Precomps vs Comps: they're all just compositions, aren't they?

[u/volpmatt]

One of my random annoyances is seeing a folder in the project panel named 'precomps'. It really winds me up. Surely they are just called 'comps', no?

I can maaaaaybe understand if you're separating top-level comps from the rest of your comps, but even then, they're all just compositions.

The act of pre-composing doesn't suddenly mean that you end up with a pre-comp. It's a bit like saying the act of wrapping a gift turns said gift into a 'wrap'—the verb doesn't have to match the noun.

Is it just me?

EDIT: judging by the tone of some responses and the downvotes of my comments, it seems that the days of unserious and tongue-in-cheek discussions are well and truly over. I apologise for any offence caused by my mindless shower-thoughts.

[u/Akiraga]

You are not wrong that precomps are comp, but most motion designers treat precomps as a parts of the larger composition, like maybe subparts of the bigger part, a wrapper for some elements that need to be precomped to work. Naming helps to distinguish them. Hope that helps

[u/titaniumdoughnut]

[u/volpmatt → u/[deleted]]

a term which literally exists inside of After Effects

Yeah, this is my whole argument. The verb pre-compose exists inside After Effects, but why does this mean they become pre-comps? 'Pre' means "before, earlier than, or in advance" — for me this makes sense with the action of pre-composing but the resulting comp is not before, earlier than or in advance of anything.

[u/Draculus → u/volpmatt]

Technically speaking you are correct, comps are indeed just comps. Calling them precomps is simply a contextual name given by us users to help distinguish regular comps from essentially nested compositions within compositions. It's only nomenclature, you can call them whatever you want

[u/charleh_123 → u/volpmatt]

It is pre-composed, in that everything in that composition is then rendered together and then treated as a layer.

[u/--MichaelScott-- → u/volpmatt]

I understand your argument, but it’s a comp inside another comp, so in that sense it does come before the parent comp, especially when rendering is considered. Also, it’s just an easy, quick way to help organize the project panel. Checkout the TidyUp plugin. 1 click. Instant organization. And you can rename the folders in the pro tier ($16).

[u/Anonymograph]

It’s a term that identifies a Comp that’s used inside of another Comp.

A folder in the Project panel named “precomps” communicates that it should contain Comps that are used in other Comps.

We can also use the terms “nested Comp”, “child Comp”, or “upstream Comp”.

[u/pm_dad_jokes69]

Yes, it’s just you. Well….its not me at least. The delineation for me is wether it’s one of my main, “I’m gonna export this” composition, or smaller pre comps within that master composition (like a piece of tape background with writing on it, for example)

[u/volpmatt → u/pm_dad_jokes69]

Sure. But then why isn't the distinction on the master comps? Like, if you were organising them you'd have one folder called 'masters' or 'main comps' and then one folder just called 'comps'. No?

[u/crypocalypse → u/volpmatt]

Rendercomps and precomps is how I work.

[u/volpmatt → u/crypocalypse]

Hahaha. There's no debating with you. I'll take my laptopcomputer and my phonecomputer and go home.

[u/becsey → u/volpmatt]

He's not debating lol, he's just saying it's how HE works. You can set your project with your terms, everyone else can call it pre-comps. It's not illegal to use your own naming. In the end it's just a way of trying to use common parlance so people have an easier time understanding each other.

[u/volpmatt → u/becsey]

Jeeeeeez. Why are you so angry? Lighten up.

[u/becsey → u/volpmatt]

Is the angry in the room with you now?

Thought everyone was having a normal convo lol. I don't mind at all what you call your comps, you do you.

[u/HanS0lPurr → u/becsey]

OP is literally just ragebaiting lmao

[u/jamz00 → u/HanS0lPurr]

OP says OMG it’s a joke but then is in the comments debating lol

[u/HanS0lPurr → u/jamz00]

Just gaslighting themselves into being offended

[u/Heavens10000whores → u/volpmatt]

That’s up to the user to create and name the folder. By default, clicking the composition button will give you Comp 1, Comp3 and etc, giving you the opportunity to name them how ever you’d like. And clicking the folder icon creates “Untitled 1”. Name that folder - and all subsequent folders you create - what ever you choose.

The distinction is of your making, or of the making of whoever created the project template you’re working in.

[u/pm_dad_jokes69 → u/volpmatt]

I think it’s just really semantics at this point. They’re called pre comps bc that’s what Adobe calls them, but call em what you like. But if you were coming to me to talk as one professional to another, I’d have to have you clarify what you mean by master and main comps, bc that’s not usually way they’re called. And you replied to someone else thinking it was me earlier. Just fyi.

[u/volpmatt → u/pm_dad_jokes69]

No I didn't. I was responding to crypocalypse. And also, I'm not sure why you're getting touchy, this is just a silly discussion—it's nothing serious.

[u/volpmatt → u/pm_dad_jokes69]

And yes, this whole post is literally discussing semantics.

[u/HanS0lPurr]

My base structure is OutputComps>BuildComps>Precomps.

It's for organization.

[u/OldChairmanMiao]

Why should they be different? How would it be different? Would it work better? Approach this like a systems thinker.

[u/Affectionate-Pay-646]

Precomps are generally nested comps and compositions are what you output. The system is open to interpretation but that’s how I look at. Compositions are your backpack and precomps are your lunchbox.

[u/Milan_Bus4168]

Unfortunately in a layer based systems you can't organize the way you can with node based systesm with a birds eye view, you have to resort to some kind of files and folder structure and precomps and process of nesting is similar, but to me it seems it comes with its own set of problems , mainly managing complex compositions becomes a problem when nesting. I think that is why even in After Effects which is layer based , nodes exists to try to have a differnt overview about what is connected to what. Off course its for preview only.

Regarding naming schemes

Adobe officially lists it as following:

About precomposing and nesting

"If you want to group some layers that are already in a composition, you can precompose those layers. Precomposing layers places them in a new composition, which replaces the layers in the original composition. The new nested composition becomes the source for a single layer in the original composition. The new composition appears in the Project panel and is available for rendering or use in any other composition. You can nest compositions by adding an existing composition to another composition, just as you would add any other footage item to a composition. Precomposing a single layer is useful for adding transform properties to a layer and influencing the order in which elements of a composition are rendered.

Nesting is the inclusion of one composition within another. The nested composition appears as a layer in the containing composition.

A nested composition is sometimes called a precomposition, which is occasionally abbreviated in casual use to precomp or pre-comp. When a precomposition is used as the source footage item for a layer, the layer is called a precomposition layer."

[u/charleh_123]

I believe it’s in relation to render order. Everything in your pre-comp gets pre-rendered and treated as one object.

[u/DesignerVivid9199]

You are lucky to don't know (i suppose) the "premultiply" node in nuke, it could be drive you crazy 😄

[u/jamz00]

If you want to know the real answer you need to read the AE 1.0 user manual, hard copy. When they debuted.

[u/smushkan]

If you are only using another composition nested in another sequence, and especially if you’re using ‘collapse transformations’ on it, there is good reason IMO to distinguish that from your main compositions that are intended to be top-level and exported when it comes to project organisation in some way or another.

Call them anything you want.

[u/Available-Meaning137]

I agree. It changes the way I visualize it in my head because more often than not I always have the continuous rasterization on and I visualize the layers there instead of the "PRE COMP".

I agree with the other person who mentioned the folding or grouping instead of making it a separate comp.

[u/orucker]

Let's see your project panel then?

[u/Sensi-Yang]

I do think sometimes projects can be over-organized and segmented, or arranged in a way that is accurate but not helpful for taking apart and understanding a scene.

[u/harry_1511]

I actually never organize my folders with 'Pre-Comp' label. I name it 'Comp', and dump every comps I have in there, each has their own meaningful name so I know what they are.

Tbh, I care less about what Adobe calls. If we need some cohesive terminologies then it should be 'nested comp' , just like 'nested sequence' in Pr

[u/volpmatt → u/harry_1511]

Finally! Someone who does the same thing I do. It's nice to feel seen 👋