FORUMS: list search recent posts

OT: Hit Film For Mac

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
David Mathis
OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 19, 2014 at 4:46:56 am

Just noticed that Hit Film is now available for the Mac platform. Even more exciting it is also available as plug-in, which is just awesome!


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 19, 2014 at 9:19:46 am

Sounds great, how much is the subscription? ;)

Steve Connor
Mellowing slowly


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 19, 2014 at 10:26:26 am

It is $499, permanent license. :)


Return to posts index


Gary Huff
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 19, 2014 at 11:36:30 am

[David Mathis] "It is $499, permanent license. :)"

And all the tools you need for your next Fan Film!


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 19, 2014 at 4:19:40 pm

It looks like it could take some steam of the After Effects locomotive. Too early to tell but with this and Resolve, things are getting very interesting.


Return to posts index

Ricardo Marty
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 19, 2014 at 6:07:01 pm
Last Edited By Ricardo Marty on Apr 19, 2014 at 6:37:10 pm

add to this that vegas and hit film are colborating and now you can import hf timelines into vegas and maybe vs,vs. then exort to resolve? wow the future looks sunny and cloudless. ht now has 2d&3d tracking maybe not as developed but its a start. who knows maybe sony will buy ht.

Ricardo Marty


Return to posts index


Gary Huff
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 19, 2014 at 6:30:08 pm

[David Mathis] "It looks like it could take some steam of the After Effects locomotive."

Have to be heavily revised. Back when the Kickstarter campaign for the Mac version was announced, I believe it was discovered that HitFilm isn't even in the same ballpark.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 19, 2014 at 9:44:45 pm

If someone wanted to take on AE - you'd think they would concentrate on transformative real time mograph performance.
with clean type tools, luts, dynamics, transfer modes, advanced CC and tracked masking - with an AE compatible javascript component. Sort of a designer's davinci.
as in forget the 3d camera at the outset - just provide the stuff you know can kill AE: a core realtime version of it.

AE feels a lot like microsoft word in that 90% of people are using less than 20% of its features. it's nice to daydream about an incubator boiling AE down into a lean extensible real time mograph application. something equivalent to nuke as a disruptive entrant. It's not like it can't be done.

AE is an incredibly marshy, slow application these days. Given mograph is, essentially, iterative playback experimentation - it's crazy how far adobe are getting away with the sluggish decades old code behaviour of AE. If you provided the core 20% of AE at close to real time you would peel off a ton of current creatives. It would be, in this software fantasy, instant hipster fashion to poo-poo that bulky AE, as they execute their work with its successor.

Adobe have already lost most of the web to nimbler software in coding and layout. Seriously - Muse anyone?

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 19, 2014 at 10:38:30 pm

Aindreas, why do you think Apple Motion has failed to take the mograph world by storm?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 19, 2014 at 11:20:28 pm

hello Walter - do you, as it were, logically, view what was outlined there as generally representing Motion?

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 20, 2014 at 8:49:53 am

You mean, is Motion 20% of AE? I'd have to say yes, but I don't use AE!

Steve Connor
Mellowing slowly


Return to posts index

Christopher Travis
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 20, 2014 at 4:24:57 pm

Motion is generally acknowledged to be able to give you about 80% of what AE can do, for about 50% of the time investment. It's designed to pre-empt a lot of the repetitive tasks that get done in AE, and boil them down to simpler, though slightly less customisable procedures.

My Motion skills have slipped a lot in recent years since I've learned more how to use AE, but I would recommend it to anyone who doesn't know or have AE but wants to do nice looking mograph quickly, and doesn't need infinite customisation and/ or expressions.


Return to posts index


Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 20, 2014 at 4:34:15 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "hello Walter - do you, as it were, logically, view what was outlined there as generally representing Motion?"

I don't know what Walter thinks, but I know what I think ...

;-)

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 20, 2014 at 8:00:14 pm

please! We've all seen what you can do in motion Simon. Given enough lead time I'm pretty sure you could perform cold fusion in there.

It's not whether motion is a functioning replacement that was my thing there. That's why I was blabbing on about a designer's davinci - just even that phrase, like what would that actually be.

Nuke disrupted the flame market right? How big is the AE market? I was basically fantasising about an incubator that would specifically target and analyse after effects to see what they could bring to market. The first thing you would think is that AE really is kind of incredibly slow relative to what's going on out there. And also that it has a lunatically broad feature set.

You'd wonder how much of the core tool set, operating at near real time, with say plug-in compatibility (have no idea if that could happen) and similar javascript for extensibility - how much of AE would people need to get them to shift to a slimmer, cheaper, faster, more focused AE that they could pick up for 4-500 quid? where say AE could open its project files ala pixelmator opening in PS?

So a mograph focused AE competitor with, like, excellent CC and stuff - that was my wee little fantasy. If it was really sweet, extremely fast, excellent type design tools etc - you could imagine trendy hipster designers opting for it, just to opt for it. Adobe lost most of their web tool marketshare to more nimble competitors in coding and layout right?

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Ricardo Marty
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 20, 2014 at 9:50:40 pm

what about digital fusion as an ae replacement.dont know much about it an it has never been mentioned here but its sold as a compositor and does mograph.

Ricardo Marty


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 20, 2014 at 10:58:16 pm

well - better not a CC debate crew circlejerk Ricardo? best avoid that at all costs eh?
also fusion is weird old crazy. I was at their booth at l.e.a.f. twelve years ago. also say nodal cannot displace AE.
A quantitatively sharper near real time AE mograph competitor could formally challenge AE though.

speaking privately here ricardo, we ideally need simon ubsdell to produce a positive substantive opinion on the viability of a new entrant, ala nuke to flame, attacking the market position of AE.

basically the notion that AE is ripe for specific mograph disruption with an addressable market in the millions ill at ease with adobe.
all you really need there is an imaginary high skills group brewing a killer nuke equivalent for the mograph AE market.

In the age of blackmagic/witchcraft NLE development that doesn't sound so crazy anymore.

you'd think a tooled up group could take on AE. It's a pretty ripe old ram preview target.
the software team's perception of interoperability and market partners would be a thing you'd think.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 21, 2014 at 3:42:59 pm

If you sat down to build the ideal mograph tool today, the one thing you wouldn't do is make it look like After Effects. Tired, old, clunky, a grab-bag of random stuff that's become glued together over the years. Who in their right minds would build such a thing today?

On the other hand, if you were sitting down to build a product that could take on After Effects, you'd be utterly out of your mind to make it anything other than the closest thing to After Effects you could possibly manage without getting sued,

No mograph professional is going to look at any wannabe Ae competitor if it doesn't match After Effects in every particular.

The major problem for anyone starting out to rival Ae is that there is just so much aggregated crud (sorry, so many powerful, essential features) that every Ae user will deem essential, that it would take a very long time to get to the same place. C4D, 3D tracking - all that more recent stuff obviously, but there's just so much more built up over the years that one can easily forget is there.

If HitFilm want to compete in the Ae market, and I'm not entirely sure that's where they want to pitch themselves, they have a really long way to go still.

Apple are never, ever going to do anything serious with Motion - they don't have the will, they don't fancy the market, and they don't have the quality developers to achieve it.

The Foundry could have a go - anybody who's used Nuke and Modo can see how the coming together of The Foundry and Luxology has the potential to create amazing stuff across the board. Nuke Studio sounds as though it could be very interesting - but at that price it's hardly in the budget realm of Ae. Imagine if they were to produce a product that could do everything that Ae could do and at the same price point - they would seriously eat into their existing product lines.

The same thing applies to Autodesk, who could make Smoke even more of an Ae competitor - but they're already regretting the decision to price Smoke as a "cheap offering" so that's not going to happen.

Mistika? Who knows ... Maybe Grant Petty has something else up his sleeve.

What you're buying with Ae is product maturity, just as you are with Photoshop. There's just so much in there that you take for granted - until you don't have it.

Ae is dirt cheap compared to everything except Motion, and it's the product that every kid in his bedroom still wants to be seen to be using because, for what seems like an eternity now, there has been no meaningful competition of any kind. It's not easy fighting against that kind of monopoly.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 21, 2014 at 4:01:18 pm

Motion is a great product, but a competitor it is not. Keep hoping that Black Magic would make something that would make for strong competition. Now if I can only find an alternative to Photoshop life would be great!


Return to posts index


Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 21, 2014 at 4:05:59 pm

[David Mathis] "Now if I can only find an alternative to Photoshop life would be great!"

Pixelmator.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 21, 2014 at 5:42:57 pm

So what are the main things that Motion is lacking that rules it out as being a viable AE alternative?

Steve Connor
Mellowing slowly


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 21, 2014 at 6:28:37 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Apr 21, 2014 at 6:37:10 pm

[Steve Connor] "So what are the main things that Motion is lacking that rules it out as being a viable AE alternative?"

As far as I'm concerned, it's clearly the front-runner as an Ae alternative and it's massively underestimated by those who don't know it very well. The fundamental architecture seems to me to be at least as good as Ae if not better in some respects and as far as real-time performance is concerned, there is simply no contest.

Here's my small contribution to trying to spread the word:

http://tokyo-uk.com/motiontutorials.html

However, one has to admit that there are large gaps that don't look as though they will be filled any time soon.

Sexy new stuff like C4D and 3D camera tracking, Roto Brush, Warp Stabilizer, etc. are the obvious things, but there's also the fact that Motion is only 2.5D not 3D capable; there are loads of Ae filters that put it way ahead of Motion (e.g. Liquify, Blend Warp, etc.); there is the lack of expressions in Motion (although Behaviors make up for this far, far more than most people realise); there's the plug-in ecosystem with stand-out offerings like Element 3D and Trapcode Particular to name just the most popular ...

And the list, unfortunately goes on and on - I've probably left out some really key things that Ae users couldn't live without ... there's just so much in there, not all of it great by any means, but it does the job in ways that are often harder or simply impossible to achieve in Motion.

Then there's the fact that Apple haven't brought anything new to Motion since rigging and publishing with the launch of Motion 5, which is really not encouraging to those of us who'd like to see if develop.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 3:50:39 pm

A version of Dynamic Link between Motion and FCP X would be very welcome.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 21, 2014 at 7:24:57 pm

You're wrecking my fantasy buzz simon. But yeah - that all has a ring to it.

except for this bit -

"No mograph professional is going to look at any wannabe Ae competitor if it doesn't match After Effects in every particular."

that's the only thing I think is basically wrong - if the competitor comes out the gate focused solely on a key mograph toolset operating at near realtime all the time - then I could very easily imagine AE types putting it into their toolset if only as a rapid prototyping area for type work, design compositing, grading and masking. make it the best possible place to do those key tasks. and have it all be realtime at 1080P.

forget all about C4D pipelines. what you want to have happen is for them to be sufficiently fond of it to start using it in conjunction with AE - then you build out the toolset and slowly start stealing mograph from under adobe. sell it for 350 quid. if you start to gain real traction with core mograph - who can always go onto AE for the crazier stuff - because you made it AE compatible, but if you can get enough people to start slotting it into their workflow, because its incredibly fast and well thought out, that would be 350 times quite a lot of people. say conservatively a quarter of a million licenses in the first three years. thats still eighty million in revenue. that should keep the wolf from the door.

there - I refined my fantasy vision.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 21, 2014 at 7:37:35 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "that's the only thing I think is basically wrong - if the competitor comes out the gate focused solely on a key mograph toolset operating at near realtime all the time - then I could very easily imagine AE types putting it into their toolset if only as a rapid prototyping area for type work, design compositing, grading and masking. make it the best possible place to do those key tasks. and have it all be realtime at 1080P. "

If that's all you're asking for, then seriously, it already exists.

Motion does everything you've described there and in real-time, not just near real-time.

But I don't believe that's all you want ... ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 21, 2014 at 7:41:52 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "forget all about C4D pipelines. what you want to have happen is for them to be sufficiently fond of it to start using it in conjunction with AE"

I worked with a lovely girl who was a really talented motion graphics artist, who once declared to me in all seriousness that she never wanted to work in anything other than Ae, she could never imagine working on anything other than Ae, and she'd sooner poke her eyes out with hot pins that contemplate a world where Ae was anything other than the only mograph tool.

I think she's not atypical.

It's a really tough crowd you're talking about.

I don't think their responses are always entirely rational.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 7:08:25 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "she could never imagine working on anything other than Ae"

true there simon, if I'm honest I'm sort of one of them. not a very highly skilled one, but one. I came in at 4.0 and the excitement of multiple masks per layer.

but the thing is you're forgetting how incredible this new application is, how tightly focused on mograph and performance, how slick and clean the toolset is, its really an amazing app. I wish you could see simon, how incredible this competitor that integrates so well with AE is.







http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 7:23:46 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "but the thing is you're forgetting how incredible this new application is, how tightly focused on mograph and performance, how slick and clean the toolset is, its really an amazing app. I wish you could see simon, how incredible this competitor that integrates so well with AE is. "

Well, hell, yeah! If it glows like that it's gotta be good, right?

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 7:33:54 pm

exactly.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 9:12:42 pm

You're right Simon, it is a tough crowd. Truthfully, I think this is the hardest nut to crack for any software package that's looking to win over AE users, while luring new designers. They're not just competing on software features and performance, they're contending with a VERY energetic and active Adobe user base (designers and developers). Experienced AE operators are used to having boatloads of plugins and scripts that ease and accelerate their work. Intermediate users can easily find really good training for free, and GREAT training materials very cheaply. For potential designers, the visibility of high-end AE work really sort of makes the choice of which mograph tool to learn a no-brainier.

I actually bought a Hitfilm license when it was in its beta stages (back in the FXHome days), because I thought those guys were onto something and I wanted to support their work. I like where they're going, but if they want to compete with AE, they seriously need to shed their "fan film" vibe and open the application up to third party developers. I also think Motion could be a serious contender to AE... but it would need to be cross platform and have a scripting engine (IMO). :-)

Lastly, I like what you're doing with your Motion tutorial site... any plans to do more VFX centric stuff? There's so much overlap between mograph and VFX now, it almost seems like a necessity to show a blend of the two. :-)

Shawn

Shawn



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 11:46:23 pm

[Shawn Miller] " I like where they're going, but if they want to compete with AE, they seriously need to shed their "fan film" vibe and open the application up to third party developers. I also think Motion could be a serious contender to AE... "

sure isn't the point that there is currently nothing on the field challenging AE as a key mograph application?

No one is going to shift to motion or hitfilm. You are hypothetically looking at a funded new entrant analysing and synthesising, with realtime operation,
core aspects of ae to produce an answer that betters it for key brand design solutions. time and motion study.

say an application that clearly, per quantifiable dollar, iterates faster and better brand mograph design problems -
without say, some pointless rotobrush or a buried, ages old, brian maffit ocean generator no one cares about.
you just clear that 20 year old crud away, hug AE close for the customer in design terms, and sleekly answer motion graphics for the now. opening it up to all partners.

as long as it's fit, design targeted and a total revelation, well there you go: surely most designers alive would try it just to see if it's all that.
they haven't seen anything in a long time. The type object animation twirl down apparatus in AE is a kafkaesque insanity. honestly. that's all ridiculous and we're talking about typographic animation here. adobe are getting away with murder.

In design terms, as an initial statement, I'm not sure this effort is predicated on C4D integration.
you just need funding to assemble a skills group to breakdown and beat AE as a mograph application that can play extremely well with AE, PS, nuke, avid and autodesk.

you would feel that could be done. far likelier target than PS, with - at least - the guts of a million licenses at play.

and so the perfect fantasy.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 23, 2014 at 8:50:45 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "[Shawn Miller] " I like where they're going, but if they want to compete with AE, they seriously need to shed their "fan film" vibe and open the application up to third party developers. I also think Motion could be a serious contender to AE... "

sure isn't the point that there is currently nothing on the field challenging AE as a key mograph application?"


Yup, and I don't disagree with your sentiments at all. A modern, dedicated mograph tool with a scripting engine, plugin architecture, near RT performance in the $349-$599 price range could potentially sell like hotcakes. Though to be honest, the application you described earlier in the thread should really cost more like $1,000 - $2,000... you would have to pare down the features to get the cost down to $350.00, I think.

As I see it, only Apple, Maxon, Boris and Adobe are interested in building tools for serious motion graphics artists... but I think Adobe and Maxon are a LOT more serious than Apple and Boris are. Maybe there is a small firm out there working on the tool of our dreams. Question is, can such a firm bring something to market at an attractive price point, that's feature rich AND stable (cheap, good, fast... pick two)? :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 24, 2014 at 10:48:41 pm

[Shawn Miller] ". A modern, dedicated mograph tool with a scripting engine, plugin architecture, near RT performance in the $349-$599 price range could potentially sell like hotcakes. Though to be honest, the application you described earlier in the thread should really cost more like $1,000 - $2,000... you would have to pare down the features to get the cost down to $350.00, I think. "

yeah, I'm revising the argument as I go.. it's just somewhere in my bones i feel, if it was built right, by like, the super right people, gunning for a serious market segment, there actually is an idealised VA mograph application that the brand new design crowd would gravitate towards to execute their core concepts. simply because they could feel it had been made specifically for their use cases. Very well made, nimble, basically real-time and deployable to multiple screen use cases. It's the last part where you feel AE fails spectacularly.

I made the argument below with simon, but you could argue that a lot of the important mograph design work of the last 6-8 years (weighted to the back end), occurred in flash, and informed a ton of what is going on now? AE really did not lead the flat dynamic design aesthetic.

you'd think a lot of the current mograph aesthetic - and the broader procedural dynamics - are an AE latecomer outcropping of that environment and the practitioners who gravitated to it? because they had a clean room operating environment?

granted we're bullsh*tting a fantasy application, but you'd feel a design clipper has a reason for being in opposition the QE2 that is AE.







http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 12:10:40 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "yeah, I'm revising the argument as I go.. it's just somewhere in my bones i feel, if it was built right, by like, the super right people, gunning for a serious market segment, there actually is an idealised VA mograph application that the brand new design crowd would gravitate towards to execute their core concepts. simply because they could feel it had been made specifically for their use cases. Very well made, nimble, basically real-time and deployable to multiple screen use cases. It's the last part where you feel AE fails spectacularly."

Yup, I can certainly see where you're coming from, and I don't disagree at all. If I could get a stable application like this at a reasonable price, I would be all over it. Of course, it would also have to be cross platform, and be able to send standard file formats and XML to and from other applications.

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I made the argument below with simon, but you could argue that a lot of the important mograph design work of the last 6-8 years (weighted to the back end), occurred in flash, and informed a ton of what is going on now? AE really did not lead the flat dynamic design aesthetic.

you'd think a lot of the current mograph aesthetic - and the broader procedural dynamics - are an AE latecomer outcropping of that environment and the practitioners who gravitated to it? because they had a clean room operating environment?"


Absolutely! I would even say that the work of Flash animators started influencing the rest of the mograph community as far back as 2000.

Speaking of, I was asked to add subtitles to this video a few weeks ago. I don't think it would look anything like this without the influences you're talking about. I think the 'Flash aesthetic' is here to stay.







[Aindreas Gallagher] "granted we're bullsh*tting a fantasy application, but you'd feel a design clipper has a reason for being in opposition the QE2 that is AE."

For sure, I think there is definitely room for a fresh perspective on motion graphics software. Now I wonder if someone is working on something like this as we speak... stranger things have happened. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 12:54:33 am

[Shawn Miller] "Now I wonder if "

wondering has financial attributes hard to beat.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 23, 2014 at 12:08:46 pm

[Shawn Miller] "They're not just competing on software features and performance, they're contending with a VERY energetic and active Adobe user base (designers and developers). Experienced AE operators are used to having boatloads of plugins and scripts that ease and accelerate their work. Intermediate users can easily find really good training for free, and GREAT training materials very cheaply. For potential designers, the visibility of high-end AE work really sort of makes the choice of which mograph tool to learn a no-brainier. "

Yes, I think these are really key points - no rival product is going to be able to create that kind of supportive ecosystem any time soon. It's taken decades for Ae to get there.

[Shawn Miller] "I actually bought a Hitfilm license when it was in its beta stages (back in the FXHome days), because I thought those guys were onto something and I wanted to support their work. I like where they're going, but if they want to compete with AE, they seriously need to shed their "fan film" vibe and open the application up to third party developers."

I actually think they've made a decision to compete in the middle of the market, where the big bucks are potentially going to come from, rather than go for the top-end Ae market. I notice lots of shiny stuff in there that's designed to sell mass market units. The only thing I looked at particularly closely was the keying which is serviceable but very definitely not top flight and that I think is quite a useful benchmarks for the product as a whole.

[Shawn Miller] "Lastly, I like what you're doing with your Motion tutorial site... any plans to do more VFX centric stuff? There's so much overlap between mograph and VFX now, it almost seems like a necessity to show a blend of the two. :-)"

Actually you and Walter are responsible for having got me started on the tutorials following our Motion/Ae discussions last summer.

One of the reasons I haven't done much in the way of compositing tutorials is not having materials to use other than client material, and not having a funny, fat friend on hand who's prepared to run around being blown up on camera. Anyone who's followed Andrew Kramer will know who I'm talking about ;-)

The other reasons are more to do with the limitations of Motion - the lack of true 3D, but also the poor quality of the 2D motion tracking, and so on. (I haven't looked deeply into mObject but that does seem to be starting to offer the kind of 3D object importing that you get with Element 3D.) That makes it hard to do the kind of flashy stuff that most people want to see. But I'll certainly give it some thought.

The interesting thing about working in Motion is that because you don't have many of the easy instant tools that come with Ae, you have to build things from scratch and/or create workarounds, so it does actually teach you to be more inventive and resourceful and that's no bad thing. But the limits are very obvious and I'm not at all sure that Apple will be trying to do anything about that - I think to move it forward, they would really need to bring in a whole new team with a higher end mindset and skill base. Not at all likely ...

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 23, 2014 at 5:54:12 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "I actually think they've made a decision to compete in the middle of the market, where the big bucks are potentially going to come from, rather than go for the top-end Ae market. I notice lots of shiny stuff in there that's designed to sell mass market units. The only thing I looked at particularly closely was the keying which is serviceable but very definitely not top flight and that I think is quite a useful benchmarks for the product as a whole."

Yes, that makes sense. I admire the work they've done so far and I hope they can stay in the game long enough to elevate the software.

[Simon Ubsdell] "Actually you and Walter are responsible for having got me started on the tutorials following our Motion/Ae discussions last summer."

Ha ha, well... if my being a PITA encourages anyone in any small way to do work that good, I shall endeavor to be more annoying more often. ;-)

[Simon Ubsdell] "One of the reasons I haven't done much in the way of compositing tutorials is not having materials to use other than client material, and not having a funny, fat friend on hand who's prepared to run around being blown up on camera. Anyone who's followed Andrew Kramer will know who I'm talking about ;-)"

lol - I know exactly what you're talking about. I've never really watched VCP or Film Riot for the tutorials... I just think those folks are really entertaining. Well that, and to see what products VCP is coming up with next. Let me know if you need any plates for your tutorials, I would be willing to run out and shoot something for you. :-)

[Simon Ubsdell] "The other reasons are more to do with the limitations of Motion - the lack of true 3D, but also the poor quality of the 2D motion tracking, and so on. (I haven't looked deeply into mObject but that does seem to be starting to offer the kind of 3D object importing that you get with Element 3D.) That makes it hard to do the kind of flashy stuff that most people want to see. But I'll certainly give it some thought."

Yes, please do! Who knows who you might inspire in the process. Again, let me know if I can help in any way. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 23, 2014 at 6:28:42 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Actually you and Walter are responsible for having got me started on the tutorials following our Motion/Ae discussions last summer."

[Simon Ubsdell] "The other reasons are more to do with the limitations of Motion - the lack of true 3D, but also the poor quality of the 2D motion tracking, and so on. (I haven't looked deeply into mObject but that does seem to be starting to offer the kind of 3D object importing that you get with Element 3D.) That makes it hard to do the kind of flashy stuff that most people want to see. But I'll certainly give it some thought.""

[Shawn Miller] "Yes, please do! Who knows who you might inspire in the process. Again, let me know if I can help in any way. :-)"

My plan is to goad Simon into doing this by occasionally stating that Motion is pretty cool, but that I still prefer to do most of my work in Ae. Observe!

True story: just a couple months ago, I prototyped an M5/FCPX title rig in Ae. I delivered in Motion, but I ultimately used a pre-rendered Ae asset in there somewhere...

(Simon, that's your cue.)

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 23, 2014 at 8:55:07 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Let me know if you need any plates for your tutorials, I would be willing to run out and shoot something for you. :-) "

I can see where this is leading. You and/or Walter are going to set me a Motion compositing/VFX challenge complete with source material ...

... that I'm going to fail horribly and then all discussion will be at an end :(

Seriously, thanks for your encouragement - and Walter's too, of course.

It's been an interesting adventure that I certainly wouldn't have embarked upon if it weren't for you two.

What it's shown me is both how far you can push Motion if you try hard enough, but also how impenetrable the barriers are when you run into them.

Come on, Apple - perhaps you could put just a little effort in this for my sake?

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 23, 2014 at 11:43:15 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "
I can see where this is leading. You and/or Walter are going to set me a Motion compositing/VFX challenge complete with source material ...

... that I'm going to fail horribly and then all discussion will be at an end :("


lol - You've exposed me! No, my motives are pure, just seeing if I can lend a hand to your effort. I'm also curious to see how you might go about accomplishing certain tasks in Motion... matching plates, stacking render passes, generally sexing up a shot and whatnot. Hopefully, that will spark even more conversation!

[Simon Ubsdell] "Come on, Apple - perhaps you could put just a little effort in this for my sake?"

Ha ha - for all of our sakes! I don't think it's good for the industry to have such few software choices.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 3:54:54 pm

You said, "In conjunction with AE" and that's a big deal, a very big deal. Exporting with alpha and importing and all that seems so ancient. Dynamic Link everything everywhere all the time. We ought to be able to import MOtion projects into AE, and AE projects into Motion, and so on. (If that's possible, please send a link to the tutorial. Thanks)


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 1:30:02 pm

I normally provide some Ae-counterpoint to Simon's Motion posts, but I think he's written a very insightful analysis here.

I'll mention Mamba FX here, since Simon mentioned Mistika. Mamba FX is a single-shot compositor based on Mistika that sells for 240 euros. It offers a stunning degree of real-time on good hardware.

I'll also mention that the Ae team knows that Ae is slow, and they're looking to fix that:

http://blogs.adobe.com/aftereffects/2014/01/happy-new-year-and-a-question.h...

(This is the sort of thing that has me excited about Creative Cloud.)

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 5:10:48 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Mamba FX is a single-shot compositor based on Mistika that sells for 240 euros. It offers a stunning degree of real-time on good hardware."

Yes, I forgot Mamba FX which odes look really interesting - I had a brief brush with Jaleo way back wen and really disliked it intensely but things do seem to be looking much more promising these days.

[Walter Soyka] "I'll also mention that the Ae team knows that Ae is slow, and they're looking to fix that:

http://blogs.adobe.com/aftereffects/2014/01/happy-new-year-and-a-question.h.....

(This is the sort of thing that has me excited about Creative Cloud.)"


Hmmm, they're looking to fix it (and they have been forever) but I'm not sure this says they're about to have delivered on it (other than "hypothetically"):

I want to look into 2014 and ask you, our customer, a hypothetical question…

What if we did NOTHING else in After Effects during 2014 other than make it faster? I mean MUCH faster. I mean much faster without a specific hardware requirement (new CPU, GPU, disk, machine, etc., etc.)?

To be frank, that’s not what’s in the works currently for 2014. A lot of our developer resources are going to focus on performance, but also on workflow and creative capability. I am curious though what your reaction would be if we ditched the workflow and creative stuff for 2014, and put ALL of our resources on nothing but making After Effects killer fast. Great!, good, bad, ugly?


Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 11:27:49 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Yes, I forgot Mamba FX which odes look really interesting - I had a brief brush with Jaleo way back wen and really disliked it intensely but things do seem to be looking much more promising these days."

I think that SGO still has a (long) way to go on the UI -- but I am one of those biased Ae users!

In fairness, I also think Ae has a lot of room for improvement on the UI and on workflow.


[Simon Ubsdell] "Hmmm, they're looking to fix it (and they have been forever) but I'm not sure this says they're about to have delivered on it (other than "hypothetically"):"

Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that improved performance was right around the corner.

I'm glad to see with CC that they can finally focus on something that affects existing users every single time they open the app, instead of trying to sell upgrades and new licenses with shiny features like CS6's ray-tracer. I think that we could have had this big performance improvement some time ago, except that "no big new features, but 80% less slow than before!" doesn't look very good on the tin.

Simon, I'm curious on your thoughts on HitFilm itself. Have you given it a spin at all?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 1:22:24 pm

[Ricardo Marty] "what about digital fusion as an ae replacement.dont know much about it an it has never been mentioned here but its sold as a compositor and does mograph."

Fusion is currently available for Windows and Linux only. There's not a lot of non-Mac software discussed here.

Fusion has some pretty cool tools, especially around volumetric effects. There are a number of interesting plugins for Fusion, too.

But as Aindreas notes, Fusion is a nodal compositor, which makes it better suited to single-shot comps than flowing mograph timelines. It generally competes more with Nuke than with Ae.

Fusion 7 is eagerly anticipated among the Eyeon faithful, and will offer a new 3D system, but in general it doesn't seem that Fusion has the huge amount of development momentum than Ae and Nuke do. It's been over a year since the last point release, Fusion has lost a lot of mindshare to Nuke in the last few years, and Nuke is gaining some of the tools and acceleration that previously made Fusion unique.

Personally, I'll be taking a look when Fusion 7 is released, but if I get into it, I think it would be as a supplement to Ae, not a replacement.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 1:11:41 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Nuke disrupted the flame market right? How big is the AE market?"

I don't think Nuke disrupted the Flame market (though it may in the coming years with Nuke Studio). Nuke inherited and grew the Shake market (which previously inherited and grew the Cineon market).

As for the size of the Ae market -- which one? Ae is a really broad tool, used in a lot of different ways: motion graphics, VFX, compositing, color correction, finishing... and the fact that it somewhat supports all these tasks (some better than others) is a part of its appeal that I don't think a 20% solution could overcome.

I would love to see more competitive motion graphics applications, and I hope that HitFilm continues to develop -- but the bar is set pretty high.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 9:19:41 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I don't think Nuke disrupted the Flame market"

I dunno - I'm sure I heard it disrupted something. There's a lot of nuke guys doing crazy composites that aren't happening in flame suites these days.

[Walter Soyka] "As for the size of the Ae market -- which one? Ae is a really broad tool, used in a lot of different ways: motion graphics, VFX, compositing, color correction, finishing... "

that, as it were, would be the point. Why can't you produce a realtime mograph focused AE that mirrors and beats AE at mograph and forget the VFX that's drifting elsewhere? say to nuke?
game companies for instance get all their high end in game commercials done in nuke off maya with in game models. At least EA does. then some chump say does the other lower type fx stuff in AE and versions in premiere. Now I have no idea who that chump would be, but he definitely did enjoy talking to the crazy skills art director nuke specialist guy running and finishing the entire show in nuke. that dude was really impressive.

the idea that AE is playing that much of that kind of game I think is open to question in VFX terms. the fact that you can dial in specific scripts for prime lenses for bokeh on a CG piece in nuke etc.

I just don't see why you can't say that AE is primarily a mograph app. forget the 20% 30% 80% stuff. just produce an AE compatible version that does mograph better and real time with more dedicated tools. Do a set of highly focused things extremely well at near realtime.

It's different to photoshop. Speed, as it were, is of the essence, and AE is improbably slow. There is an argument that a focused mograph realtime implementation of AE could take quite a lot of AE away from AE.

then AE can go off and compete on high level colour correction, high level finishing and VFX where it is doubtless performing so well.

MS word gets away with the bloat because in the end its all about typing sentences and word owns that. You could argue that AE is caught amidships where the disciplines in CC and vfx are drifting away.

All it would really take was one funded effort to answer core mograph fundamentally better at realtime than AE.

and so the perfect fantasy.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 11:14:41 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I dunno - I'm sure I heard it disrupted something. There's a lot of nuke guys doing crazy composites that aren't happening in flame suites these days."

No doubt, but I think that's more because the compositing market has grown so enormously. Virtually all the desktop compositing formerly done on Shake has gone to Nuke, plus stacks of new customers. Flame is 20 years old, still kicking, and still premium.

A lot of Nuke prep work supports Flame sessions, but I don't see that Nuke has made any inroads into the client-attending finishing sessions that Flame is known for. I think this could change with Nuke Studio, but that's a bit off in the future yet.


[Aindreas Gallagher] "There is an argument that a focused mograph realtime implementation of AE could take quite a lot of AE away from AE... All it would really take was one funded effort to answer core mograph fundamentally better at realtime than AE."

Who's got bigger pockets and more loyal customers than Apple?

My original question was only half rhetorical. Aren't you drawn to Motion? Isn't that the app you're describing? If not, where do you think it falls short?


[Aindreas Gallagher] "Why can't you produce a realtime mograph focused AE that mirrors and beats AE at mograph and forget the VFX that's drifting elsewhere? say to nuke? ... You could argue that AE is caught amidships where the disciplines in CC and vfx are drifting away."

A lot of the value that Ae adds is the VFXy stuff. You noted LUTs and mask tracking in your original feature list. I'd consider these compositing, closer to VFX than mograph -- yet you think they are essential features for mograph. I think that's because the lines around mograph have become so blurred.

I think that CC/mograph/VFX are all converging in a kind of Venn diagram of visual disciplines, and I expect this trend to continue in the coming years -- but maybe that's just me. Are you seeing something different in your market?

What Ae features would you be willing to lose for better interactivity?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 23, 2014 at 12:54:10 pm

[Walter Soyka] "A lot of the value that Ae adds is the VFXy stuff. You noted LUTs and mask tracking in your original feature list. I'd consider these compositing, closer to VFX than mograph -- yet you think they are essential features for mograph. I think that's because the lines around mograph have become so blurred."

The expansion of mograph to encompass so many more areas than just mograph in the old-fashioned sense is almost certainly directly driven specifically by what Ae has come to be over the years.

More users started to like using Ae for VFX, so more VFX tools got added, so more mograph began to have a VFX component, and so on. Mograph doesn't especially need 3D camera tracking - 2D should be enough for most purposes, but now it's here we'll see 3D tracking everywhere.

Ae has effectively defined the market that any competitor has to get to grips with. Mograph means what Ae and its devoted users have defined it as meaning.

Which is why Aindreas' dream application is going to struggle. You can't appeal to the Ae audience without offering the full range of tools and workflows that Ae has defined as "essential".

I think the point you make about convergence is right - we see it happening everywhere, and we may well start to see fewer specialist tools and more monster agglomerations, which may well not do the job as well but which seem to be what the market is asking for.

I think that's a shame - I'm a big believer in dedicated tools that are refined to do a few things well rather than many things indifferently. And I have no problem in hopping between applications to take advantage of their individual strengths. But I suspect I'm in a tiny minority.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 23, 2014 at 2:43:05 pm

If Adobe got wind of anyone trying to take AE's crown, I would imagine they would throw the resources at it that it needs to improve it's speed. They've got too much of a head start for anyone to catch up.

Steve Connor
Mellowing slowly


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 24, 2014 at 9:42:49 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Which is why Aindreas' dream application is going to struggle. You can't appeal to the Ae audience without offering the full range of tools and workflows that Ae has defined as "essential"."

I'm not entirely sure still, although I've done a truck of stuff with the 3D camera tracker to be fair.

I simply think (revising again) there is an addressable market for a mograph tool that isn't flash, which is dead, and isn't AE, which is, being fair, incredibly bloated. I'll go on record saying I don't see it as being bloated given I got my employer to pay for natresse grain surgery before adobe absorbed it - I've never been more than a b-level player with AE, but I feel intrinsically comfortable with it because I saw everything come in over the last fifteen years. the only thing my brain shut down completely on was typing out expressions. I'm not doing that. I'm not making a section of my brain for that grammar. not happening.

AE is over weighted for the task of mograph - and there were a ton of people doing extremely interesting mograph out of flash that largely informed the aesthetics bleeding into general AE work the last half decade.

there definitely is space for a focused mograph thought leader application dedicated to brand mograph video execution as long as it operates transformatively at near realtime for them, with a suite of truly excellent design tools and has a sticker price between say 350- 550 as shawn posits.

I don't think there is any sense to this mindless defence of AE as an inevitability given a lot of the fresher work was being done with flash when it was the live design environment under a competitor. This defence of AE now, taken in that context, feels like extremely lazy thinking to me.

I don't care about c4D, and for the purposes of this response I don't care about LUTS. (ha ha! malleable position) I think there is an argument and a commercial viability for a tool that can demonstrably answer mograph cleaner and faster than AE.

(also If anyone says motion once more - they owe me a kipper) ...Motion is the spotty exchange student that everyone in brand new design mograph disliked before they ever met it. motion is as consequential as betamax.

we're talking about a well constructed, funded, blade sharp mograph effort that challenges AE right at its brand asset execution core.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 12:19:15 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "(also If anyone says motion once more - they owe me a kipper) ...Motion is the spotty exchange student that everyone in brand new design mograph disliked before they ever met it. motion is as consequential as betamax."

I guess I owe you breakfast or something now... but really, why not Motion?

It's real-time. It has a decent feature set. It's highly focused on motion design. It's mature: 9 years old now! It integrates with an NLE (see what I did there?) It's as cheap to buy as a month of CC is to rent. Oh, and it's from Apple, so it's accessible to an awful lot of designers.

Motion has been doing what you're describing for almost a decade. Why hasn't it caught on? Why won't you use it?


[Aindreas Gallagher] "I don't think there is any sense to this mindless defence of AE as an inevitability given a lot of the fresher work was being done with flash when it was the live design environment under a competitor. This defence of AE now, taken in that context, feels like extremely lazy thinking to me."

Hmm. I'm not trying to defend Ae as an inevitability. Quite the contrary -- I think that more competition in this space would be welcome, and I think that most of the really interesting work isn't happening exclusively in Ae right now.

I keep tossing kippers on my tab for you because I think that Motion is a cautionary tale. It has everything you want, but you still won't use it, and you actively want to replace Ae. I don't think that speed (the high floor) is enough to overcome the frustrating limitations (the low ceiling) of a partial-solution app like Motion.

Personally, I'm trying to learn Houdini in my spare time. It's mainly used for film VFX now, but I think that its "go procedural" mindset is a natural fit for motion graphics.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 3:50:28 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Why hasn't it caught on?"

Because no one has "edited Cold Mountain" with it?

:-D

I know that Motion used to crash a lot, so much so it prevented me from being interested in it.

I am not a mograph artist, but I need to perform mograph actions sometimes, and Ae was just more stable to do the very simple things I need to do. And then of course I can use Ae for a ton of other things (composite/roto/paint/key/etc). It is the proverbial Jobsian truck.

The "problem" I have with Ae and me is the UI, and the performance barrier that creates at even the very simplest of levels. The principles of it haven't really changed all that much over the course of the 15ish years I've used it, and the underlying RAM preview and playback methods are still the same! I know some will argue about global cache, yadda yadda, but you know what I mean. As soon as you change something, or enough of something, the cache becomes obsolete. You can't simply crunch through the change as easily as you can in Motion.

The past week we had client attended edit and motion graphics sessions, I as doing the editing of course. It really is like watching paint dry. These were fairly complex compositions, and this was a highly experienced and seasoned Ae artist. Even he gets confused in the interface sometimes because it isn't real straightforward where the interaction is happening in a really complex and megalayered comp.

At the same time, I highly doubt he would switch to anything else for what he does in Ae. Also, he loves CC as do most still and motion designers I talk to. :)

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 8:34:18 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I know that Motion used to crash a lot, so much so it prevented me from being interested in it."

I used Motion really heavily in the v1/v2 era, and it was super-crashy -- but isn't that better now?


[Jeremy Garchow] "The "problem" I have with Ae and me is the UI, and the performance barrier that creates at even the very simplest of levels."

One of my favorite hobbies is pestering the Ae team with UI suggestions. I think there is enormous room for improvement there.

I agree on the performance issue, too. Working in Motion or Mamba and then coming back to Ae is pretty shocking. This is why I was so excited to see Steve Forde's post on performance that I shared above. This is one of those places where the app's maturity has allowed this enormous third-party plugin ecosystem, but the app's maturity has saddled it all with an thoroughly unmodern architecture.


[Jeremy Garchow] "At the same time, I highly doubt he would switch to anything else for what he does in Ae."

FCP7 used to be formidable like this, too. Ae has to keep evolving and it needs to address its legacy architectural issues to stay relevant.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 8:40:25 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Ae has to keep evolving and it needs to address its legacy architectural issues to stay relevant."

I think it's easy to underestimate just how much of a challenge this is. They have known for an eternity that their users want performance improvements but they just can't seem to deliver them. Legacy architecture can easily become a millstone it's impossible to shake off.

Which is why I'd love to see Aindreas' built from scratch thing ... Ae Modo-style.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 8:58:04 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "I think it's easy to underestimate just how much of a challenge this is. They have known for an eternity that their users want performance improvements but they just can't seem to deliver them. Legacy architecture can easily become a millstone it's impossible to shake off."

I underestimate neither the challenge nor the Ae team's commitment to their users.


[Simon Ubsdell] "Which is why I'd love to see Aindreas' built from scratch thing ... Ae Modo-style."

I'm watching some Modo videos now. You could have just said, "Walter, go look up 'tool pipeline' right this very second!"

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 9:01:57 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I'm watching some Modo videos now. You could have just said, "Walter, go look up 'tool pipeline' right this very second!""

Very glad to hear it. I thought it would probably be right up your street :)

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 9:25:57 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Very glad to hear it. I thought it would probably be right up your street :)"

Ha, but the joke is on you, as I will now be submitting Modo-inspired feature requests to the Ae team!

In all seriousness, thank you for this. I'm not sure I have the brainspace for all these 3D apps, but Modo is clearly worth a closer look.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 9:35:30 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Apr 25, 2014 at 9:37:13 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Ha, but the joke is on you, as I will now be submitting Modo-inspired feature requests to the Ae team!"

Although of course who needs Ae when you have Nuke and the rest of the Foundry ecosystem to support Modo?

;-)

[Walter Soyka] "I'm not sure I have the brainspace for all these 3D apps, but Modo is clearly worth a closer look."

I know what you mean about brainspace - 3D is really not like other applications where you can comfortably master every available offering and still have room to think.

But yes, I've been a huge fan of Modo for a while now and 801 looks to have nailed so much more that it's hard not to see it as a very major player at this point.

A lot of 3D artists use Modo for the modelling alone - and then move over to something else for finishing (though increasingly I think we're going to see Modo used throughout the pipeline). It's not unreasonable to argue that Modo's modelling tools are best in class. Do check out Mesh Fusion - it's astonishingly powerful:

http://community.thefoundry.co.uk/tv/training/view.aspx?id=732

And that's only a small part of what's an incredibly modelling powerful toolset.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 26, 2014 at 1:24:26 am

[Walter Soyka] "I used Motion really heavily in the v1/v2 era, and it was super-crashy -- but isn't that better now?"

I don't know, I keep using Ae. :)

Yes, Motion seems better now, and Simon keeps pointing out its strengths, and it is very hard to ignore.

Also, almost everything I do related to mograph involves an edit. Rarely do I work on one shot.

Currently it is much easier for me to get a layered edit from fcpx (or any NLE) over to Ae than it is to get to Motion.

It also easy to collect files in Ae and send a package off to the real artists. They appreciate it much more than a flattened QT movie.

No one has asked for a Motion project yet. :(


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 1:05:19 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "there definitely is space for a focused mograph thought leader application dedicated to brand mograph video execution as long as it operates transformatively at near realtime for them, with a suite of truly excellent design tools and has a sticker price between say 350- 550 as shawn posits."

I don't at all disagree that there's a potential for such a product - there's always room for competition and Adobe sure do need some at this point. In fact, I'd like to see a raft of Ae competitors springing up - it could only be good for everybody.

But I seriously doubt anyone could develop and market such a competitor for the kind of money you're talking about - much more like $1000, I would say, which I think was Shawn's suggestion too.

I think it's easy to underestimate how much work would need to go into it - it's not like building an NLE, which is frankly very small beer by comparison.

It's much more like building a 3D product. In fact, it would be very much like what happened with Modo, an outstanding 3D package that I keep mentioning here but which seems to have no penetration with the contributors to this forum, a fact that seems germane to this discussion.

So outstanding in fact, that there's a notorious and slightly desperate Autodesk white paper that sets out for its sales team the arguments to use to explain why Maya has the edge over Modo - and this is a few years ago now.

Modo has hit version 801 this week and it's a very exciting offering indeed with signs that character animation has finally arrived at a pretty fully-fledged state.

I got on board at the end of 301 in 2009 and at that point it was a real leap of faith to believe that it would develop to where it is today.

What Luxology decided to do from the outset is precisely what you're suggesting should happen here - build it for speed and leanness and modernity with a very clear professional target market; keep up a steady upgrade pattern (essentially annual these days); only introduce features when they were good and ready and absolutely not try and hit all the targets from the outset.

Modo has succeeded, despite competing in a relatively crowded market, by being incredibly focussed, building a great user community, and most of all by creating an exceptionally good product.

But there are still things that it doesn't have that drive me crazy and send me back to the old dinosaurs occasionally.

Suffice it to say, that my commitment to Modo hasn't been cheap in the long run, even with a starting price of around $900 (I seem to remember). All the upgrades are paid for and cumulatively that's a lot of money, even if the initial entry point was lower than everything except Lightwave.

Not sure what the point of this is, except to say that it's taken a long time - in industry years - to get it to where it's starting to achieve feature parity with the major players.

Do we think that the Ae community, much more dyed-in-the wool and unwilling to investigate alternative options to the Adobe monopoly offering, would embrace a new product in the same way, and in sufficient numbers, and have the patience to see it build slowly over a number of years?

In 3D there has always been a range of credible offerings and 3D artists are very used to jumping from one product to another - very few stake undying allegiance to one product or another if they have any sense at all.

The exact opposite is true of the Ae community who are more defined by their tool of choice than by what they actually do. That is the problem to overcome, I think. Not insoluble, but a very hard nut to crack.

Why would Ae users leave behind their comfort zone where everything is to hand and everything is made easy, for an offering that initially gave them much, much less? Aside from what Ae actually is in and of itself, think of the scripts and plug-ins and vast support resources ...


And yes, Walter is right - you keep asking for Motion you just don't realise it ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 1:28:27 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "In fact, it would be very much like what happened with Modo, an outstanding 3D package that I keep mentioning here but which seems to have no penetration with the contributors to this forum, a fact that seems germane to this discussion.
"


Hey, I'll talk about Modo! I'd love to hear your opinion.

I haven't looked at seriously, ever, because I've heard scary (possibly unfounded?) tales of its stability and (again, without having used it) I am somewhat leery of its Lightwave-ish heritage.

But Brad Peebler is my kind of geek, and 701 looked cool in demos, especially the particle system. Now that I'm becoming a lot more interested in Nuke (due to the upcoming Nuke Studio), maybe Modo makes a more sense than it did before.

That said, I like C4D for its interface, its mograph toolset, and its stunning Ae integration (sorry, Aindreas). I am loving Houdini for its power and sheer nerdiness. Why would I love Modo?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 1:58:27 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Apr 25, 2014 at 2:00:55 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Hey, I'll talk about Modo!"

I hoped you'd rise to the bait.

Brad Peebler is indeed a great guy, but (clever and funny as he is as you can tell from his "modcasts"!) he'd be the first to admit that he's not the real brains - there are some simply awesome talents behind it despite their Lightwave credentials. (Allen Hastings is astonishingly brilliant).

It was actually the fact that Brad and others at NewTek wanted to rebuild Lightwave from the ground up that led to them leaving when the management disagreed.

That's what's particularly interesting in terms of this discussion.

As for stability issues, I've done some massively big jobs in Modo without serious problems - I suspect that's just nasty rumour-mongering. The transition to 64 bit in 501 was the most impressive such transition I've seen in any application - already extremely fast in 32 bit, it became massively faster. I've not seen that kind of speed bump anywhere before. They really take speed optimisation extremely seriously and always have done.

The renderer is one of the best-looking I've seen and the OpenGL preview rendering gives you really great real-time feedback which speeds things up no end.

Your point about interoperability is of course very much being taken care of now that they're in the Foundry stable, but your insistence on Ae compatibility is sadly just one more nail in the coffin of Aindreas' noble dream. You Ae people - Ae is the Sun around which everything else must revolve ;-)

I haven't used C4D much, but I would say that Modo feels like a much more serious offering in terms of its long term potential - they've built it slowly and deliberately from the ground up with an incredibly deep, powerful and well-thought out architecture that I don't think C4D quite matches.

" In April 2005, the high-end visual effects studio Digital Domain integrated modo into their production pipeline. Other studios to adopt modo include Pixar, Industrial Light & Magic, Zoic Studios, id Software, Eden FX, Studio ArtFX, The Embassy Visual Effects, Naked Sky Entertainment and Spinoff Studios."

Although it doesn't get talked about much by the casual 3D user, there's no question that it's started to penetrate deep into the upper echelons - and for very good reasons. And of course, it talks nicely with the rest of the 3D world.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 3:47:54 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Your point about interoperability is of course very much being taken care of now that they're in the Foundry stable, but your insistence on Ae compatibility is sadly just one more nail in the coffin of Aindreas' noble dream. You Ae people - Ae is the Sun around which everything else must revolve ;-)"

You know, I started using Nuke in the first place to replace Ae as the compositor for my C4D renders. I was going out of my mind in Ae trying to manage all the object buffers as layers -- clearly a task better suited for nodes -- and because multipass EXR was so slow.

But then Adobe went an introduced CINEWARE and improved EXR support. CINEWARE doesn't solve my node/layers problem, and I was pretty well opposed to it at first as a waste of resources -- but the ability to bounce camera/light/null data back and forth between the apps with a single click is really a big workflow improvement over the old one-way 3D-to-comp system.

TLDR; I had one foot out the door for compositing, but then they pulled me back in!


[Simon Ubsdell] "I haven't used C4D much, but I would say that Modo feels like a much more serious offering in terms of its long term potential - they've built it slowly and deliberately from the ground up with an incredibly deep, powerful and well-thought out architecture that I don't think C4D quite matches."

Fair. The advantage of new applications is more modern architectures. The advantage of old applications is maturity. These same advantages are also their primary disadvantages!

Is there anything in your mind that Modo does especially well? Unique strengths?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 25, 2014 at 4:42:06 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Apr 25, 2014 at 7:26:28 pm

[Walter Soyka] "But then Adobe went an introduced CINEWARE and improved EXR support. CINEWARE doesn't solve my node/layers problem, and I was pretty well opposed to it at first as a waste of resources -- but the ability to bounce camera/light/null data back and forth between the apps with a single click is really a big workflow improvement over the old one-way 3D-to-comp system."

Yes, I'll certainly buy that CINEWARE has got to be seriously useful for a lot of users. Personally, I feel even more strongly than you do and I abominate the notion of doing 3D compositing without nodes but that ease of use does have its attractions. Up to a certain level of complexity ...

[Walter Soyka] "Is there anything in your mind that Modo does especially well? Unique strengths?"

I like it for its dissimilarity to C4D ;-) C4D seems to be engineered to "make things easy" whereas Modo is built to make processes incredibly deep. I'm not sure you can have easy and deep in the same package.

I've been checking out the new character animation features in 801 and there's some seriously well thought out stuff in there:

http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/products/modo/latest-version/?utm_campaign=GLOB...

In fact all of the new features are as always a really significant step forward - without trying to over-reach and under-deliver.

I think you'd really like how "scriptable" it all is.

What's really great for me is how powerful the modelling toolset is and it keeps getting better - Mesh Fusion is a fantastic way to work for instance, combining the best of subdivision and booleans.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: Hit Film For Mac
on Apr 22, 2014 at 1:05:12 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "hello Walter - do you, as it were, logically, view what was outlined there as generally representing Motion?"

I do. I don't know about all the particulars (mask tracking in Motion?), but in terms of the general idea -- a real-time application purpose-built for motion graphics -- yes, I think Motion is that.

I pointed it out because I disagree with the premise of your argument. 20% of Ae's capabilities is not going to be nearly enough. It's tough to quantify, but I'd call Motion a lot more than 20% of Ae. I think that the "high floor, low ceiling" approach is valuable and has a place in the industry, but you're going to need to convince a lot of Ae artists that they won't bump their heads to get them to switch.

Also, I think that building a new motion graphics application from the ground up is really hard! There are an awful lot of little things that we expect as designers. Just think about the work required to develop a satisfactory type engine alone.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]