FORUMS: list search recent posts

MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Andre van Berlo
MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 20, 2015 at 12:28:09 pm

I don't post much here but read everyday. Couldn't help but notice people think motionvfx would be suffering from the new 3D titles. They just came out with mTitle 3D and to me it seems they're ok with it and using it to their benefit.

http://www.motionvfx.com/mplugs-79.html?utm_source=MotionVFX&utm_campaign=c...


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 20, 2015 at 2:24:08 pm

Dude... that's all SO 90's! No one wants or needs that kinda crap. Realtime and fully customizable?? Pffff... oh puh-leeeze...



- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index

Mark Suszko
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 20, 2015 at 4:24:43 pm

Not sure if you're trolling, but... in Motion VFX's defense, these are gorgeous fonts and I can easily see using them in certain specific roles where they would be great. As far as people thinking there's no use for M-Object, now that there's 3-d titling in Motion and FCPX, I disagree: if you were just using that for 3-d titles, you were ignoring a whole lot more possibilities there. I'm looking forward to M Object getting further developed in the area of digital set extensions and building or supplementing existing real environments for composites.

There's a real need out here for photoreal environments useful in keying projects for locations that are hard to get to in real life, without a lot of expense or hassle. Just the ones that immediately come to mind: A passenger jet cabin and pilot compartment interiors (or even airport interiors, for that matter). Laboratories. Hospital operating room or ER. Class rooms and school hallways, from Kindergarten on up. A bus, a train car. A bank, with vault. We have a million versions of virtual news sets and game show sets out there, but what about real world locations? Does everything have to be a one-off and does every editor need a masters' degree in Maya or whatever, to get a decent background? Products like M Object might be what helps fill this need, with a little more support and development.


Return to posts index


Robin S. Kurz
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 20, 2015 at 4:56:00 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Apr 20, 2015 at 4:57:21 pm

[Mark Suszko] "Not sure if you're trolling, but... "

Really?? I would have thought a dancing cow couldn't make it any more obvious. ;D Go figger.

Just to be sure: that couldn't have been meant any more sarcastic, no. I find the new 3D Titles quite brilliant and a superb addition! Whether I end up using them or not, or should I actually say how, when, where etc. is yet to be seen. Either way I'm very happy to have them at my disposal.

And I completely agree. Comparing the built-in 3D of FCP to mObject is complete nonsense. mObject is exponentially more powerful and flexible and has an entirely different target audience to boot. mObjest is maybe 20% a titler. Beyond that it has advanced shaders, obj import, particle and smoke fx, drop zones(!) etc. etc. etc. ... a complete different ball game imho.

- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 20, 2015 at 5:50:11 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Comparing the built-in 3D of FCP to mObject is complete nonsense. mObject is exponentially more powerful and flexible and has an entirely different target audience to boot. mObjest is maybe 20% a titler. Beyond that it has advanced shaders, obj import, particle and smoke fx, drop zones(!) etc. etc. etc. ... a complete different ball game imho."

The question was not if built-in 3D type makes mObject utterly obsolete, but rather if it eliminates a common use case that made mObject worth having for more users. If true, would that hurt their sales? On a larger view, how do you balance adding first-party capability against the viability of your third-party ecosystem?

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Ronny Courtens
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 20, 2015 at 8:10:39 pm

[Walter Soyka] "On a larger view, how do you balance adding first-party capability against the viability of your third-party ecosystem?"

With 3D titles I think we are seeing the same thing we have always seen: Apple provides a feature that will probably satisfy the average user who wants such a feature but who doesn't need nor want to learn advanced techniques. And they leave plenty of room for third-party developers to fill the holes for people who do need advanced possibilities and who are willing to pay for this. In the end everyone gets what he wants.

- Ronny


Return to posts index


Shawn Miller
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 20, 2015 at 7:21:02 pm

[Mark Suszko] "There's a real need out here for photoreal environments useful in keying projects for locations that are hard to get to in real life, without a lot of expense or hassle. Just the ones that immediately come to mind: A passenger jet cabin and pilot compartment interiors (or even airport interiors, for that matter). Laboratories. Hospital operating room or ER. Class rooms and school hallways, from Kindergarten on up. A bus, a train car. A bank, with vault. We have a million versions of virtual news sets and game show sets out there, but what about real world locations?"

There's a ton of that stuff on TurboSquid. You just need a 3D package to render out the shots/angles you want... which BTW, is pretty easy to do. Learn a bit of Blender, and you can do it for the cost of the 3D scenes and your time.

[Mark Suszko] "Does everything have to be a one-off and does every editor need a masters' degree in Maya or whatever, to get a decent background?"

I think you might be talking about two different things; having access to high quality backgrounds, and building photorealistic, 3D environments in something like mObject. IMO, building photorealistic, 3D environments will probably be a task for specialists for some time to come.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Ronny Courtens
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 20, 2015 at 8:00:21 pm
Last Edited By Ronny Courtens on Apr 20, 2015 at 8:02:36 pm

Robin was just kidding. I agree there is a market and a need for this kind of titles. How FCPX/Motion 3D titles finally look entirely depends on the person who creates them:

http://images.apple.com/media/us/mac/motion-5/2015/tour/3d-titles/motion5-3...

- Ronny


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 20, 2015 at 8:45:55 pm

hey! the dancing cow. too long, too long.

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


Return to posts index


Jason Jenkins
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 21, 2015 at 6:57:07 pm

[Andre van Berlo] "Couldn't help but notice people think motionvfx would be suffering from the new 3D titles. They just came out with mTitle 3D and to me it seems they're ok with it and using it to their benefit."

Heck, maybe they actually sold the 3D Title code to Apple and took home a nice paycheck.

Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production... with style!

Check out my Mormon.org profile.


Return to posts index

Andre van Berlo
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 22, 2015 at 1:35:36 am
Last Edited By Andre van Berlo on Apr 22, 2015 at 1:37:08 am

"Heck, maybe they actually sold the 3D Title code to Apple and took home a nice paycheck."

That's an interesting thought! Not sure those things would actually happen but apple has got enough money to pay for the code


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 22, 2015 at 9:58:45 am

[Jason Jenkins] "maybe they actually sold the 3D Title code to Apple and took home a nice paycheck."

Erm... hardly. The underpinnings of both couldn't be any more different. And Apple isn't exactly NEW to 3D.

- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index


Shawn Miller
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 22, 2015 at 4:42:56 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "[Jason Jenkins] "maybe they actually sold the 3D Title code to Apple and took home a nice paycheck."

Erm... hardly. The underpinnings of both couldn't be any more different. And Apple isn't exactly NEW to 3D.

- RK"


Sincerely asking because I honestly don't know - but, what other 3D technologies has Apple developed?

Shawn



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 25, 2015 at 8:43:25 pm

LiveType.

Kinda sorta.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 27, 2015 at 11:25:04 am

I wonder how long before Apple decide to acquire Motion VFX? That would be quite a library to give away and a great team to be working in Pro-Apps


Return to posts index


Nicholas Zimmerman
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 30, 2015 at 6:45:41 am

I mentioned this to Luke from the ProApps team last year at Black Magic's event in Burbank. Still kind of sad they haven't done it yet.

________________________________________

NickZimmerman.net

Certified in FCPX, Logic Pro X, & Motion 5
________________________________________


Return to posts index

Martin Curtis
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 30, 2015 at 4:50:03 am

I remember Live Type before Apple bought it when it was India Titler Pro and cost $800 or something crazy like that.


Return to posts index

Martin Curtis
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 30, 2015 at 4:55:38 am

I notice that MotionVFX use the word "extrude" twice on that page. Perhaps they are trying to differentiate between what Apple does (extrusion) and what they do (true 3D).


Return to posts index


Robin S. Kurz
Re: MotionVFX seems to be ok with the new 3D titles in fcpx
on Apr 30, 2015 at 4:54:36 pm

[Martin Curtis] "I notice that MotionVFX use the word "extrude" twice on that page. Perhaps they are trying to differentiate between what Apple does (extrusion) and what they do (true 3D)."

Huh? Not sure how that makes sense. If Apple is "only" doing extrusion and they aren't, why would they repeatedly use "extrude"?? And how is what Apple is doing not "true" 3D in comparison?

- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index

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