Possible interpAccel or do I have to frame by frame?

So I’m trying to figure out if I can create a similar effect to this watch face.

I don’t want it to be the same but the part that I’m trying to figure out is how to create the “tail” effect that gets longer and then shortens again after it meets it’s destination. I’d like mine to stop at whatever the hour is at the time. Here is an example of what I mean.

Hi @syntaxracing,

for me, it would be the clear frame to frame animation due to the complexity of effects (speeding up, evaporation, flame, color change, et.)

Btw. how is your last featured watch face doing and does your boy already wearing a smart watch?

Hey @Tomas,
I know his was frame by frame but I’m only trying to figure out if I can create the tail effect and have it end on the hour. This is the expression without the tail.
(0+interpAccel(#DWE#,0,2,1)*#DWFKS#)
I honestly don’t think that what I’m trying to do is possible considering, unless I have a frame by frame that rotates with the hour hand. The downside to this is the origin wont be at 0 but that might not be a bad thing. I guess I’ll have to see how it looks.
I’m super excited about this face though. As for my other face it’s sitting at 133 currently. Also I’m still searching for a band that’s small enough for my son’s wrist. haha
Another quick question though, do you know the difference between #DWFK# and #DhoT#? Documentation says the same description for both which is, Value for Hour Rotation (12 hour) (30-360 with intervals of 30). Thanks again Tomas.

Hi there,

now, I see more clearly what is your goal (my first answer come before your explanation picture). Well it is definitely possible in my opinion. The question is, how much time must be invested into such formulas

A - Basically if you would be happy with only max half circle pointing the hour on it should be much easier

as the second option

B - making up to (almost) whole circle depending on hour

Anyway, I see the critical point at right timing - at least when to change the visibility of the cover layer(s). Therefore, I would recommend to use own speed expression (based on #DWE#) instead of “unknown” interpAccel acceleration factor in general.

But, its a nice math problem and it should be solved here at facer community I will think about…

I never used the #DhoT# Tag. However my small test (green color) shows that there is no difference.

1 Like

Hello again,

I would have two another simple ideas for you (even if its not exactly what you wanted).

Accelerator Effect

Time Effect

Sure, that you could combine them or modify as you wish. Additionally in the case you would use enough* elements - the whole animation could looks like a “tail”

*do not now the limits of Facer Engine - you could find out

Here just the expressions for my 6 testing elements:

Accelerator Effect

(interpAccel(#DWE#,0,2,(0.5))#DWFKS#)
(interpAccel(#DWE#,0,2,(0.56))
#DWFKS#)
(interpAccel(#DWE#,0,2,(0.66))#DWFKS#)
(interpAccel(#DWE#,0,2,(0.8))
#DWFKS#)
(interpAccel(#DWE#,0,2,(1.035))#DWFKS#)
(interpAccel(#DWE#,0,2,(1.4))
#DWFKS#)

Time Effect

(interpAccel(#DWE#,0,2,(1))#DWFKS#)
(interpAccel(#DWE#,0.1,2,(1))
#DWFKS#)
(interpAccel(#DWE#,0.25,2,(1))#DWFKS#)
(interpAccel(#DWE#,0.45,2,(1))
#DWFKS#)
(interpAccel(#DWE#,0.7,2,(1))#DWFKS#)
(interpAccel(#DWE#,1,2,(1))
#DWFKS#)

2 Likes

So it’s so awesome that you posted these because I’ve been busy with mom and baby today so I’ve not had time to check the forums. Although I was thinking back and remember reading your tutorial that thoes pictures from the first post were from and thought, that’s what I’ll do! Except I’ll have The cover layer follow behind at a slower time and acceleration factor than The visible layer. I’d like to think this is one of thoes, great minds think alike situations but honestly I think it’s more that you’re a great teacher! I love your tests though. I think I’d like to incorporate the method you did in the second post with multiple layers someday though, that looks really cool. I love the tails.

Nice Work, @Tomas.

@syntaxracing: When you create some layers witch different transparency-levels and/or Colours, you should come nearer to your Goal and get interesting results. The flame looking animations, nevertheless, can´t be reached. In that case frames wood be better.

I always wonder, with which programs these guys make that awesome animations…

Greetings,

Phantasico aka GAUSS

Yeah I totally understand what you mean. I wonder what programs people use all the time. Luckily since I’ve been photoshopping for a very long time I like to think I’m very good at manipulating layers to achieve some pretty cool effects. Thankfully I’m not looking for anything super fancy as far as my animation in this case. Hopefully before to long I’ll finish it and you will understand why. I think I’ve got everything figured out, now I just need to wrap it all up and do 3d/lighting effects.

Btw is there a reason you put an extra ( ) around the acceleration factor? I don’t ever put that in and my strings work the way they are intended.

Hi @syntaxracing, no. The extra ( ) should be actually deleted. I was trying several things and just wanted to separate some sub-expressions And thanks a lot for the challenges! That’s really like a great food for brain

1 Like

My pleasure, I enjoy working with you.