FORUMS: list search recent posts

Particular versus Particle Illusion?

COW Forums : Trapcode

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Jon Okerstrom
Particular versus Particle Illusion?
on Jun 3, 2006 at 4:15:36 am

If you had the choice between Particle Illusion and Trapcode's Particular plug-in for After Effects, which would you choose and why? For the purposes of discussion, let's say you already do the bulk of your motion graphics work in After Effects and you're looking for a flexible, powerful partlcle system. I will post the same question in the Particle Illusion forum, in an attempt to hear from both camps.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Jon



Return to posts index

Mylenium
Re: Particular versus Particle Illusion?
on Jun 3, 2006 at 8:09:57 am

I'd always choose Particular. While pI is great for what it does, it simply isn't integrated with AE and I've never been one who is willing to jump hoops just to transfer data between apps (regardless if it's simple copy&paste). Another problem with pI is its dependence on hardware, which can be a killer in some situations.

Mylenium

[Pour Myl


Return to posts index

Jon Okerstrom
Re: Particular versus Particle Illusion?
on Jun 3, 2006 at 1:22:41 pm

I'd agree the worflow issue is worth considering. It's enough of an issue that there's a training dvd addressing how to make PI and AE work together (I haven't seen it, so I don't know how many hoops you have to jump through).

I'm most curious about whether there's anything PI can do that Particular can't... and visa versa. The emitter libraries PI offers are intriguing... with so many out there, it may be faster to use or modify one of those than to try to build custom emitters in Particular. I realize more presets are being made available for Particular... maybe that's an opportunity for Peder or someone else to develop something similar?

Jon





Return to posts index


Mylenium
Re: Particular versus Particle Illusion?
on Jun 3, 2006 at 5:38:23 pm

[Jon Okerstrom] "
I'm most curious about whether there's anything PI can do that Particular can't... and visa versa.


Well, in theory they are both on par with each other, but since Particular is truly 3D, thus adding substantial extra computional effort to the equation, it can never be as fast. So typically things such as very dense smoke, dust, waterfalls and fire are pI's domain. It's not that Particular can't create those effects, but because of the large number of particles required it just slows down to a level it get's impractical. Particular also is limited in terms of providing collisions, but this is more a matter of AE's general limitations in its 3D space implementation.

[Jon Okerstrom] "
The emitter libraries PI offers are intriguing... with so many out there, it may be faster to use or modify one of those than to try to build custom emitters in Particular. I realize more presets are being made available for Particular... maybe that's an opportunity for Peder or someone else to develop something similar?"


Mmh, this is a point I always see critical. Many of those libraries often consist of only mildly modified presets and are not very original. On closer inspection the numbers condense down from several thousand to a few hundred really distinct presets at best. I also don't think that it would be a good move to spend many resources on creating an extensive library for Particular. There are simply so many situations and cool effects nobody can really think of before the need arises. I also think it would go again the intent of Particular - to provide a flexible, modifyable generic particle system. If there were presets for everything, peopel wouldn't really delve into the depths of Particular and there would be no need for its complexity. That would be another thing if there was an LE version just as with pI, where you couldn't save presets and modify certain parameters, but I don't know if Peder has any such plans.

Mylenium



[Pour Myl


Return to posts index

Jon Okerstrom
Re: Particular versus Particle Illusion?
on Jun 3, 2006 at 11:52:17 pm

Thanks for your comments. I'm playing with the Particular demo now. It'll be interesting to see what other users of both apps have to say. There is some logic in what you say about presets, but I think the habit of using presets as they are is more a function of deadlines than anything else. Experimentation is fun for me when time permits.

In a perfect world, I'd have the ability to get both, learn both and push them to their limits. But deadlines being what they are, getting great results fast is important... and I'll choose one or the other.

Jon



Return to posts index

lasvideo
Re: Particular versus Particle Illusion?
on Jun 4, 2006 at 8:37:58 pm

I have both and tend to lean toward Particular for many of the same reasons.Its 3D capacity is spectacular. I must admit to looking forward to the time that the AE plugin version of PI is released. It was announced about a year ago, then run into some snags. I wont hesitate to buy it, since it has a niche as valuable as Particular.


Return to posts index


Kurt Wiley
Re: Particular versus Particle Illusion?
on Jun 5, 2006 at 4:46:35 pm

PI is faster for large particle systems thanks to its reliance on OPEN GL, doing large scale dust clouds and other FX that would grind Particular to a halt.

However, because it's not integrated with AE, there's more work and "guesstimation" involved in getting the PI created fx to work within an AE comp.

Particular's 1.5 is very handy to use within the AE 3D workspace, though AEs' 3D is very limited.



Return to posts index

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