of them without duplicating it? Thanks!
This effect is a hit or miss for me, sometimes works, other times doesn't 😂wish it worked properly otherwise it's save me a lot of time and stacks of layers!
The Set Matte effect has some unclear limitation. Seems like it only works with Shape Layers. Not solids. If your layer has masks - it also has a problem applying a matte to it. Quite confusing....
My mind's somewhere in space rn... the explosion caused from what it's learned in this tutorial has catapulted it out of my reach.... This is body speaking.
Fully transparent is invisible, no transparency is opaque.
Very helpful video by the way, thank you.
youve changed my life. ashamed I didnt know this before
oh my word THANK YOU, how have I been living without Set Matte all this time?!
Opposite of Transparency is Opaque 😋
The opposite of transparency is opacity. The opposite of transparent is opaque. lol
This video was amazing! I was working on trying to put to matte layers together and this video was CLUTCH in explaining the concepts. Thanks!
You are a lifesaver, my man! you have my sub!
So glad someone finally explained all this. I've used AE for years and I sort of understood the matte features, but having you lay it out like this really helped. It's a system that isn't necessarily self-explanatory, so thanks for the tutorial!
The problem with this set matte that it doesn't work 50% of the time. Sometimes it ignores, sometimes the size is weird and it all ends up with many pre-composing to make it work which is not convenient and time-consuming as well for a single layer. I demand a better Set Matte from AE. lol
I agree. The layers must be the same size or it starts to not work so well and if you want a true luma matte you must add a black to white fill keyframes. But for a lot of my use cases it's a no brainier.
As Mike said, the layers need to be the same size for it to work, so it's actually really great for shape layers, which render as the size of the comp. But I agree, it would be cool if there was a setting where you could "pre-render as comp size" or something.
I thought the same thing because this effect worked great when I was using only shape layers, but not when I was using pre-comps and a shape layer (as matte) but then I learned that to get the effect to work for pre-comps, I had to have collapse transformations/continuously rasterize turned on and then the set matte effect works perfectly!
@@staciegregory3520 Thanks for mentioning the continuous rasterize element here - saved me from the headache I was having trying to get this to work on a non-text/shape layer! AE is amazing but can be so frustrating when things like this cause a 30 minute detour down a weird internet rabbit hole.
@@staciegregory3520 THANK YOU SO SO SO SO SO MUCH, you saved me so much time.
What a badass find! Thanks for sharing this, I've recently had an issue on a project where this kind of thing would have come in handy. Liked and subbed.
the moment i finished watching this tutorial video I subscribe to this channel.
Thanks for the tip. I"ll give it a try.
For the overlapping circles, I’d rather control their lightness/saturation than opacity. And then use an adjustment layer of them with any of the numerous effects to get alpha from brightness or saturation, if it really needs opacity anyway.
Thanks.. It was helpful
This is life saving
Glad we could help!
I use mattes quite a lot. This helps!
Oh god it'll definitely decrease the number of layers on my compositions ! THANKS A LOT !
This looks really good, and I think I understand how it's different from track matte. Thank you! I'm trying to create an intro title where I have a name of a company filled with 3 different videos we've done scale increase, pause, and then scale out towards the viewer. I can do all that with track mattes, but I'd really like the video that's behind the text in the center of the name become the actual video you're about to watch, at the proper scale of the video. That is, I want the name to still be cut out, only revealing the video behind the letters, but as the letters get bigger and bigger, you see more of the video underneath until it fills the frame. But as far as I can tell, mattes attach the cutout and the video to each other, meaning that as I scale the name in or out, the video behind it scales as well. I hope this makes sense. Thanks!
Thanks man, really great thing
Please read the full comment. Ok that set matte bounced over my head. If possible please explain a bit in depth and reply to this comment. Question: are you saying that set matte is better than track matte or does it depends on case to case basis? I ask this because people easily say it depends on what your are making but we as inexperienced students or those starting out in their jobs don't know in what situations/ different situations, which matte to be used. How does one tackle that. Please help
awesome tutor.
Great tutorial-but "transparent" means see-through or visible, while opaque means obscuring or hidden.
thanks brotha, i really needed that
great video
Helpful tutorial! thanks!
You got a new subscriber! Thanks man!
Awesome, enjoy your stay!
Very very helpful
First.. AWESOME Tutorial.
Hi please could you help, it is not working when I use two set matte effects on one precomp! Whether continuous raster is on or off it does not work.
Very usefull tut. Thx for your time
Glad it helped!
super useful
great thanks for the video
Woow Thanks for make this tutorial :D
hey, why my set matte doesnt have that source, mask , and effect n mask?
This would be great but it ignores 3d properties of the matte layer : ( so i cannot use it. I need to apply 2 mattes from 3d layers to one 2d layer. Any Idea?
Omg thank you soo much brother ❤️
Nice vid! Just one question. :) Let s say that I have a lyric video with many verses, each on a track. And let s say I want to add that grid thingy as a set mat to all of them. Do I need to duplicate that grid track for every verse, or how can I do it to add that grid to all of them without duplicating it? Thanks!
Thanks dude!
This effect is a hit or miss for me, sometimes works, other times doesn't 😂wish it worked properly otherwise it's save me a lot of time and stacks of layers!
The Set Matte effect has some unclear limitation. Seems like it only works with Shape Layers. Not solids. If your layer has masks - it also has a problem applying a matte to it. Quite confusing....
@@wilkobye9533 Cool! So what was your workaround then? share
@@eladbari just not using an adjustment layer but a shape layer and finding an adjustment effect that worked
@@wilkobye9533 what do you mean by adjustment effect that works?
SUBSCRIBED!!!!
Very usefull. Спасибо большое.
My mind's somewhere in space rn... the explosion caused from what it's learned in this tutorial has catapulted it out of my reach.... This is body speaking.
for some reason this effect doesn't work with me
Ooh!
"only look at the alpha channel of this layer"
Anybody else hate those Wix ads?
Fucking genious. how much time did u spend on AE per day?
2-4 hours. Other days I don't use it at all.
i literally dont know what this tutorial tried to explain???
Hold on, WHAT?!...