"Adobe After Effects has become the ‘Avid Media Composer’ of motion graphics generation. It is the default choice of those who make money from 2D animation.
It is time Apple showed how Motion 5 is more of an ‘and’ choice than an ‘or’ choice when it comes to animation – especially as it is at its heart a real-time animation application."
Seriously wish I could spend some time to become competent in Motion. After Effects is one of the few reasons still to have an Adobe CC account, but the render engine and performance is terrible compared with Motion.
Unfortunately, I think Motion has some catching up to do before it's a viable competitor to After Effects for serious motion graphics. While the philosophy of Motion is brilliant, it is missing significant pieces of the toolset -- specifically, a project manager and extensibility -- necessary for large-scale mograph projects.
I think that Mainframe's Cavalry [link] will come to occupy the 2D mograph niche Alex sees for Motion pretty quickly.
[Walter Soyka]"Unfortunately, I think Motion has some catching up to do before it's a viable competitor to After Effects for serious motion graphics. "
I agree. I'm trying to use Motion more, but there are times it just doesn't have what I need so it's back to AE.. It's development has been stagnant for a long time. The base is there, but there is a lot of features that need to be added.
"It is time Apple showed how Motion 5 is more of an ‘and’ choice than an ‘or’ choice when it comes to animation"
Back when I was using Motion almost exclusively (which was 8 years ago- wow), I remember having the same hopes and making the same argument. I'm guessing not much is going to change on that front, as Apple doesn't really seem to have any desire to make it into that kind of product, at least from what I can tell.
As far as the "and" part; for my part I've tried to find that "and" but don't really think there's a compelling reason to use After Effects "and" Motion, at least not if one is really deep in After Effects on a regular basis. There are some things I really liked about Motion back when I was using it (which was admittedly a long time ago), but the ceiling of its functionality is real, and by the time one deals with figuring out how to integrate it into one's workflow that includes Ae, any speed increases are IMO negligible, especially the larger and more complex the projects become. If I was using FCPX on a regular basis I'm guessing that might change, at least for some things.
I still use AE a bit and it's the only CC I still subscribe to. Although I think I'll turn that off and just pay when I need it.
If one is doing most of their editing in FCPX and still using AE for their daily motion graphics, they're likely doing themselves a disservice. The integration of Motion into FCPX is remarkable and can really increase productivity and efficiency for any project with motion graphics. It'll do most of what you need day in and day out. It's just those times you need the puppet tool or Illustrator integration that AE really shines.
It could definitely use some updates. But amazing how well the publishing and rigging has held up. Still light years ahead of what Adobe has put together. I'm quite surprised by that, especially since we've been using rigging / expressions inside of AE for a long time. That's where Motion is great. All that power is put into the editor's hands right in FCPX. If you want to utilize all the power AE has, you've pretty much got to know AE.
And as usual, platform independence will keep Apple from really being a contender and perhaps Adobe and Apple know that. The potential user base is restricted from the start.