Questions about Combustion feature parity in AE
by Alan Okey
on
Oct 22, 2009 at 9:15:40 pm
I suspect that Autodesk will be releasing neither a patch nor a new Mac version of Combustion that's compatible with Snow Leopard, so I'm looking into moving to After Effects in the long term despite the fact that I find Combustion's UI to be far superior.
For those of you who have experience with AE, I have some questions regarding its capabilities. Are these Combustion features available in AE without plugins (unless the plugins are included with the purchase price)?
1. Interactive schematic view - not just viewing, but building/connecting permitted. I already own dvGarage's Conduit Suite, so this may be a non-issue.
2. Simultaneous tracking of individual mask vertex points
3. Per-vertex mask feathering adjustment ("splines" mode in C*)
4. B-spline mask tools (not just Bezier)
5. 3D compositing environment with multiple lights/shadows
6. Vector paint tools
7. Warping/morphing
8. 10-bit color depth at the comp level
9. Footage 3:2 pulldown removal/addition
10. Live frame buffer preview to broadcast monitor via video I/O hardware (I use the AJA Kona LHe)
I'd also be interested in hearing what capabilities AE has that Combustion does not. The ones I'm aware of include:
1. Better support/integration of Adobe vector file formats
2. Broader plugin support
3. Gamma shift issue fixed when converting YUV Quicktime files to RGB color space (supposedly)
4. 64-bit version in next release
Any other opinions about what AE does better or worse than Combustion are welcome. Since it looks like AE is going to be my best option in the future, I'd like to know what I'm in for and how to address any potential shortcomings.
Re: Questions about Combustion feature parity in AE by Aaron Neitz on Oct 23, 2009 at 12:38:41 am
AE is a terrible compositor. But it's strength lies elsewhere.
Schematic = yes. But like Combustion, it's really just a kludged view of a layer based program. You want to blow your mind: get into Shake or Nuke or Fusion.
It's masking tools are utter crap. No vertex tracking, no feathering per side, no B splines. Nuttin. They're not fun to use. I hate masks in AE so much.
3D compositing is on par with C.
Paint tools will leave you crying. Combustion is uber-alles.
Warping: yes. Good stuff there. Reflex. Bezier. MESH WARPING! puppets!
8,16,float color depth if you'd like. not all effects support it though.
3:2 removal and addition is great. works a little easier than C.
Buffer preview works like a charm.
Keyframe control is quicker than C, but not as easy to fine tune as C. You'll miss the Animate button.
----------
I'm frankly surprised you haven't dabbled with AE yet! Doesn't everyone have it lying around :) Despite it's compositing problems, it is *really* a handy program.
Motion graphics and type setting are a gem. I do my text/graphics solely in After Effects at this point.
AE is FAAAASSSSTTTTT. Not only can it render with all available cores but it's caching is so incredibly smart. The thing is zippy!
It has SO many plug in possibilities - and they tend to be MUCH more stable than trying to run the same plugin in Combustion. And again they all seem WAY faster in AE than C.
It has amazing depth of options for color control: typically there are ZERO problems with gamma shift (but they do creep up, it's not the programs, it's quicktime). Though I haven't had a single problem in the last year of CS3.
Want to bring in some Illustrator files??? Great - it rasterizes continuously. This is also a great boon for setting type.
For ANY job I do I swear AE gets used at least once during the process. It's SUPER stable, it's fast, and it can do a lot of really simple or complicated tasks that save you time and headaches. BUT as a co positing program you'll tear out your hair. For me it's poor masking and paint tools are strikes 1, 2, and 3.
They have a 30 day free FULLY OPERATIONAL trial version. Do it! nothing to lose.
You'll bemoan the UI. It ain't sexy and artist friendly like Autodesk.... but you get used to it.
As far as compositing pick up a dirt cheap copy of Shake. it may be EOL, but it's still a juggernaut. You'll fall in love with nodes and never go back. Also Shake is FAAASSSSTTTTT.
Re: Questions about Combustion feature parity in AE by Alan Okey on Oct 23, 2009 at 2:32:51 pm
Aaron,
Thank you so much for taking the time to write such a fantastic response. That's exactly the kind of information I was looking for.
Too bad about AE's roto/paint suck factor.
I have Shake, and I love using it when I can, mostly for straight compositing. Unfortunately its roto, paint and tracking abilities pale compared to Combustion, at least in my experience.
I've really been enjoying getting into Conduit lately - it's like having a mini Shake right inside Final Cut Pro. Nodal compositing is definitely where it's at.
I've actually been going back into C* lately to try to use it like a nodal compositor, with some limited success. I find that it's a little more cryptic than Shake or Conduit when trying to use math operations. The operators are more complex than the simple nodes in Shake or Conduit. I was trying to build a color difference key the other night and I found it kind of difficult to separate the input source into individual channels. It's probably easy to do, it's just that the RGB arithmetic and Compound RGB Arithmetic operators are a little trickier for me to figure out.
What's your opinion of Combustion's capabilities when trying to use it like a nodal app?
Re: Questions about Combustion feature parity in AE by Aaron Neitz on Oct 23, 2009 at 6:10:58 pm
Well I started using Paint & Effect before it was even Combustion v1, so I learned to use it purely in layers..... The several times I poked around with the schematic view it came across as a quirky way to re-represent layers that has ZERO real nodal abilities.
Once you go Nodal you don't go back. Combustion is great for quick slop composites, I use it in rough cuts all the time, but the power you get from nodes for final compositing is a must. sometimes I'll be trying to do something in C that would be a cinch in Shake - end up frustrated by the limits of layer based compositing.
Re: Questions about Combustion feature parity in AE by Carlos Zapater on Oct 26, 2009 at 12:32:17 pm
My work is more motion graphics oriented and I tried everything to get used to AE but for me it is impossible to deal with its interface. DVD training, auto-training... time lost. But still trying.
Have you tried render farm with AE? Is it worth enough to make the move?
