Write On behavior...

I can't figure this out by reading the manual....I've tried.
I am in Motion 3 and I drew a funny-shaped oval with the bezier tool. I only want the outline of that oval so I unchecked "fill" and then applied the "write on" behavior to that oval outline. The actual write-on behavior works great and looks great, but as soon as the behavior completes its write-on action, the outline of the oval disappears. I think this is happening because I have applied a shape style to the oval outline, but even still, what the heck am I missing?

Actually Mark, I just tried the exact same process using a different shape style (chalk) and it worked just fine. I was previously using the "Pencil Medium" style under the "traditional" tab and it would disappear every time it was finished drawing my shape. The duration of the shape layer was taking up the entire project for sure. So, it had something to do with the actual type of shape style I was using... weird. I have noticed that shape styles have done unpredictable things in the past - could this be a bug, or do I still not know how to properly work with these new shape styles?

Similar Messages

Tracking a write on behavior

Here's what I want to do. I want a glow filter to track the starting point of a shapes write on behavior. Is this possible? The only tracking behaviors that seem to work with shapes (on my system) are Match Move (which doesn't give a tracking point to adjust) and Shape>Track Points (which requires the tracking points from an Analyze Motion tracker). However I can't seem to get Analyze Motion to work on a shape. Is this normal?
Thanks in advance.

Thanks for the reply Specialcase.
The Light Rays filter. And yes the leading edge of the shape as it "writes on".
But the bigger issue is when tracking a shape none of the trackers gives me the crosshairs. Like say I wanted to make a magic wand (using a shape) and track the end of it. As I recall I was able to do that before and now I can't. Am I hallucinating or is it possible to do this?

Delaying the erase with the Write On behavior

Hey everyone.
Does anyone know how to delay the "erase" with the write on behavior.
When I apply the write on effect to my outline the behavior and set it to draw and erase. Motion draws the shape and as soon as it's drawn motion starts the erase the shape. I want to delay that erase and have the entire shape stay drawn for a few seconds.
I thought I could play with it in the keyframe editor but there are no options to adjust that specific ability of the write on effect.
Thanks.

Hi,
this had me stumped for a bit too. All you have to do though is drag the start point of the shape to an earlier point in the time line. This will automatically drag the start point of the write-on behaviour with it (annoying!). Then drag the start point of the behaviour to a later point on the time line. (It will allow you to this independently of the start point of the shape as long as you drag it forward in time.) Now just reposition the shape on the timeline accordingly. Hey presto! - A delayed writeon/erase effect. Hope this is clear enough.
M.

"write on" behavior problem

I’ve drawn shapes many times with the “write on” behavior. All of a sudden, it’s not working. Here’s the problem. “Write On” completes drawing and then reverses a little bit on the last frame. I included frame shots. If anyone can help, I would appreciate it.
Side note: I know I can do the same thing with key frames. However, I’d rather solve the “write on” behavior problem.

Ah, nevermind! I think I may have solved the issue myself. It seems if you click on the Group tab to the left of the main timeline as opposed to the clip within the timeline, it allows you to change the group and scale it while also keeping different elements together. Could be helpful for anyone with a similar question.

Replicator and Write on behavior in Motion 5

I have a shape (bezier or B-spline) with a write on behavior. When I use this shape as object source for replicator it ignores the write on behavior unless I make the source (the shape) visible. In Motion 4 it doesn't do this, it works as expected. Is this a bug in Motion 5 or has something changed in the way Motion 5 works?

The only thing I did having to do with sound input/midi settings was when I attached a microphone to my computer to record a voiceover in Garageband. I then used that voiceover file (after converting/sharing to iTunes) in this Motion project. However, I did that before I encountered this problem. I was able to export an audio file out of Motion that included that voiceover file, so I know everything was still fine after changing any settings for the microphone. I was very, very lucky because I was able to utilize that last audio export to finish my project. I made a bunch of changes to the images/clips (about 4 days worth), but thankfully I hadn't made any changes to the audio. Of course, there would have been some tweaks I would have liked to have been able to make to the audio, but it was fine as is. My issue going forward is that I want to do more of these projects for clients, but I would hate to run into this problem again. It just boggles my mind why it was working perfectly fine, and then it just stopped. And I learned my lesson a few years ago not to make any system or program updates while I'm working on a project. So, I hadn't made any updates to Motion or OS X. Now that the project is done, I did update my operating system (that was before I tried trashing the Motion pref file).

Animate Z position with write on behavior

I'm looking to animate the Z position (and X,Y) of a shape that's using write on behavior. i don't want the whole shape's Z position to shift to the new position, i only want it to apply to the section that's currently being 'written on'.
something like this video:
http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/motion/effortless-graphics.html#overlay-shad ows
motion 4.

Actually, what's clear in that video is that they are not using a shape at all to generate the light trail. Shapes are only 2D or local 3D which means that they'll obey layer order, not Z depth if drawn along that axis. Only replicators and particle emitters can react as the light in the video does. They probably used a particle emitter.
To get a light streak to mimic that video, you need to create an emitter from a circle or similar shape (highly feathering it helps it look like it's glowing). Change the emitter to 3D (Global, not local) and the speed to 0. Change the life to something short like 1.5 seconds.
Then use the Motion Path behavior to animate the emitter around the various layers in 3D space.
Having the speed at 0 means that although the emitter is moving, each dot that it emits stays put until it dies. With a high birth rate, it looks like a streak of light.
There are many more things done to make that light streak including color, blending and trailing off the end, but those are the basics.
Andy

Write on behavior stutters

I created a very simple project: A map and a B-Spline. Then, I added the "write on" behavior to the B-Spline.
Unfortunately, when I play back the video (and also after rendering), the B-Spline revealing stutters. Every few frames, a small part of the B-Spline is revealed and then, it freezes again. (Whereas the movement of the camera is smooth).
I can't figure out, what might be causing this. I tried it with a bezier, too: Same story.
Does anyone have an idea?
Thanks!
Chris

That looks like a normal behavior to me, even though it's not what you want. The timing of it is good and consistent. However, if you created a "shape" (line) and added the Write-On behavior separately (which it seems you've done), then what you probably want is to go into the Behavior inspector and change the Speed from Natural to any of the other options [Eases, Accelerate/Decelerate, Contant, or Custom (which is automagically keyframed from 0% to 100% over the life of the behavior by default) .]
If you ask me -- Natural is broken. It's supposed to change speed based on the curvature of a line, etc... but I get that halting progress with it as well...
If the above is not the scenario you used, but are instead using an Airbrush Stroke, then the write-on effect is affected by the Spacing of the Outline > Brush Profile > Spacing. In which case, turning the spacing down to 5% should create a much smoother write on.

Write on behavior - stroke disappears

Sorry, I've read the manual (decently) and searched the forum - I just can't figure it out. I drew a stroke with the bezier tool, changed its shape style to "marker" under the "traditional" shape styles category, and applied a "write on" behavior to the stroke. I shorten the behavior a bit, play back the animation and the shape writes on just fine - but at the end of the "write on" animation, the stroke disappears. This doesn't happen if I don't apply the "marker" style and just animate a regular line. Am I missing something here, or is it just another bug? Any help would be great. Thanks.

Chinees, thanks for the input. Unfortunately, I had already checked that and yes, it is long enough. I have since switched my paint style to "chalk, tight" and it works just fine. Since posting this question, I have found a couple other styles that did this same disappearing act as the "marker" style at the end of the "write on" behavior. Has anyone else been able to duplicate this with the "marker" style? By the way, I am working on a MBP which I know has some screwy issues with HD projects in Motion. From what I read, I think this stems from the MBP's graphic's card. Thanks again Chinees.

Write on behavior setting

When I create a text using Write On behavior, writing process ends in the very end of a letter’s track. How can I tune the behavior so that a letter to be written quickly and left in the screen in static?
Sorry for may bad English

If you are applying the Type On behavior (from Text Animation) to text, then select the behavior in the Layers List, move the playhead to where you want the text to finish typing on, and type the 'O' key to set an out point. You can also simply drag the end of the behavior in the mini-timeline to the end point you require. Once all the characters are "on", they'll stay on.

Write On behavior on a circle creates artifact

Hi guys,
I created a very simple project: Two circles with two different colors. The upper circle uses the write on behavior to hide the lower circle.
The problem is an artifact that is created during this animation on the circle. You can see it in the screenshot. It happens inside Motion 5 and inside FCPX, even after rendering. Does anyone of you have a solution, or is this a bug?
Thanks,
Chris

Well, it seems like the first and last point offsets show the "animation" icon (the gear), because I applied the write-on behavior to them. The second circle does not have any behavior applied (I just checked my project again and it seems like I deleted its behavior since I opened this discussion). The artifacts are still there.
Here's a new screenshot.

About NIO non-blocking socket write method behavior

Hi all -
I hope anyone could help in this issue.
Assume you create a NIO socket and configure its channel in non blocking mode:
channel.configureBlocking(false);
then you write a byte buffer into it:
int sentBytesNum = channel.write(byteBuffer);
What are the possibilities of sentBytesNum value? I am sure of two possibilities, which are:
- all data sent so sentBytesNum equals byteBuffer data size (limit minus position before sending) (after sending the limit and position of byteBuffer are the same)
- no data is sent so sentBytesNum is zero and byteBuffer limit and postion did not change, so we shall use a write selector to test when the channel will be ready for write to write the data.
What I am not sure about and need someone to confirm is the third possibility:
- only a part of data is sent (according to the available free space of socket output buffer) so sentBytesNum is more than zero but less than data size and byteBuffer position is advanced by the value of sentBytesNum, might this possibility happen??
If yes, so we should manage to hold the non sent part of byteBuffer till the channel becomes ready for write (we can know that using write selector) so we can write it to channel???
Thanks for help,
Rocka

Yes, case three can occur. The usual NIO write loop looks like this:
int count = 0;
while (buf.position() > 0)
buf.flip();
count = ch.write(buf);
buf.compact();
if (count == 0)
break;
}This will run until buf.position() == 0 or count == 0. If the partial write case happens it will loop one more time and probably get a 0 count.
At the end of the loop, if buf.position() > 0 there is still unwritten data and at this point you should register for OP_WRITE and return to the selector. Otherwise if there is no data unwritten you should deregister OP_WRITE as you have nothing to write and aren't interested in the event any longer.
If you are reading something and writing at the same time the logic goes like this:
while (inch.read(buf) >= 0 || buf.position() > 0)
// etc
}This will read until EOF occurs and either buf.position() is zero or a zero length write occurred.

Single-statement 'write consistency' on read committed?

Please note that in the following I'm only concerned about single-statement read committed transactions. I do realize that for a multi-statement read committed transaction Oracle does not guarantee transaction set consistency without techniques like select for update or explicit hand-coded locking.
According to the documentation Oracle guarantees 'statement-level transaction set consistency' for queries in read committed transactions. In many cases, Oracle also provides single-statement write consistency. However, when an update based on a consistent read tries to overwrite changes committed by other transactions after the statement started, it creates a write conflict. Oracle never reports write conflicts on read committed. Instead, it automatically handles them based on the new values for the target table columns referenced by the update.
Let's consider a simple example. Again, I do realize that the following design might look strange or even sloppy, but the ability to produce a quality design when needed is not an issue here. I'm simply trying to understand the Oracle's behavior on write conflicts in a single-statement read committed transaction.
A valid business case behind the example is rather common - a financial institution with two-stage funds transfer processing. First, you submit a transfer (put transfer amounts in the 'pending' column of the account) in case the whole financial transaction is in doubt. Second, after you got all the necessary confirmations you clear all the pending transfers making the corresponding account balance changes, resetting pending amount and marking the accounts cleared by setting the cleared date. Neither stage should leave the data in inconsistent state: sum (amount) for all rows should not change and the sum (pending) for all rows should always be 0 on either stage:
Setup:
create table accounts
acc int primary key,
amount int,
pending int,
cleared date
Initially the table contains the following:
ACC AMOUNT PENDING CLEARED
1 10 -2
2 0 2
3 0 0 26-NOV-03
So, there is a committed database state with a pending funds transfer of 2 dollars from acc 1 to acc 2. Let's submit another transfer of 1 dollar from acc 1 to acc 3 but do not commit it yet in SQL*Plus Session 1:
update accounts
set pending = pending - 1, cleared = null where acc = 1;
update accounts
set pending = pending + 1, cleared = null where acc = 3;
ACC AMOUNT PENDING CLEARED
1 10 -3
2 0 2
3 0 1
And now let's clear all the pending transfers in SQL*Plus Session 2 in a single-statement read-committed transaction:
update accounts
set amount = amount + pending, pending = 0, cleared = sysdate
where cleared is null;
Session 2 naturally blocks. Now commit the transaction in session 1. Session 2 readily unblocks:
ACC AMOUNT PENDING CLEARED
1 7 0 26-NOV-03
2 2 0 26-NOV-03
3 0 1
Here we go - the results produced by a single-statement transaction read committed transaction in session 2, are inconsistent � the second funds transfer has not completed in full. Session 2 should have produced the following instead:
ACC AMOUNT PENDING CLEARED
1 7 0 26-NOV-03
2 2 0 26-NOV-03
3 1 0 26-NOV-03
Please note that we would have gotten the correct results if we ran the transactions in session 1 and session 2 serially. Please also note that no update has been lost. The type of isolation anomaly observed is usually referred to as a 'read skew', which is a variation of 'fuzzy read' a.k.a. 'non-repeatable read'.
But if in the session 2 instead of:
-- scenario 1
update accounts
set amount = amount + pending, pending = 0, cleared = sysdate
where cleared is null;
we issued:
-- scenario 2
update accounts
set amount = amount + pending, pending = 0, cleared = sysdate
where cleared is null and pending <> 0;
or even:
-- scenario 3
update accounts
set amount = amount + pending, pending = 0, cleared = sysdate
where cleared is null and (pending * 0) = 0;
We'd have gotten what we really wanted.
I'm very well aware of the 'select for update' or serializable il solution for the problem. Also, I could present a working example for precisely the above scenario for a major database product, providing the results that I would consider to be correct. That is, the interleaving execution of the transactions has the same effect as if they completed serially. Naturally, no extra hand-coded locking techniques like select for update or explicit locking is involved.
And now let's try to understand what just has happened. Playing around with similar trivial scenarios one could easily figure out that Oracle clearly employs different strategies when handling update conflicts based on the new values for the target table columns, referenced by the update. I have observed the following cases:
A. The column values have not changed: Oracle simply resumes using the current version of the row. It's perfectly fine because the database view presented to the statement (and hence the final state of the database after the update) is no different from what would have been presented if there had been no conflict at all.
B. The row (including the columns being updated) has changed, but the predicate columns haven't (see scenario 1): Oracle resumes using the current version of the row. Formally, this is acceptable too as the ANSI read committed by definition is prone to certain anomalies anyway (including the instance of a 'read skew' we've just observed) and leaving behind somewhat inconsistent data can be tolerated as long as the isolation level permits it. But please note - this is not a 'single-statement write consistent' behavior.
C. Predicate columns have changed (see scenario 2 or 3): Oracle rolls back and then restarts the statement making it look as if it did present a consistent view of the database to the update statement indeed. However, what seems confusing is that sometimes Oracle restarts when it isn't necessary, e.g. when new values for predicate columns don't change the predicate itself (scenario 3). In fact, it's bit more complicated � I also observed restarts on some index column changes, triggers and constraints change things a bit too � but for the sake of simplicity let's no go there yet.
And here come the questions, assuming that (B) is not a bug, but the expected behavior:
1. Does anybody know why it's never been documented in detail when exactly Oracle restarts automatically on write conflicts once there are cases when it should restart but it won't? Many developers would hesitate to depend on the feature as long as it's not 'official'. Hence, the lack of the information makes it virtually useless for critical database applications and a careful app developer would be forced to use either serializable isolation level or hand-coded locking for a single-statement update transaction.
If, on the other hand, it's been documented, could anybody please point me to the bit in the documentation that:
a) Clearly states that Oracle might restart an update statement in a read committed transaction because otherwise it would produce inconsistent results.
b) Unambiguously explains the circumstances when Oracle does restart.
c) Gives clear and unambiguous guidelines on when Oracle doesn't restart and therefore when to use techniques like select for update or the serializable isolation level in a single-statement read committed transaction.
2. Does anybody have a clue what was the motivation for this peculiar design choice of restarting for a certain subset of write conflicts only? What was so special about them? Since (B) is acceptable for read committed, then why Oracle bothers with automatic restarts in (C) at all?
3. If, on the other hand, Oracle envisions the statement-level write consistency as an important advantage over other mainstream DBMSs as it clear from the handling of (C), does anybody have any idea why Oracle wouldn't fix (B) using well-known techniques and always produce consistent results?

I intrigued that this posting has attracted so little interest. The behaviour described is not intuitive and seems to be undocumented in Oracle's manuals.
Does the lack of response indicate:
(1) Nobody thinks this is important
(2) Everybody (except me) already knew this
(3) Nobody understands the posting
For the record, I think it is interesting. Having spent some time investigating this, I believe the described is correct, consistent and understandable. But I would be happier if Oracle documented in the Transaction sections of the Manual.
Cheers, APC

How can I see what I write while "write on" is enabled

I want to track what I write on my graphic tablet. When I apply the "Write On" behavior afterwards, all strokes are "written" with the same speed, so it has to be the "live" version of "Write On".
My problem is: When I lift the pen, for example to draw the dot on the "i", I cannot see what I drew before. In the case of the i-Dot this is OK, but when it comes to multiple letters, its a problem. Is there a way to display what I wrote immediately after I lift the pen, so I don't have to write "in darkness"?

Select it in the Finder and choose Get Info from the File menu.
(86668)

Issue with adding custom speed to a behavior

I am trying to add a custom speed to a write on behavior. The shape I am trying to write on works fine when I have it at any other speed setting but when I set it to custom (which I need to allow it to both write on and write off at the end) the shape disappears. Despite playing with the custom speed percentage, the shape never comes back. Any ideas?

Ok. I opened your project in my Motion 4 and after it updated it, I got the custom behavior to work fine. However, I had a thought so I decided to open it on my machine that's using Motion 3. There I noticed the problem you're having. I was unable to get the shape write on behavior to work either.
I believe the problem to be with your project. It appears slightly corrupt. Here's something you might try. Create a new project. Redraw your circle shape. Apply the write on behavior and keyframe it as I mentioned before. Then copy and paste it into your current sequence to replace the circle you have in there.
If that doesn't work, I'd rebuild your project. Instead of using all those strokes, just make one X and one O and one line. Then use clones for all the others. That should simplify the project quite a bit.

Pre-load a write-through cache

This probably is a common problem.
I want to use write-through cache to keep the cache and the db in sync. But at application start-up, I'd like to pre-load the cache. Is there anyway I can disable the write-through behavior during pre-loading, and enable it after pre-loading is complete?

Wouldn't you just be better to load the data into the database first, and then just query it to get it into the cache? That way, the cache and the db are 'in sync', and no write operations have occurred; also, you don't need to 'flip' any cache settings. Subsequent updates to cache items would then be written to the database as normal.
Surely if the data wasn't in the db first, you'd end up with a large 'write' operation to place it there once you've loaded the cache and 'flipped' it over, which could be quite a lengthy process. I can't see the advantage of this over putting the data in the db first?
I'd be interested to know more about your specific use-case, as I'm just to embark on a similar 'loader' program. In my case, I was planning on loading the db first. I'd be interested in any alternative approaches and the reasoning behind them (or, likewise, if you can't actually do it the way I was planning! :)).
Steve

Write On behavior...

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for