Answers.Body: <p>Simply copy the two animated masks to the 4th footage file and set them to "Intersect" instead of "Add". Then they will only reveal the footage that they are applied to when they intersect with another mask. Then put this footage files layer ontop of the others.</p>
  
  <p>Here a screenshot as a reference.
  <img src="https://i.sstatic.net/4FXJe.png" alt="enter image description here"></p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-04-23T02:02:26.763Z
Answers.Text: This was the best way I could think of too.
Answers.UserDisplayName: AJ Henderson
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-04-22T23:45:33.390Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2014-04-22T23:50:47.217Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2014-04-22T23:50:47.217Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: timonsku
Body: <p>As a quick demonstration, here's an illustration;</p>
  
  <p><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/cCGWr.jpg" alt="Intersecting masks"></p>
  
  <p>So I have two shapes (2 and 3), which intersect (4). I want to animate the position (possibly also scale) of these two shapes, while having footage masked inside each numbered area. The shapes should move independently of the footage.</p>
  
  <p>I've gotten as far as masking the footage for 2 and 3, but the intersection is what makes me scratch my head. Is there a way to do this in After Effects CC without any hand-tooling for a mask for the intersecting area?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-04-22T18:49:39.640Z
Comments.Text: My first thought: what happens at the intersection? Is it just overlapping footage, like in the middle of a "dissolve"? My second thought: once you figure that out, I'd be tempted to create the #2 masked shot first, then use that as the "background" for the #3 masked shot. But that's after you figure out what happens when they overlap. (The overlapping area COULD be a third masked shot that you layer on top of the other two masked shots.)
Comments.UserDisplayName: BrettFromLA
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-04-22T22:40:31.993Z
Comments.Text: What exactly is your issue? What do you expect to happen when the masks intersect? Are you masking one footage file with both masks at diffrent areas or does mask 2 and 3 have different footage that they are masking?
Comments.UserDisplayName: timonsku
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-04-22T23:32:30.970Z
Comments.Text: @ProfessorFartSparkle - it sounds like he wants a different video entirely to play in area 4, so each number has its own video driving it.
Comments.UserDisplayName: AJ Henderson
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-04-22T23:41:04.360Z
Comments.Text: Aaah I see, makes sense now. Then I know an answer for that.
Comments.UserDisplayName: timonsku
Tags: <after-effects>
Title: Intersecting animated masks
UserDisplayName: Emphram Stavanger
ThreadText: # Intersecting animated masks
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2014-04-22)
  
  As a quick demonstration, here's an illustration;
  
  ![Intersecting masks](https://i.sstatic.net/cCGWr.jpg)
  
  So I have two shapes (2 and 3), which intersect (4). I want to animate the position (possibly also scale) of these two shapes, while having footage masked inside each numbered area. The shapes should move independently of the footage.
  
  I've gotten as far as masking the footage for 2 and 3, but the intersection is what makes me scratch my head. Is there a way to do this in After Effects CC without any hand-tooling for a mask for the intersecting area?
  
  **Tags:** after-effects
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: My first thought: what happens at the intersection? Is it just overlapping footage, like in the middle of a "dissolve"? My second thought: once you figure that out, I'd be tempted to create the #2 masked shot first, then use that as the "background" for the #3 masked shot. But that's after you figure out what happens when they overlap. (The overlapping area COULD be a third masked shot that you layer on top of the other two masked shots.)  
  > **username_2**: What exactly is your issue? What do you expect to happen when the masks intersect? Are you masking one footage file with both masks at diffrent areas or does mask 2 and 3 have different footage that they are masking?  
  > **username_3**: @ProfessorFartSparkle - it sounds like he wants a different video entirely to play in area 4, so each number has its own video driving it.  
  > **username_2**: Aaah I see, makes sense now. Then I know an answer for that.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2014-04-22. Score: 4 | Accepted answer
  
  Simply copy the two animated masks to the 4th footage file and set them to "Intersect" instead of "Add". Then they will only reveal the footage that they are applied to when they intersect with another mask. Then put this footage files layer ontop of the others.
  
  Here a screenshot as a reference.
  ![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/4FXJe.png)
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_3**: This was the best way I could think of too.  
  
  ---
  
  