APPLE FINAL CUT PRO: Apple Final Cut Pro X Creative Community Conversations FCP Legacy FCP Tutorials

Is anyone using Motion?

COW Forums : NAB Show

VIEW ALL   •   PRINT
Oliver Peters
Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 5:25:01 pm

I'm curious. I see a lot of wonderful work being done in Motion from time to time, as well as to create FCPX templates. But is anyone seriously using it for motion graphics? In the entire existence of Motion, I've only encountered 1 or 2 people who have delivered graphics to me that were created in Motion. Almost everything I encounter was created in After Effects. What are others seeing?

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 5:35:21 pm

As an Editor I use it a lot for straightforward work, but I don't know any Graphic Artists who use it, it's all AE


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 6:28:29 pm

As an editor that's been doing his own AE work for 20 years, I switched when Adobe started being a ...

For my work, mostly communications, it's easily more capable than AE, especially for creating X templates and plugs. But I still use AE when I have to. I try to use my CS5 version first. When Adobe recently had a sale on subscriptions I got an AE only subscription. But I STILL use CS5 if I can. I like to open my projects down the road without shelling out cash.


Return to posts index


John Rofrano
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 8:17:50 pm

[Bret Williams] "As an editor that's been doing his own AE work for 20 years, I switched when Adobe started being a ..."
+1

I switched from AE CS6 after Adobe went subscription so I use Motion 5 now and I find it a lot easier to use and the integration with FCP X templates makes it a far better choice for video editors that also do motion graphics.

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 8:22:09 pm

[John Rofrano] "I switched from AE CS6 after Adobe went subscription so I use Motion 5 now"

That's easy to do when you operate self-contained. Next to impossible when you have to interchange with outside designers if you are actually exchanging project files.

I have regular designer who ends up working on a lot of projects that I work on. A big AE guy and he was trying to hold at CS6. He found it impossible to do, because the rest of the world that he has to interact with has moved on and embraced (willingly or not) CC.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 3:11:18 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I have regular designer who ends up working on a lot of projects that I work on. A big AE guy and he was trying to hold at CS6. He found it impossible to do, because the rest of the world that he has to interact with has moved on and embraced (willingly or not) CC."
...and it's even worse if you are in the Graphic Design world like my son is. You flat out can't find a job if you don't use Photoshop and Illustrator. I don't believe the subscription model would work without Adobe having the monopoly that they do. You really don't have a choice in some industries.

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 3:53:48 pm

[John Rofrano] " I don't believe the subscription model would work without Adobe having the monopoly that they do"

I think it's a bit unfair to call that a monopoly. De facto, yes. Actual, no. They make superior tools that industries have standardized on. Same for Microsoft and Word/Excel or Avid with Media Composer/Pro Tools. Until someone comes up with better products that ALSO achieve critical mass, that won't change.

But compare that to Aperture and Lightroom. Apple effectively created the genre and GAVE AWAY the lead to Adobe.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 4:24:45 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Until someone comes up with better products that ALSO achieve critical mass, that won't change."
Fair enough... Affinity sure has come up with some very good competition to Photoshop and Illustrator with Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer (of which I've purchased both) but it's the "critical mass" part that's really hard to achieve. Adobe hasn't had any real competition in that space in years so we'll have to wait and see if Affinity can get a foothold into that market.

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 4:38:09 pm

[John Rofrano] "so we'll have to wait and see if Affinity can get a foothold into that marke"

All Mac-only applications are going to have difficulty achieving critical mass. While creative industries skew heavily toward Mac, that isn't a given. I've run into plenty of corporate environments and individuals running PCs with Adobe software.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 7:01:08 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[John Rofrano] "so we'll have to wait and see if Affinity can get a foothold into that marke"

All Mac-only applications are going to have difficulty achieving critical mass. While creative industries skew heavily toward Mac, that isn't a given. I've run into plenty of corporate environments and individuals running PCs with Adobe software."


I think this might depend on which segment(s) of the creative industry you're looking at. In my experience, designers and editors tend to favor Macs, while 3D/VFX and motion designers seem to be more platform agnostic, with more folks leaning towards PCs when looking to replace their aging Mac Pros. But I agree with your larger point, Oliver. Real alternatives to Photoshop and Illustrator will have to be cross platform if they want to make a serious dent in Adobe's market share.



Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 16, 2016 at 9:26:39 am

[Oliver Peters] "All Mac-only applications are going to have difficulty achieving critical mass."

https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/windows/

- RK

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


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 17, 2016 at 12:40:16 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/windows/"
The plot thickens!!! :-D

(I love it when a plan to crush the dominant player that is abusing their power comes together...) lol

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 10, 2016 at 4:41:07 pm

[John Rofrano] "Affinity sure has come up with some very good competition to Photoshop and Illustrator with Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer"

+1!

I also have them both, am amazed at the overall performance and glad that I could finally ban both PS and Illu from my machine thanks to them. Whether they reach "critical mass" is fairly irrelevant for me, since the exchange with the "real" apps has been flawless so far. Both in and out. But they aren't a major part of my core business either, as I would assume is the same for the VAST majority of people in this business.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Mitch Ives
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 6, 2016 at 6:45:29 pm

[John Rofrano] "Affinity sure has come up with some very good competition to Photoshop and Illustrator with Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer (of which I've purchased both) but it's the "critical mass" part that's really hard to achieve. "

Agreed. The speed of Affinity products should have Adobe embarrassed. Since I am mostly self-contained I have the luxury of choosing superior tools over Adobe.

To answer Oliver's question, I used Motion a lot more back when we had round-tripping. Now I see it as sort of a plugin to FCP X. There are plenty of pre-made plugins that I find more useful.

I don't want to whine, but Apple's lack of interest in FCP X, Motion, Aperture (or some decent replacement) has been a real PITA. I wish someone else would run Apple. Someone with enough passion to say:

"We make $200 Billion a year, we can afford to not act like accountants all the damn time and do some really great stuff, just to remind people how special we are as a company"...

Time to adjust the meds... oh wait I don't take any...

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index

Mitch Ives
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 1, 2016 at 4:20:16 am

[Oliver Peters] "Until someone comes up with better products that ALSO achieve critical mass, that won't change."

Agreed. I've been exploring Affinity products. Affinity Photo is a true 64 bit screamer and it's faster than other image editing programs I own.

I intend to look at Affinity Designer... an Illustrator replacement when I get some time.

Without CC, I don't think companies like Affinity could find a market...

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 7:35:21 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Feb 28, 2016 at 7:35:13 pm

[Oliver Peters] "But is anyone seriously using it for motion graphics?"

Yes, I've come across dozens of professional users scattered across the world who are doing fairly high level motion graphics work with Motion so they do exist, though I suspect they are mostly small operations who can choose their own workflows. I also think I've "met" more serious Motion users outside North America for what that's worth. I know of almost nobody using it professionally in my own market of the UK.

[Oliver Peters] "Almost everything I encounter was created in After Effects."

I think this is probably the sticking point for a lot of situations. If you have to cope with interchange, then it makes no sense not to use the industry standard. I've had situations where I've built something in Motion not expecting to have to share it and then been faced with having to rebuild it in After Effects when I discover that I am being asked to do just that.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 7:58:48 pm

Apple certainly isn't doing anything to promote it. There's not even an "In Action" page on their own website page for it. An that page lives as a subset of FCPX's page.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 8:08:13 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Apple certainly isn't doing anything to promote it."

It's becoming increasingly hard to argue that Motion exists as a product in its own right rather than merely as a necessary adjunct to FCP X of which it forms an integral part.

And I say that as someone who would really like this not to be the case.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 8:18:33 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "It's becoming increasingly hard to argue that Motion exists as a product in its own right"

Clearly Motion has become something completely different than what seemed to be intended when it was originally created. FCPX could clearly live without Motion as a standalone app. However, in the Adobe world, AE could easily thrive without the existence of Premiere Pro.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 8:23:18 pm

As a side-note, does anyone see Fusion as having more substantial success than Motion as an AE alternative in the larger world?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 8:45:13 pm

I don't really know a lot of people using it. But if not, who are all these companies dedicated to Motion/FCP X selling to? Ripple, MotionVFX, Pixel Film Studios, and countless others seem to be doing pretty well for themselves.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 8:50:33 pm

[Bret Williams] "I don't really know a lot of people using it. But if not, who are all these companies dedicated to Motion/FCP X selling to? Ripple, MotionVFX, Pixel Film Studios, and countless others seem to be doing pretty well for themselves."

They're selling to FCP X users, not Motion users. Motion is a necessary wrapper for FCP X plug-ins but there is barely any market at all for Motion specific plug-ins ... as far as I know.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 8:54:50 pm

Maybe not plugins, with the exceptions of mObject, but Ripple is selling huge training courses in Motion and MoitonVFX is completely Motion templates now, with plugins that work for both. You really can't use a template right in FCP X without making some changes in motion or just using it in motion.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 9:06:34 pm

[Bret Williams] "Maybe not plugins, with the exceptions of mObject"

mObject is a plug-in for FCP X that you can also use in Motion, but I bet that they sell 1000 units to FCP X-only customers to every one that they sell to someone who will only use it in Motion.

[Bret Williams] "Ripple is selling huge training courses in Motion"

Fair enough, Mark Spencer must feel there's enough of a market there.

[Bret Williams] "MoitonVFX is completely Motion templates now, with plugins that work for both."

Again, I would guess that their market is massively more FCP X than Motion exclusive.

[Bret Williams] "You really can't use a template right in FCP X without making some changes in motion or just using it in motion."

You're a relatively rare Motion power user, I think.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 9:59:30 pm

I use it quite a bit and really like it.

I remember when X came out and the reviews on Apples site where pretty bad. I looked up the reviews on the new Motion and they were really good. I found that curious.

I don't really hand anything off to anybody who would start making changes to my motion project.

I'm either the editor or someone else is.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 10:30:24 pm

I think it's a progression Oliver.

At $50 apiece, Motion and Compressor are often seen as simple "add on" products to X. But I was surprised and I think Mark Spencer was as well!) at the first Creative Summit when the number of people in the Motion sessions was as much or more than those in the general sessions.

It's not the same as the market for AE. But that's been growing for 20 years+.

And if you're deeply into motion graphics, the weight of that history will be hard to ignore. I think Motion will always attract X editors who don't want to mess with AE, rather than Motion Graphics Pros who are looking for something better/different.

On Richard Taylors Radio Show today, there was some talk about how there's now likely 3million plus X editors working out there. Each able to add Motion for a click- even if they don't use it rigouously. That's plenty of market for Motion templates, enhancements, plug-ins etc world wide.

Be interesting to see how many DEDICATED AE jockeys there are out there. Not just people who use it because they use the CC suite. And is that vertical big enough to service separately - or ONLY as a suite offering? We'll probably never know.

FWIW

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

Oliver Peters
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 28, 2016 at 11:40:06 pm

[Bill Davis] "On Richard Taylors Radio Show today, there was some talk about how there's now likely 3million plus X editors working out there. Each able to add Motion for a click- even if they don't use it rigouously. That's plenty of market for Motion templates, enhancements, plug-ins etc world wide. "

I'm curious about that number, because Apple hasn't even officially acknowledged 2 million FCPX owners yet. They announced 1 million separate installs in their 2014 news, but it's been silence since then AFAIK. I do agree it's possible, but I haven't actually seen anything official. Nor have I personally encountered a growth in users around the professional community. I see about the same users as has been the case for a few years now. However, I have seen visible shifts to Adobe from other platforms in that same time frame.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 8:13:45 am

Talking of numbers, I thought I'd have at look at the stats for my YouTube channel (which consists almost exclusively of Motion tutorials) which now has over 10,000 subscribers.

Obviously in terms of the installed user base for Motion that's going to be a tiny sample and to some extent self-selecting (and skewed towards those who can understand English to a sufficient level) so I'm not suggesting these figures are in any way scientific.

Anyway, here are the topline figures.

The top 10 locations in order are US, Germany, UK, France, Japan, Canada, Italy, India, Netherlands and South Korea. (Interesting that Germany is in second place despite the language issue.)

The US represents only 33% of the total which is perhaps surprising.

The demographic is consistently around 90% male.

The age ranges differ considerably between different territories, but in the US they break down as follows:

13-17 -5.8%
18-24 - 14%
25-34 - 27%
35-44 - 25%
45-54 - 18%
55-64 - 6.4%
65+ = 3.8%

The US has easily the highest proportion of under 18 year olds and, speaking anecdotally, many of these seem to have mastered Motion to a surprisingly high level.

25-34 seems to be the peak age group across most territories - this group is perhaps the likeliest to be using Motion in a work situation, though I would say again anecdotally that at least half of the adult users of Motion that I have come across on the channel are not video professionals and the number may well be a lot higher.

One of the most frequent comments is to express surprise at discovering what Motion can actually do. (Jason echoes this lower down this thread.) It would seem that Motion suffers from a perception problem generally and Apple don't seem to want to do much to correct this inasmuch as they market it exclusively as an adjunct to FCP X.

One other thing that I'd note is that of those 10,000+ subscribers only one that I know of is a regular here on the COW - not quite sure what that means but it may mean something.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 1, 2016 at 2:42:29 pm

[Bill Davis] "Be interesting to see how many DEDICATED AE jockeys there are out there. Not just people who use it because they use the CC suite. And is that vertical big enough to service separately - or ONLY as a suite offering? We'll probably never know."

No one knows precisely (more accurately, no one tells precisely), but there are enough dedicated users to support a good number of developers in the sizable ecosystem that has flourished around Ae.

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

Jason Watson
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 4:37:33 am

I used it pretty heavily for probably 5 years or so exclusively for motion graphics, but eventually I reached the point where it lacked the capability to do what I wanted and needed, and so I sort of made a cold turkey switch over to Ae. I really liked Motion, and hoped it would turn into a major Ae competitor, but I eventually realized it was probably going to be more of an effects generator for FCPX and so I never looked back. After using Ae for the past 5 years, it would be almost impossible to go back, as there are workflow and functionality aspects for me that Motion either couldn't accommodate or would make harder to pull off. I'd love to see it developed more, but I don't think that's what Apple has in mind for it.

At any rate, I only know of a couple people in my circles that use Motion for motion graphics creation, and a lot of that is modifying pre-existing templates. I know that when I was using it I always got odd looks and people were surprised that I was able to make what I was making with it, which is hopefully a compliment to it.


Return to posts index

Doug Suiter
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 10:53:07 am

I am a long time Motion fan. I used it to re-create broadcast templates originally created in AE so that promo editors didn't have to book in time with designers in the Promo departments of Channel [V] and Disney Channel in Australia. At the time we were using FCP Studio.

I understand that AE is far more capable from a certain point onwards but Motion is far more accessible, better value and a sheer pleasure to use right up to that point where they veer off into their respective strengths.

The thing is that so many people would be better off using Motion given what they actually use AE for. They under-estimate Motion's capabilities and over-estimate their need for AE's high end strengths. The result is this phenomenon of "Oh wow! I didn't know Motion could do that..." which is a combination of Motion's surprising power and their own over-estimation of what their own needs actually are. It's this whole "Industry standard" thing. I wonder how relevant it will remain the more things fragment?

Maybe instead of a "Professional vs Non-professional" paradigm we now have a "Specialised Professional vs Non-specialised Professional vs Non-professional"

For the Non-specialised Professional Motion is a powerful, affordable and effective motion GFX tool. I know that use it daily - and I know that I'm no specialist and I don't want to be. And there's probably a lot of non-specialised professionals out there just like myself. I imagine that trend is only going to continue.

The twist I think is how Motion works with FCPX as a Plugin and effects tool. There's nothing quite like it. In that sense it's even more advanced and than AE is to Premiere.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 11:09:32 am
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Feb 29, 2016 at 11:11:49 am

[Doug Suiter] "The thing is that so many people would be better off using Motion given what they actually use AE for. They under-estimate Motion's capabilities and over-estimate their need for AE's high end strengths. The result is this phenomenon of "Oh wow! I didn't know Motion could do that..." which is a combination of Motion's surprising power and their own over-estimation of what their own needs actually are."

Although I hesitate to prejudge the complexity of other people's workflows, my feeling is that this is very probably right on the money.

However, I have to reiterate that Apple really, really don't help the perception of Motion. Here's the headline text on the product page:

"An interface designed especially for editors. Smart templates for making changes on the fly during editing. And easy-to-use motion graphics tools for creating eye-catching titles, transitions and effects. Motion is the perfect companion to Final Cut Pro."

Note the emphasis on this being a tool for editors - not motion graphics artists.

Note that it is a companion to Final Cut Pro - not a product in its own right.

Note that its only suggested uses are for titles, transitions and effects. (Amazing!)

Talk about limiting your market!

If the company selling the product are happy to belittle it to this degree, it's small wonder that it's not taken as seriously as it might be.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Doug Suiter
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 11:46:35 am

"Although I hesitate to prejudge the complexity of other people's workflows" - well said.
"...my feeling is that this is very probably right on the money." - also well said ;)

"However, I have to reiterate that Apple really, really don't help the perception of Motion."

I also feel frustrated about this, however in a way I think it's smart of Apple to push Motion as a companion app. That truely is it's unique
strength. It is integrated into FCPX is a way that is much more fundamental than AE is to Premiere. Motion and FCPX are in a class of their own in that regard.

Note that its only suggested uses are for titles, transitions and effects.

I'd say it's because that's what Motion does uniquely, that's what they are pushing FCPX deep integration up front. It's probably a little harsh to say they're belittling Motion. But if you said they were underselling it, I'd be hard pressed to disagree.

I read today a thread where people were talking about what they'd like to see with the next FCPX released. Someone said "Better PR and Communication". In a heartbeat, I'd give back the last 12 months of FCPX releases for that.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 12:04:28 pm

Broadly speaking, I agree with what you're saying but ...

[Doug Suiter] "I also feel frustrated about this, however in a way I think it's smart of Apple to push Motion as a companion app."

Yes, their decision makes sense. I just think it's a great shame. If all you're using Motion for is as a helper to FCP X, then frankly you're barely using Motion at all. The fact is there is a vast constituency of Motion users, many of them young, who are doing great things with it - who don't even own a copy of FCP X. Apple seem to have no interest in speaking to them - for reasons which no doubt make commercial sense too. But that's a big wasted opportunity.

[Doug Suiter] "I'd say it's because that's what Motion does uniquely, that's what they are pushing FCPX deep integration up front."

It's not that they're pushing it "up front" - it's that they're not pushing anything else about Motion at all! Again, that's a crying shame. FCP X integration is cool - but it's just a tiny fraction of what you can do with Motion, as you know.

[Doug Suiter] "I read today a thread where people were talking about what they'd like to see with the next FCPX released. Someone said "Better PR and Communication". In a heartbeat, I'd give back the last 12 months of FCPX releases for that."

OK, so you wouldn't give very much at all then ;-) (Just kidding.)

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Doug Suiter
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 12:07:11 pm

"The fact is there is a vast constituency of Motion users, many of them young, who are doing great things with it - who don't even own a copy of FCP X."

Wow that's interesting. I actually didn't realise that.

"OK, so you wouldn't give very much at all then ;-) (Just kidding.)

Yeah I thought that as I typed it ;)


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 12:16:23 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Feb 29, 2016 at 12:19:08 pm

[Doug Suiter] ""The fact is there is a vast constituency of Motion users, many of them young, who are doing great things with it - who don't even own a copy of FCP X."

Wow that's interesting. I actually didn't realise that."


I know that probably sounds like a random claim, like so many that get bandied around here, but actually it's based on hundreds of interactions with subscribers to my YT channel.

It often surprises me when I recommend using FCP X only to discover they don't have it - and in some cases can't afford it!

You'd have thought that Apple would eagerly seize on a committed young demographic like this but they don't want to. Instead those young users of Motion will be graduating to Ae pretty soon and will be lost to the pro apps ecosystem ... They're unlikely to stick around using a product that shows very little sign of ongoing development and which Apple itself is only too happy to stigmatise.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 12:59:35 pm

A couple years ago I thought for sure Adobe was going to add full publishing (they already have rigging- albeit more complicated) to keep up with Motion's integration. They quickly implemented text publishing which brought them up to FCP legacy and Motion 4 standards. But then seemed to have dropped it. Motion didn't turn out to be a threat and I guess the pressure was off so they don't feel the need to develop that integration any further.


Return to posts index

Jason Watson
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 2:15:11 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "It's not that they're pushing it "up front" - it's that they're not pushing anything else about Motion at all! Again, that's a crying shame. FCP X integration is cool - but it's just a tiny fraction of what you can do with Motion, as you know."

I'd definitely agree with this, and it was one of the most frustrating and disappointing things for me back when I was heavily using Motion. To me the feature set bump from Motion 3 to Motion 4 was pretty significant, and at the time I thought it portended more in regards to how Apple would be developing it. But when Motion 5 came out and the biggest update (from what I remember) was the rigging, I thought it was cool, but not being an FCPX user it seemed like the app was going in a direction other than I was.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 2:31:52 pm

[Jason Watson] "To me the feature set bump from Motion 3 to Motion 4 was pretty significant, and at the time I thought it portended more in regards to how Apple would be developing it. But when Motion 5 came out and the biggest update (from what I remember) was the rigging, I thought it was cool, but not being an FCPX user it seemed like the app was going in a direction other than I was."

That's an interesting point.

If you were a long time user of Motion, M5 was not the exciting leap forward that so many others seem to have seen it as. It was a disappointment in that it didn't keep up the trajectory that we'd been expecting. And in many ways what it did was consign Motion to a much more secondary role. Subsequent Motion updates have been hugely underwhelming in terms of moving Motion forward as a product in its own right.

That's not to underestimate the value of the whole rigging and publishing thing - it's been a lot of fun. But rigging and publishing is primarily designed to get you into FCP X - it's primary purpose is not to expand what you can do inside Motion. (Although, yes, it's occasionally useful for that ... very occasionally.)

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 2:32:18 pm

[Oliver Peters] " I see a lot of wonderful work being done in Motion from time to time, as well as to create FCPX templates. But is anyone seriously using it for motion graphics?"

I dabble in Motion to make Templates. But for heavy FX work I use After Effects. The reason is simply I know AE well and I'd need more time in Motion to get to the same level. And time is not something I have a lot of these days. The other thing is that without round tripping, I'm not sure what the great advantage is of using Motion over AE. The only thing I can think is that it would make me better at making Templates, which is not a direct benefit.

I also get the sense that if I start using Motion in the same way as I use AE, I will run into roadblocks. "What do you mean Motion can't do this or that." or "Boy, I wish I had Optical Flares".

Bottom-line. If Motion had round-tripping and more robust development, I could easily see it becoming my main VFX software. But until then probably not.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 2:49:43 pm

[Brett Sherman] "I also get the sense that if I start using Motion in the same way as I use AE, I will run into roadblocks. "What do you mean Motion can't do this or that." or "Boy, I wish I had Optical Flares"."

It's only fair to mention that mFlare is a very decent flare package that compares to Optical Flares and works well inside Motion.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Daniel McClintock
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 6:10:58 pm

I know I'm probably gonna get heat for this, but I only bought Motion so I could have a inexpensive way to receive the ProRes codec.

---------------------------

"Sometimes Life Needs a Cmd-Z!"


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 7:55:45 pm

I've been using Motion pretty much exclusively for about 5 years- to the extent which I'm actually going to be dropping my CC account, and switching over to the photographers plan for Photoshop. I just don't use the other apps...

The only time Ive used AE in the last few years has been for 3D Camera tracking, a feature which I'd very much like to see make it's way into Motion- natively or as a plug-in.

And I think that (to me) is Motion's real achilles heel. As great as Ae is, a lot of the most advanced functionality comes from 3rd party support from Trapcode, Mocha, Video Copilot ect... and while Motion does have great support from companies like Motion VFX and Tokyo Productions, the above guys are missed.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 8:14:05 pm

[Marcus Moore] "And I think that (to me) is Motion's real achilles heel. As great as Ae is, a lot of the most advanced functionality comes from 3rd party support from Trapcode, Mocha, Video Copilot ect..."

You're quite right about third party support for Motion - I think it's very hard for developers to justify Motion-specific products, sadly. However I should point out that Mocha is available for Motion:

https://www.imagineersystems.com/videos/motion-tracking-tutorial-for-apple-...

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 9:09:25 pm

[Marcus Moore] "
The only time Ive used AE in the last few years has been for 3D Camera tracking, a feature which I'd very much like to see make it's way into Motion- natively or as a plug-in."


Have you considered using Syntheyes for tracking? I believe it has an export module for Motion - for $299.00, I don't think you could do better.



Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 9:13:03 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Have you considered using Syntheyes for tracking? I believe it has an export module for Motion - for $299.00, I don't think you could do better."

Totally agree - it's one of the very best 3D trackers there is.

Included exporters for After Effects (2- & 3-D, with plugin effects matching SynthEyes's distortion model for AE CC/CS6; PixelBenders for AE CS5.x); Alembic ABC (1.5 Ogawa format); AutoCAD DXF; Bentley Microstation; Biovision BVH (import also); Blender (various ongoing versions); Carrara; Cinema 4D; COLLADA; Combustion (2- & 3-D); Electric Image; Filmbox FBX; FLAIR motion control cameras; Flame (2- & 3-D); Fusion 5 (2- & 3-D); Fusion 7 (very full-featured 3-D & 2-D planar corner pin); Hash Animation:Master; Houdini; Inferno (2- & 3-D); Lidar XYZ; Lightwave; MAXscript (3ds max, 3D Studio VIZ); Maya; Mistika; MDD animated mesh vertices; Modo; Motion(2- & 3-D); Nuke (3-D & 2-D planar corner pin); OBJ meshes; Particle Illusion; PC2 Point Caches; PhotoScan; Poser; Realsoft 3D; Shake (2- & 3-D); Smoke2008 (2- & 3-D); Softimage dotXSI; toxik (pre2009); trueSpace; Vue 5 & 6 Infinite;

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Nicholas Zimmerman
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 1, 2016 at 6:46:25 pm

I've been fighting with getting 3D tracking into Motion, and SynthEyes is currently the way to go. At the moment Mocha Pro (which I'm a huge fan of) only supports limited shapes and corner pins, about 1/4 of the output available to AE.

________________________________________

NickZimmerman.net
________________________________________


Return to posts index

Jason Watson
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Feb 29, 2016 at 11:25:49 pm

[Marcus Moore] "And I think that (to me) is Motion's real achilles heel. As great as Ae is, a lot of the most advanced functionality comes from 3rd party support from Trapcode, Mocha, Video Copilot ect... and while Motion does have great support from companies like Motion VFX and Tokyo Productions, the above guys are missed."

For me this is a crucial aspect of Ae. When I originally moved from Motion to Ae, it didn't seem like that big of a leap; for what I was doing at least the core functionality seemed fairly interchangeable (although I eventually realized this wasn't really true). But once I started understanding just how extensible Ae was through the sheer amount of 3rd party plugins, scripts, training, tutorials, etc., I realized that much of its value is precisely in that, at least for me.

For me at least it's beyond just effects and such; there are scripts and the like (as an example) that make the actual workflow easier and more efficient for me to manage that Motion doesn't have, at least as of the last time I was working heavily in it. I think that it's because of this that even if Motion suddenly got feature and functionality parity with Ae, it still probably wouldn't cause me to switch back; I'd love to see Apple give it a go, although I'm doubtful they have that sort of scenario in mind for Motion.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 5:43:13 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jul 3, 2020 at 5:46:41 pm

[Marcus Moore] "The only time Ive used AE in the last few years has been for 3D Camera tracking, a feature which I'd very much like to see make it's way into Motion- natively or as a plug-in."

Just as a little FYI.





Next to the also upcoming camera tracker, yes.





😉

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 1, 2016 at 2:14:25 pm

[Oliver Peters] "But is anyone seriously using it for motion graphics?"

Define "motion graphics."

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

Oliver Peters
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 1, 2016 at 3:40:49 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Define "motion graphics.""

All manner of moving graphics or video. Low-level VFX. So, animatics, flying logos, heavy graphics-based composites, green screens, window inserts, simple multi-image composites, composites that require layering over several tracks or layers. IOW - the genre that is largely defined by AE.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 1, 2016 at 7:04:07 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Walter Soyka] "Define "motion graphics.""

All manner of moving graphics or video. Low-level VFX. So, animatics, flying logos, heavy graphics-based composites, green screens, window inserts, simple multi-image composites, composites that require layering over several tracks or layers. IOW - the genre that is largely defined by AE."


I feel as if this might be harder to define now than it was say, ten years ago. The HUD animations you see in movies like Oblivion or The Avengers, are those VFX or motion graphics? The VFX shots in shows like The Flash or Agents of Shield, are they low end or high end? The HUD graphics in Ironman, are those low end VFX or high end motion graphics? Even 3D camera and object tracking is used in motion graphics projects now, projects that would have been considered VFX work 15 years ago. I'm not saying there aren't lines between VFX and motion graphics, high end and low end post production... but I don't think the lines are as clear as they used to be.



Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 1, 2016 at 7:17:02 pm

[Shawn Miller] "I feel as if this might be harder to define now than it was say, ten years ago."

I think everything you say there is exactly right - "motion graphics" is a much wider and more sophisticated category than it's ever been and only becoming more so all the time.

However, it's important to stress (and you of course know this) that the gulf between even the highest end motion graphics and "true" VFX is getting wider as well. High end VFX shots are vastly more complicated in every sense than the kind of thing we're talking about here and the complexity keeps getting significantly greater. Unfortunately there has been a general blurring of definitions that is quite confusing and often misleading - so you get movies with pretty basic "motion graphics type" effects shots claiming 1000+ VFX in a bid to claim parity with genuine VFX heavy shows. It helps with the marketing buzz but it's a bit cheeky some of the time ...

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 1, 2016 at 8:48:12 pm
Last Edited By Shawn Miller on Mar 1, 2016 at 8:51:13 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "
I think everything you say there is exactly right - "motion graphics" is a much wider and more sophisticated category than it's ever been and only becoming more so all the time.

However, it's important to stress (and you of course know this) that the gulf between even the highest end motion graphics and "true" VFX is getting wider as well. High end VFX shots are vastly more complicated in every sense than the kind of thing we're talking about here and the complexity keeps getting significantly greater. Unfortunately there has been a general blurring of definitions that is quite confusing and often misleading - so you get movies with pretty basic "motion graphics type" effects shots claiming 1000+ VFX in a bid to claim parity with genuine VFX heavy shows. It helps with the marketing buzz but it's a bit cheeky some of the time ..."


Yup, I completely agree. It's a fascinating industry that seems to be evolving on a daily basis. It's still mindblowing to me that it might take the efforts of a few hundred (or a thousand) people to deliver a single shot. I'm also fascinated by what's happening on the "low end"; 3D scanning with a DSLR or an inexpensive handheld device, panoramic HDR stills or SDR video capture with a sub $500 device, 3D camera and object tracking in sub $500 applications, 13 stop video cameras that can capture raw, 12bit images for $995, inexpensive to free node based compositing software, "blockbuster strength" 3D rendering software for under $1,000, online render services for $.16 per frame (in some cases), etc. I do agree that the difference between the high end and the low end is complexity (and required labor), but it's pretty cool to see where the ball has moved in terms of overall quality.

Lastly, I agree that part of the confusion about the term 'motion graphics' comes from marketing types... but that's par for the course, I think. :-)



Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 3, 2016 at 12:33:10 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Even 3D camera and object tracking is used in motion graphics projects now, projects that would have been considered VFX work 15 years ago."
You could use a narrow definition based on the term "graphics". If you are superimposing a graphic on the screen, and it's "moving"... it's a Motion Graphic. If you are just tracking a background on a green screen shot, or adding smoke, that is a visual effect. To me, motion graphics requires a graphics designer or at least "a graphic". Everything else is a VFX.

I would say that tracking a 3D object that is "unnatural" such as 3D text over a moving landscape is considered motion graphics while tracking a 3D object that is supposed to look like it's naturally part of the scene (e.g., a car that wasn't originally there) is a VFX. The same skills and tools can be used to complete each task, but from the perspective of the audience, one is a moving graphic while the other is a visual effect meant to trick them into thinking that it is "real".

To me it all depends on whether you are adding text and logos, or smoke and fire. If someone asked me to add a motion graphic my first questions would be to send me the graphic and describe the motion. ;-)

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 4, 2016 at 12:14:27 am

[John Rofrano] "You could use a narrow definition based on the term "graphics". If you are superimposing a graphic on the screen, and it's "moving"... it's a Motion Graphic.."

If I create a graphic that looks like a bird in flight, superimpose it on a background plate, and animate it to move across the screen, is it a motion graphic or a visual effect? :-)

[John Rofrano] "If you are just tracking a background on a green screen shot, or adding smoke, that is a visual effect."

What about the moving graphics which were superimposed over an object tracked Robert Downey Jr in Iron Man, were those motion graphics or VFX shots? What if I design a shot where a moving logo catches fire and goes up in a puff of photorealistic smoke... would that be VFX or motion graphics... how about a photorealistic splash of CG water, washing over a dirty kitchen counter to reveal a shiny, clean logo? What if my intent is to have some graphics look real in a shot but not others...:-)

[John Rofrano] "To me, motion graphics requires a graphics designer or at least "a graphic". Everything else is a VFX."

There are a lot of VFX artists who are also graphic designers, and a lot of VFX shots require the creation of some sort of graphic element... where does that leave us? :-)

[John Rofrano] "I would say that tracking a 3D object that is "unnatural" such as 3D text over a moving landscape is considered motion graphics while tracking a 3D object that is supposed to look like it's naturally part of the scene (e.g., a car that wasn't originally there) is a VFX. The same skills and tools can be used to complete each task, but from the perspective of the audience, one is a moving graphic while the other is a visual effect meant to trick them into thinking that it is "real"."

I agree with this to a point - but I also think there are a lot of instances where there's enough cross over, that it might be tougher to classify a shot as one thing or the other. The opening sequences from Entourage, Person of Interest and Pacific Rim come to mind. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 4, 2016 at 1:00:53 am

[Shawn Miller] "If I create a graphic that looks like a bird in flight, superimpose it on a background plate, and animate it to move across the screen, is it a motion graphic or a visual effect? :-)"
I guess it would depend on if the bird was a laden or unladen swallow and if it was of African or European descent? ;-)

My take is: If the bird looks real it's a visual effect... if it looks fake it's a motion graphic. lol

...but I get your point.

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 4, 2016 at 2:12:48 am

[John Rofrano] "I guess it would depend on if the bird was a laden or unladen swallow and if it was of African or European descent? ;-)

My take is: If the bird looks real it's a visual effect... if it looks fake it's a motion graphic. lol"


Fair enough. :-)



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 3, 2016 at 5:17:27 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Define "motion graphics."

[Oliver Peters] "All manner of moving graphics or video. Low-level VFX. So, animatics, flying logos, heavy graphics-based composites, green screens, window inserts, simple multi-image composites, composites that require layering over several tracks or layers. IOW - the genre that is largely defined by AE."

Personally, my primary use for Motion is what you might call mograph lite: the titling/identity work for integration in FCPX that Apple is pushing. Ae gets everything else that's design-led or remotely close to mograph: the explainers, conference opens and elements, C4D composites, etc.

Although I used to be a heavy Motion user back in the v1/2/early-3 days, my Motion usage has dropped off considerably as I transitioned from editor to designer. Now I only use Motion a couple times a year, while I use Ae nearly every day.

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

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 2, 2016 at 2:33:54 am

[Walter Soyka] "Define "motion graphics.""



Return to posts index

Andre van Berlo
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 3, 2016 at 1:38:04 am

I use Motion quite regularly for making templates for FCPX. I also like to edit the templates I buy from Motion VFX. I'm not a very skilled user but I find my way around motion fairly well as I did a couple of courses from Ripple Training. I really like the integration of the 2 and for my work I've never really needed to have send to motion though it would have been handy once or twice.


Return to posts index

Winston A. Cely
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Mar 4, 2016 at 7:04:58 pm

I've used it nearly exclusively since it was first released. Granted, most of the work was very simple titling, but my use has expanded. I now teach a high school level class how to use Motion, and don't even touch AE.

Winston A. Cely
Editor/Owner | Della St. Media, LLC

17" MacBook Pro | 2.3 GHz Intel Core i7
4 GB RAM | Final Cut Studio 3 | FCPX | Motion 5 | Compressor 4

"If you can talk brilliantly enough about a subject, you can create the consoling illusion it has been mastered." - Stanley Kubrick


Return to posts index

Djaka Dwiandi
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 5, 2016 at 3:35:09 am

I am considering to buy Motion but when checking the price I get upset as the price is now $79.99 in the app store. Did they upgrade the price when releasing the new version (5.2.3)?


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 5, 2016 at 4:14:34 am

Try Blackmagic Fusion is you want something for free. But sub $80 for software is not expensive really.


Return to posts index

Djaka Dwiandi
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 5, 2016 at 9:22:54 am

Thank you for the tip. I mostly would do motion design, I'll research the capability of the software.


Return to posts index

Djaka Dwiandi
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 7, 2016 at 12:16:27 am

I tried the Fusion It blows my mind! feels like having a ferrari machine on a beetle!
at the end, the fusion blows my mind but the motion wins my pocket, eh I mean heart. LOL


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 5, 2016 at 10:34:43 am

[Djaka Dwiandi] "but when checking the price I get upset as the price is now $79.99 in the app store"

No idea which Store you're looking at (in foreign App Stores the exchange rate plays a big part!), but in the U.S. Store the price has not changed since day one. Nor in the european ones that I frequent.

And really... a measly $79 (if that were the case) for THAT powerful of an app? That's a problem? Seriously?

- RK

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


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 5, 2016 at 12:26:21 pm

I just checked and the iTunes stores still shows $49.99 for me. Maybe there is a currency conversion happening depending on your location as Robin said. It's the deal of the century at anything less than $100 if you consider the power that Motion brings.

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index

Djaka Dwiandi
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 7, 2016 at 12:20:28 am

Yeah right. that what make me confuse. But it turned out that in the Australian store they charged more for the item there... they think Aussies are more wealthy....


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 8, 2016 at 3:19:41 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on May 8, 2016 at 4:27:02 pm

[Djaka Dwiandi] "they think Aussies are more wealthy...."

Like I said... "exchange rate"?? $49 U.S. are roughly $67 AUS... plus tax and what not... bingo. Motion costs $55 U.S. or even more in the various Europe stores as well. It's not some "Australian thing".


Return to posts index

Djaka Dwiandi
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 9, 2016 at 1:25:57 am

You are right.
a bit old news
http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/apple-defends-high-costs-technology...


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 5, 2016 at 1:11:59 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "And really... a measly $79 (if that were the case) for THAT powerful of an app? That's a problem? Seriously?
"


Cost is relative. If you're making $3,000 a month it's less than 3% of your take home pay. If you're monthly income is $700, it's more than 11%.

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on May 5, 2016 at 4:32:19 pm

[Michael Hancock] "Cost is relative. If you're making $3,000 a month it's less than 3% of your take home pay. If you're monthly income is $700, it's more than 11%.
"


Maybe so but if you can pay for an asset that earns you money with just 11% of your income for ONE month then it's well worth it!


Return to posts index

Lorenzo M. Vidali
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 1, 2020 at 5:12:13 am
Last Edited By Lorenzo M. Vidali on Jul 1, 2020 at 5:15:58 am

I work for a government contracting company and we do a lot of work that has to be accessible, hence using flat colors and vector-based 2D animations with snappy motion, etc.

I use Motion exclusively for our work and I'm running circles around people using AE for the same types of projects.

No dis to AE, but with so many features piled on, it is just plain clunky compared to Motion for this type of work.

Also, government agencies tend to make decisions by committee, and we get a lot of very inconvenient and poorly timed change requests. Motion makes dealing with that fairly easy provided you set up your projects correctly.

In addition I can accomplish fairly complex projects on an aging MacBook, which would grind to a halt if I was using AE.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 1, 2020 at 5:26:15 pm
Last Edited By Shawn Miller on Jul 1, 2020 at 5:27:32 pm

[Lorenzo M. Vidali] "I work for a government contracting company and we do a lot of work that has to be accessible, hence using flat colors and vector-based 2D animations with snappy motion, etc.

I use Motion exclusively for our work and I'm running circles around people using AE for the same types of projects.

No dis to AE, but with so many features piled on, it is just plain clunky compared to Motion for this type of work.

Also, government agencies tend to make decisions by committee, and we get a lot of very inconvenient and poorly timed change requests. Motion makes dealing with that fairly easy provided you set up your projects correctly.

In addition I can accomplish fairly complex projects on an aging MacBook, which would grind to a halt if I was using AE."


Wow, this thread is a blast from the past! Thanks for reviving one of my favorite discussions on The Cow.

Four years later, I wonder what the state of the Motion user base is; is it still small but loyal, is it growing in popularity with FCPX, is it stagnating, is it shrinking? As a Motion user, do you feel like Apple is continuing to innovate the application and pushing it in the right direction?

Shawn



Return to posts index

Winston A. Cely
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 1, 2020 at 6:07:23 pm

I use Motion and teach it to my high school students because it's way easier to grasp basic concepts and create an easy animation than trying to use Motion. And as I've said before, most of the students that I have that want to continue their education in this field, will get AE in college and tech school, so I enjoy using an app that allows my students to create nice motion graphics quickly.

That being said, now that Apple is moving towards Apple Silicon, I'm wondering if we're about to get Motion 6, finally!

Winston A. Cely
ACTC Media Broadcasting Video Instructor
Apple Certified Editor FCPX 3

"If you can talk brilliantly enough about a subject, you can create the consoling illusion it has been mastered." - Stanley Kubrick


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 1, 2020 at 7:02:34 pm

Don't you start!

Otherwise I might have to make a reappearance ...

Simon Ubsdell

hawaiki


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 1, 2020 at 7:21:12 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Don't you start! Otherwise I might have to make a reappearance ..."

Ooh, are we treading trodden trails?

Two updates from the year 2020:

Ae's MOGRTs have grown up a lot and cover most of my titling needs, but there is still no equivalent to Motion footage dropzones or effects. I miss them sometimes, but it's been a couple years since I've even opened Motion.

I have still not personally seen a Fusion motion graphic in the wild. Has anyone else?

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

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 1, 2020 at 10:45:18 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Ae's MOGRTs have grown up a lot and cover most of my titling needs, but there is still no equivalent to Motion footage dropzones or effects. I miss them sometimes, but it's been a couple years since I've even opened Motion."

So, what would inspire you to pick Motion up again? Does it need a complete overhaul in your opinion, or is it just missing a few very important features/capabilities?

[Walter Soyka] "I have still not personally seen a Fusion motion graphic in the wild. Has anyone else?"

To be honest, I haven't seen anyone use anything but AE in my daily work. I've edited, templatized, and created AE projects for a wide variety of people and uses - but I have yet to work with an agency, coworker, contractor, or vendor hand-off or ask for a Fusion or Motion project. The last time I worked with a non-AE motion graphics artist was maybe 18 years ago - where the post house I contracted with had an Inferno suite. ☺

Shawn



Return to posts index

Winston A. Cely
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 1, 2020 at 10:50:43 pm

I think this may be a moment in time where "it's the industry standard" may not have as tight a grip as it used to. If we're going to have to continue to social distance from each other, maybe the individual post-guru will be more open to using something they had not in the past. Simon has demonstrated how powerful Motion can be (multiple times in tutorials and even head on as well); plus, without the use of machines that post-/graphics- houses have, we users may be more open to trying something that isn't "industry standard."

Not to mention, Apple Silicon may be about to blow our socks off with Motion 6... Hehehe

Winston A. Cely
ACTC Media Broadcasting Video Instructor
Apple Certified Editor FCPX 3

"If you can talk brilliantly enough about a subject, you can create the consoling illusion it has been mastered." - Stanley Kubrick


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 2, 2020 at 12:20:14 am

[Winston A. Cely] "I think this may be a moment in time where "it's the industry standard" may not have as tight a grip as it used to. If we're going to have to continue to social distance from each other, maybe the individual post-guru will be more open to using something they had not in the past."

Sure, if you're lucky enough to not to have to be compatible with others, then you can pretty much use whatever you want. Not all of us are that lucky. ☺

[Winston A. Cely] "...without the use of machines that post-/graphics- houses have, we users may be more open to trying something that isn't "industry standard.""

If you're doing the kind of heavy-duty mograph work that requires a powerful workstation, you'll probably need something equally powerful for complex Motion or Fusion projects. Multi-layered 16-bit .exr files with deep effects stacks and animations on top will bog down any software application on any platform... sooner or later, every program hits the wall and has to resort to a proxy workflow. ☺

[Winston A. Cely] "Not to mention, Apple Silicon may be about to blow our socks off with Motion 6... Hehehe"

Well, I would surely like to see that... and I'm not even a Mac user ! ☺

Shawn



Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 2, 2020 at 11:02:34 am
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jul 2, 2020 at 12:26:51 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Sure, if you're lucky enough to not to have to be compatible with others, then you can pretty much use whatever you want. Not all of us are that lucky."

So are people saying that they're actually exchanging native project files with clients and not just the rendered clip? 🤨 Because I have maybe seen that needed a few times on larger scale in-house productions, but never once did I need to myself in my decade+ as an AE user nor seen others do it. And if you're not exchanging actual project files, then I'd love to know how it can be a given that any one app "has to" be used, aside from maybe just plain HABIT. That's like saying you can somehow tell which NLE was used to edit a film, so you have to use NLE X, Y or Z on your film to get the same? I'm pretty sure I can show you a number of clips with massively elaborate motion graphics where you can't and won't guess if done with AE or Motion.

But at least no one has brought up "Dynamic Link" as the must-have, killer feature (or have they?), seeing that it's anything but "dynamic". Never mind that, if anything, Motion shows what that means i.e. should mean. Add to that it's exponentially deeper integration into FCP than AE is in Premiere and you're golden.

I always say there's a good reason for "Render and replace" in PPro. Because the playback speed with native files is just unbearable 95% of the time. And once you have to hit that (i.e. render out) I have to wonder why you "have" to use AE? That's aside from the fact that I haven't seen anything anyone has put together in AE for any average everyday production in the past many many years that they a) couldn't have just as well done in Motion, and b) for not only in a fraction of the time, but also for a fraction of the cost, assuming they used Motion for more than 3 months (or just one month, depending on their subscription 😏)



[Shawn Miller] "If you're doing the kind of heavy-duty mograph work that requires a powerful workstation, you'll probably need something equally powerful for complex Motion or Fusion projects. Multi-layered 16-bit .exr files with deep effects stacks and animations on top will bog down any software application on any platform... "

Aside from the fact that that isn't even anywhere close to Motion's target audience or intended use-case, I'd guess you've never actually used Motion or seen it in action? If "Multi-layered 16-bit .exr files with deep effects stacks and animations" is someone's bread and butter (which I'll venture to guess it isn't for anyone here?) and they're looking at MOTION to do it… erm… not very clever. It's about being able to do the vast majority of things editors need in the context of editing (but also much more of course, if needed), and that with features such as not needing to render, or making changes as it plays back, and again, it's brilliant integration with FCP. A level of integration that AE/Premiere can only dream of.

But then the whole "AE vs. Motion" thing is ultimately nonsensical either way since Motion isn't and never has been positioned as a replacement for AE in any way, shape, or form. That notion has only come from users that are ignorant to the differences, only know AE (barely) and just see some overlapping functionality and make an assumption that's somehow what Apple's intention is. Then they just go with AE because it's "the standard" that the big boys use.

I always say that if general-purpose and everyday mograph is what you need and you're using Premiere, then clearly AE is what you should be using, but Motion certainly couldn't hurt. But if you're using FCP then you'd be stupid and shooting yourself in the foot big time if you used AE instead of Motion.


[Tim Wilson] "Can you tell what you're doing with it? What about Motion was so compelling that compatibility with Motion was your go-no go for adopting X?"

I'd venture to say that is not so much what it is he's doing, just the how, i.e. fact that he can do it in a fraction of the time one would need in AE, assuming you don't need some super-specialty plugins that are only for AE, or integration with C4D or the likes. Something that only a fraction of AE users ever need from my experience.

But then I also use Motion to make entire CI conform packages for clients consisting of custom titles, transitions and the occasional generator. And if they're using FCP they can install the project files (a case where it actually makes sense) so that they can use and customize nearly any and every aspect of the titles, transitions etc. that they need (and I allow 😏). All in realtime, zero rendering. Would love to see anyone do anything even close to that with AE/PPro.

Alex Gollner's near full-time job for example is making custom assets for the BBC, who have switched very large parts of their production to FCP. And with that effectively Motion. His single, highly complex assets are also optimized to work in any broadcast AND social media aspect ratio… adjusting automatically to whatever type of project they're used in. Again something you could only dream of being able to set up in AE for Premiere.

Just watching this already five year old clip (where absolutely nothing has changed since 🙄) says it all for me. Or even Simon's take on the matter.

For me Motion's most lacking feature is: PROMOTION (from Apple). And information/education. Because I, too, would love to know what people think they cannot get from Motion, outside of specialty plugins and integrations, that they actually need on a day to day basis in the direct context of their work in their NLE. The primary if not almost only relevant context for Motion. Not massive 3D composites and/or 200 layer mographs.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 2, 2020 at 6:21:32 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "[Shawn Miller] "Sure, if you're lucky enough to not to have to be compatible with others, then you can pretty much use whatever you want. Not all of us are that lucky."

So are people saying that they're actually exchanging native project files with clients and not just the rendered clip? 🤨 Because I have maybe seen that needed a few times on larger scale in-house productions, but never once did I need to myself in my decade+ as an AE user nor seen others do it"


Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. In 20+ years of doing this kind of work, I've exchanged AE project files with others for a number of different reason; an agency designs a motion graphics package for a campaign and another part of the business wants to use those assets for another project that I'm working on, I design a motion graphics package for an event and a vendor wants to use it for a number of videos they are producing for the company, someone from a different part of the company wants their design team (yes, we have multiple) to use some title cards that I designed for a another group, or vice versa, etc.

[Robin S. Kurz] "[Shawn Miller] "If you're doing the kind of heavy-duty mograph work that requires a powerful workstation, you'll probably need something equally powerful for complex Motion or Fusion projects. Multi-layered 16-bit .exr files with deep effects stacks and animations on top will bog down any software application on any platform... "

Aside from the fact that that isn't even anywhere close to Motion's target audience or intended use-case, I'd guess you've never actually used Motion or seen it in action? If "Multi-layered 16-bit .exr files with deep effects stacks and animations" is someone's bread and butter (which I'll venture to guess it isn't for anyone here?) and they're looking at MOTION to do it… erm… not very clever. It's about being able to do the vast majority of things editors need in the context of editing (but also much more of course, if needed), and that with features such as not needing to render, or making changes as it plays back, and again, it's brilliant integration with FCP. A level of integration that AE/Premiere can only dream of."


I think you're missing my point... it's not about what Motion can't do, it's that big beefy projects require big beefy workstations regardless of application or platform. The suggestion from Winston was that, when users are freed from having to use powerful machines at work, then that will free them to try different software at home on less powerful hardware... my point (again) is that the need for capable hardware doesn't change with location.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 2:54:12 am

[Shawn Miller] "Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. In 20+ years of doing this kind of work, I've exchanged AE project files with others for a number of different reason; an agency designs a motion graphics package for a campaign and another part of the business wants to use those assets for another project that I'm working on, I design a motion graphics package for an event and a vendor wants to use it for a number of videos they are producing for the company, someone from a different part of the company wants their design team (yes, we have multiple) to use some title cards that I designed for a another group, or vice versa, etc."

The problem with anecdotal stories in any direction is that they always lead to the wrong conclusion. "I don't need this" becomes "I don't know anybody who needs this" becomes "NOBODY NEEDS THIS", or "It's edge cases only" when "nobody" and "edge case" in this industry could refer to millions of people, and millions of people beyond them in their extended workflows.

(We could certainly think of Avid in this context, but look at the original content on Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, and all the rest and tell me again about how Hollywood is an "edge case". )

The lack of insight provided by this sequence of reasoning (I don't need it >> I don't know anyone who needs it >> nobody needs it/it's an edge case) for Motion vs. AE manifests itself when you remember, oh, right, there are many millions more users of After Effects than Motion, and millions of those are making their living as full-time After Effects artists, when relatively few people can be said to making a full-time career in Motion.

To put it another way, the "edge cases" that "nobody needs" are in fact the core features that millions of people have been using for nearly 30 in After Effects for years now -- features that these millions of people helped add to the product by virtue of an extremely responsive development team that has aggressively pursued user input. Adobe's "old school" beta programs still had thousands of people in them, and open betas are now extending that to anyone who wants access.

Not that YOU need those features. Any number of untold millions of people might never need anything in After Effects ever, but the millions of people who DO use it daily, and have for almost 30 years, are anything but edge cases.

The feature set in AE is no doubt unwieldy to people who have a handful of specific tasks to perform, and Motion is one of the many options that many people will find preferable. Good! Prefer it for all the reasons you want to. One of the best reasons to prefer it is that Motion was explicitly NOT developed for full-time mograph professionals. That's its best feature.

It's also the feature that makes it unusable for many mograph professionals. Not all of them, of course, but no tool developed for non-mograph pros is ever going to fit the needs of most mograph pros. That isn't its goal, and it's not disrespectful to be truthful about this.

What's disrespectful is assuming that the millions of mograph professionals who are using the deep, dark recesses of AE's toolset, in a multiplicity of NLEs, are either ignorant or obstinate for failing to choose a tool that was not only NOT developed with them in mind, but developed with the OPPOSITE of them in mind.

I love Motion for what it is, but it's not for everyone. By design.

[Robin S. Kurz] "But if you're using FCP then you'd be stupid and shooting yourself in the foot big time if you used AE instead of Motion."

I don't agree with that, and I politely and gently contend that more FCPX'ers will agree with me than you.

To flip this around, I don't think that any AE artist who needs an NLE would be stupid or shooting themselves in the foot if they chose FCPX. They would be sacrificing SOME built-in integration between the two, but if they preferred editing in FCPX, I think you would agree that might more than make up for it, without even having to resort to third-party interchange tools.

The goal is never to take some manufacturer's word for what the best workflow is, but to combine the best tools for ME, for all of MY tasks, and MY clients, and hopefully not get in my way if I need to expand my workflow beyond their four walls.


Stepping away from my immediate reply to Robin, I'm going to make a larger observation: living inside the wall-to-wall integration with tools from only one vendor? THAT's the edge case. In practice, hardly anybody does it.

Look at it at the broadest consumer level. Some Apple users believe deep in their bones that the best, nay the ONLY way to live the best life is to combine iPhone, iPad, Mac, iCloud, Apple TV, FCPX, and on and on.

But Apple themselves will never produce a TV spot pointing out the advantages of tying together the iOS experience with Macs because they know that the majority of iPhone customers are NOT using Macs, and never will. If people thought that they NEEDED a Mac to use iPhone, they wouldn't buy Macs. They'd stop buying iPhones.

I know some "I'd kill everyone I've ever met and then myself before I used Windows or Android" people who feel just as strongly in their preference for Gmail, Spotify, and Netflix on their Macs and iPhones and iPads over Mail, Apple Music, and Apple TV.

Sure, there are advantages to integration, but every single day, people opt out of integration in favor of *preference.*

So there are good reasons for people to edit in FCPX, animate in After Effects, and grade in Resolve, or any other way that they care to mix and match (throw in Pro Tools for mixing and Propellerhead for instruments and Sibelius for scoring!) that vastly outweigh the advantages of doing everything using only the tools from one vendor.

No matter how much they all want to say so, nobody has the best in class products in every single category for every use case. The best that they can do for us is enable interop, respect our metadata, and stay out of our way.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 3:15:59 am

[Tim Wilson} "Sure, there are advantages to integration, but every single day, people opt out of integration in favor of *preference.*"

I would love to switch to the integrated Fairlight in Resolve but I still prefer to use my stand alone version of Fairlight, even though Resolve is my integrated post tool of choice. And I don't lecture anyone about their preferences in software unless their choice breaks or makes difficult a post workflow that I am part of.

Your observations about preference make it so much more important that we can take timelines between different software vendors which is why I have been critical of NLEs in the past that make this needlessly difficult. Recent discussions about HitFilm reminded me that the last time I looked at it, they didn't support XML, AAF or OMF export so it was a "please don't edit with this and ask me to grade in Resolve".


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 10:15:33 am

[Michael Gissing] "I would love to switch to the integrated Fairlight in Resolve but I still prefer to use my stand alone version of Fairlight, even though Resolve is my integrated post tool of choice."

I have seen this from every angle myself, as an editor, designer, and a developer.

When I worked at Boris FX, my long suits were FCP (which I started working with in Windows when it was still at Macromedia) and Avid, with a twist of AE. Enough to demo and test our stuff in it, but once I stopped using AE as an artist myself in 1998, I admit that I couldn't keep up. LOL

I also recruited and onboarded the (then) Sonic Foundry team, although I didn't help develop the plug in integration for it. I eventually got up to speed on Boris's integration with Premiere, Sony Xpri (!!!) and a few others, by which point I knew as much about integration as almost anybody on the planet not named Boris. Not a brag. It was my job.

And yet my biggest concentration was the relationship between those plugins and Boris's standalone product, RED. That was my baby. I learned lots and lots of advantages to plugins standing alone, which is why I was also so delighted to see just last week that Boris has developed and released a standalone version of the venerable plugin Particle illusion.

Because RED was a standalone application, being used by people who also worked with plugins, who obviously, also worked with a variety of host applications, I immediately saw the advantages of Automatic Duck, and began work with West plate and his father Harry on Automatic Duck integration for Boris RED.

(Auto Duck enabled sections of NLE timelines, first Avid, then FCP, to be opened in AE, while retaining things like DVE, markers, filter settings, layers, and more, then bringing something comprehensible back to the NLE. Fiendishly clever stuff, WAY ahead of its time, if now common as a built in feature, largely because of Auto Duck's efforts.

Talk about an education in interchange, though! Working with Auto Duck to make RED's timelines (not just rendered output) compatible with all these took me under the hood of the timeline architectures of Final Cut Pro, After Effects, Premiere Pro, Media Composer and Symphony, as well as understanding the relationships between plugins and standalone compositing for all of these.
And not just things like filter values, DVE, and tracking data, but what it means to share camera data and software lights, which may or may not have any relationship to real lights or real cameras, but might in fact be entirely artificial creations, each unique to its own environment.

It happens that my predecessor in product management for Boris RED left to develop a super flexible real time particle and compositing system for Discreet. His entire team was bought by Apple, and that product was released as Motion. I was working in the Apple booth at NAB the year before Motion was released, and he gave me a preview on his laptop. The product didn't have a name yet or even an interface. It was running in a shell, but it was jaw dropping.

That was the same year I saw India Titler further down the floor, and was clearly not the only one to think "Wow, real-time particles and procedural media combined with real-time procedural textures on titles, that would make a dynamite combination! " LOL

So then I wound up at Avid. Lost now to the sands of time is a suite that I led the product marketing for, that is to say not the engineering, and it wasn't my idea, but the product development and release, called Avid Xxpress Studio.

We were starting to put this together at the same time that Apple was working on Final Cut Suite, its first name, now also lost to the sands of time. Neither of us was copying the other. We were both running terrified of Adobe, with a bigger software user base than Apple and Avid combined (true then, and true now), and neither of us as yet had a good enough story to answer Adobe.

Apple's solution of course was to buy a whole bunch of stuff in addition to Motion/Live Type. Spruce DVD, Final Touch, Logic, etc etc. A ton of stuff. Many of you remember this well.

Avid's solution was likewise obvious in retrospect. A very popular set of NLEs and IO hardware, a very popular audio software and integrated hardware toolset, a 3D application in Softinage XSI and much more.

Remarkably, nobody had ever tried to get any of it working all the way together before! (AAF and OMF, yes. Anything else, not so much.) I traveled back and forth between Montreal, San Francisco and Boston, where the three teams were located, trying to bang it out.

This was a gargantuan effort that was directed from on high, but I was the grunt interfacing with the teams putting it together. I talked to engineers to get Pro Tools hardware talking to Avid timelines as a control surface for the first time ever, creating 3D rigs in XSI (whose long suit had been character animation) that were useful for broadcast animation and titling (ie, the opposite of anything vaguely resembling character animation)...

Oh yeah and an Avid branded version of Boris RED (Avid FX) that would now fit into the mix to answer the mograph, tracking, paint, compositing, and titling pieces. Where I also learned more than I ever wanted to know about integrating DISPLAY processing, thanks to a handful of entirely unrelated OpenGL implementations.

By this point, combining everything I'd learned about timelines, interop, plugins, hardware, software, audio, video, 3D, for Avid, Apple, Adobe, and more, I was it. Nobody was juggling more of it than me.

(I'm skipping the DVD authoring and our unique integrations with SmartSound that I worked with them closely on. I'd been a customer since the 90s, and an still a fan, and yeah, learned STILL MORE about integration from these two. NLE markers to DVD chapters was just the beginning.)

Heck, I was even having to learn about integrated dongles, because the Pro Tools plugins all had their own dongles IN ADDITION TO the dongles for Avid and Pro Tools. Audio guys were used to this. Audio freelancers carried around suitcases of dongles, but I knew that even one dongle was too many for many people, and insisted on just one.

Well, I talked them down to two, which nobody had even tried before. And a ton of people did a ton of work to pull it off, so I called it a victory and moved on

But I wasn't done yet!

I'm going to take a pause in that story, though, to tell you this one.

I'd already been a road warrior, on the road for 100 days a year or more. I met many of you at some of these presentations going back before the turn of the century at Boris. At one time, I'd presented to every FCP UG on the planet, and most of the ones for Avid, Premiere, and AE.... but travel for Avid Xpress Studio was through the roof. Approaching 200 days on the road that year.

I had a rough time at IBC that year, and was genuinely delighted to see some of my friends from Apple's road team third row center for my presentation at the historic Amsterdam Stock Exchange. Avid spent a fortune on this thing, too, their big after hours event that year. Two giant Barco protectors worth a quarter million each, filling a pair of 30 ft screens, incredible sound, an open bar, 3000 people, it was insane.

And I ended my pitch the way I always did, emphasizing that Avid's was "the most complete suite" - the industry's definitive video editing, the only suite with integrated hardware for video IO and an integrated control surface, the only suite with 3D, and the only suite with Pro Tools.

"Why would you bother with a suite that doesnn't have ANY of these things when Avid offers THE MOST COMPLETE SUITE right here in Avid Xpress Studio ?" ....I said looking my friends from Apple's Final Cut SUITE right in the eye. LOL

We'd been giving each other playful grief on the road for years, and they rolled their eyes at me, as well they should have. They really let me have it later, too. "Most complete suite, very clever. Ha ha ha." All good fun.

Fast forward to NAB the next spring, Apple and Avid across the aisle from each other just inside the front door to the South Hall. Apple's booth was shrouded in curtains, and had been for the past month. (Yes, it takes a month to set up a major booth.) Five minutes before the doors open, the curtains rise, and a 40 for banner pointing ONLY at Avid reveals Apple's big news for the show.

Final Cut Suite is dead and gone.

In its place, Final Cut....STUDIO.

We laughed out loud. We'd spent a year beating them up with "Avid Xpress Studio: The Most Complete SUITE, so they turned both barrels on us to face Avid Xpress STUDIO with Final Cut STUDIO. Ya gotta love it.

So for anyone who prefers the name Final Cut Studio, you're welcome. LOL

Anyway, as all this drama was playing out, Avid bought Pinnacle, for one big reason: the intersection between integration and inter op.

People in our market tend to forget that Avid is even bigger in broadcast than post. They were running the table on digital newsrooms conversions at the time, and newsrooms are INSANELY complex. Avid's systems designers took sole responsibility for developing turnkey neesrooms that were absolutely bulletproof and tied together, and a typical invoice would have products from as many as 200 companies on it.

Plenty of stuff like wires and connectors, but also switchers, routers, CG, MAM, playout servers, archive and nearchive servers, NLEs and shared editing storage, on and on - and it all had to talk to each other.

Pinnacle offered a lot of pieces like CG and playout servers that Avid was never going to build, so after buying Pinnacle, Avid could offer more streamlined systems from fewer vendors, and keep more of the dough. Nice!

The only part of this I had anything to do with was graphics. I'd become the defacto titling and graphics nerd n chief because I not only knew how Boris FX, XSI, and Avid's other two titlers (Title Tool and Marquee) fit together, but I also knew After Effects, the defacto animation engine for Pinnacle's Title Deko. My job was to create a scope of work for integrating sooooome aspect of these.

So I flew to Mountain View from Boston, and figured out before lunch that it would cost more to develop than it would ever make. LOL Oops. Had a great Indian lunch and flew back across the country early. Avid wisely punted and created something new for broadcast graphics.

If you want to see something REALLY cool if there's ever another NAB, check out Avid's broadcast graphics solutions. So so amazing... and again, nothing to do with me, but you can in fact add the integration of broadcast graphics and post graphics, and reconciling incompatible approaches to alpha channels, to the stupid integration tricks I had to learn.

Part of the acquisition of Pinnacle was Liquid, a low cost NLE ($1000, same as Final Cut at the time) that completely rewrote the book on integration at that time: video, audio, 2D and 3D titling and animation, and DVD authoring not in one suite, but in one application.

The dev team was in Munich, my counterpart in Pinnacle product marketing was there in Mountain View, but here comes Mr Integration, ME, to run point on the Avid side from Boston. Plus a whole new set of user groups to visit.

I spent a TON of time banging on Liquid, and grew really fond of it. I led the press demos for the rollout under the Avid banner, and was of course fully up to speed on the pluses and minuses on Liquid's approach to integration vs Xpress Studio (still in charge of that), AND vs Apple and Adobe.

Seriously, NOBODY was deeper into EVERY angle of this than me.

Here's the last story about this. Liquid had developed such a space age interface that longtime users found it disorienting, so Pinnacle did something I've never seen before or since. They had a button in the prefs that let you flip back to classic mode. You lost a ton of features, sacrificed a ton of performance, and kissed much of the integration with other components goodbye, but if you were going hard into the edit itself, muscle memory is worth a lot, right? Flip back to modern mode, or whatever it was called, for when you needed those other features.

Best of both worlds! I have no idea how they pulled off the compatibility between the two modes, but it ROCKED. German engineering, son.

So this one time I spent all morning demoing the shiny new Liquid to a member of the press who Oliver will probably guess from this description. One bullet point right before we broke for lunch was to mention, hey, for people who want to edit in the old way, you can turn on classic mode to edit, then flip back to the modern UI for the rest. I didn't spend 90 seconds on this out of a four hour briefing. No kidding.

And what was the review? The longest review I've ever seen for a product I managed, BLASTING us for not updating the old UI. I screamed at him, "You had to TURN OFF the new, modern interface you said we didn't have

WHICH WE DO

WHICH YOU KNOW

BECAUSE YOU HAD TO TURN IT OFF. The old interface was just there for compatibility, which is A GOOD THING!!!”

He shrugged and said, "Yeah but you didn't update the old interface. You're telling people who LIKE the old interface to pay you for an update that doesn't give them anything, and I think that's wrong."

So I turned my screaming to the Liquid team and said, Look, if you want your customers to go all in on your future, YOU have to go all in FIRST. Burn the old stuff to the ground, or you're in for a lifetime of this pain, for NOTHING. Worse, every day you spend supporting the past is a day you're spending preventing your own future from happening. Get out of your own way!

Note that I did not say burn the boats. My metaphor was terrestrial. But the principle is the same. If you know your future, and you only want your customers in that future, you have to remove the option of the past.

Which is why I remain the only person in the COW to have gone on the record supporting Apple's call to torch FCP classic upon the release of FCPX. Many of you said they shouldn't have, they didn't need to, yadda yadda. It's not true, even a little. I lived it, and I'm telling you, it can't be done any other way.

Pinnacle stopped this nonsense immediately, and Apple saved itself, and ultimately its customers, a world of pain by sensibly avoiding this pain. Instead, they forced the decision up front. You in or you out? Wise, wise, wise.

Actually, one small PostScript. My insane Avid integration saga lasted three years and one month. I spent that time sitting next to the product manager for Avid | DS, another pinnacle (haha) in integration. Talk about one application that could do it all! It really could. What an elegant beast!

Its fans are adamant that Avid killed DS, and I'm here to tell you it's not true. They kept it going long, long past its economic viability because those developers LOVED that product. It ultimately died a death of 1000 cuts from Symphony, After Effects, Commotion, eyeon fusion, an upstart grading system called Da Vinci Spirit, and Nuke from below, and Autodesk from above....

.... because in the end, the people who breathed and bled Integration Above All numbered in the dozens compared to millions who were only too happy to use whatever they wanted, for whatever reason they wanted.

ALL OF THIS is why I'm the LAST person to judge anyone's reasons for any combination of plugins and native tools from allllll the companies, because I know an INSANE amount of how they ALL work together, and don't, and can tell you a lot more stories about all of it.

Do what makes you happy. Don't piss on whatever makes someone else happy.

Vendors who make it easy for us to pursue our happiness wherever we can find it make me happy. Vendors who don't, don't, but they can't stop me either. Try as they might. LOL

To somewhat come back to the topic 3009 words later, I do hope that Blackmagic pursues a standalone future for Fairlight and Fusion for people who want to squeeze all the juicy goodness out of those that they can. Pursuing that AND integrated versions is quite doable indeed, as Boris has shown for 20 years.

More options make me happy, which I'll take where I can get.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 11:47:16 am
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jul 3, 2020 at 5:31:31 pm

[Shawn Miller] "I think you're missing my point... it's not about what Motion can't do, it's that big beefy projects require big beefy workstations regardless of application or platform."

Actually, you're missing MY point i.e. Winston's. Motion is not intended for your "big beefy projects", period. As well as apparently not being intended for YOU or what it is you seemingly do.

But that said, those "big beefy projects" will still perform exponentially better in Motion, even on old hardware, no "big beefy" needed. "Good average" will do just fine. Fact. Even if that just means 5 frames a second vs. 5 frames a minute. Or did you not watch the videos? Motion has been largely realtime SINCE 2005! AE isn't even close to that today with even the simplest of projects, 15 years later. Go figure. It's pretty pathetic and embarrassing actually.


[Shawn Miller] "Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. In 20+ years of doing this kind of work, I've exchanged AE project files with others for a number of different reason"

Okay then. Then you clearly need to stick with AE! No question about it. All the power to you. You're a full-time mograph person, therefore you don't even fall into Motion's target group to begin with, so the discussion is really completely off-base to begin with. If it's not meant for you, then clearly it can't be for you. Makes total sense. No push back from here!

Just like if you need things like macros in your text editor then you obviously need to be using Word. If not, and you're on a Mac, then Pages is most likely more than enough and clearly the better choice. For financial reasons alone, but also for the sake of speed, design, usability and integration. Exact same difference. Or take color correction as an example. Until FCP 10.4 I was constantly sending projects to Resolve. Since 10.4 I've maybe done it once for something very specific. Am I saying Resolve is useless or no one needs it? Of course not! I'm saying that for me, and I know for a lot of other FCP users, the newly introduced color tools are perfectly sufficient if not MORE than enough for 99% of things we need to get done. And staying in FCP is and will always be the best option if available. The only thing I'm missing "natively" are trackable power-windows and even those I have with Color Finale in FCP.

Again, Motion is first and foremost for (fcp) editors that need quick, easy, highly customizable, great looking graphics and animations without ever leaving FCP. The next in line are those that make those graphics and/or plugins for said FCP editors. So, again, if neither the first nor latter describe you or anything you need, then I'd say the entire discussion/comparison is rather pointless. Motion would be a horrible choice for you. 100% agreed! No one is trying to take AE away from anyone. The question is "Is anyone using Motion?". The if and why.

Because if neither you nor any of the aforementioned colleagues/clients use FCPX, then, as I already said, there's little point or advantage to using Motion. It's called "horses for courses".


[Tim Wilson] "The problem with anecdotal stories in any direction is that they always lead to the wrong conclusion. "I don't need this" becomes "I don't know anybody who needs this" becomes "NOBODY NEEDS THIS", or "It's edge cases only" when "nobody" and "edge case" in this industry could refer to millions of people, and millions of people beyond them in their extended workflows."

But then I don't see where anyone wrote anything even remotely resembling "NOBODY NEEDS THIS". I know I certainly didn't. I was merely asking if that's in fact a high priority since in 30+ years I have rarely seen the need for it myself. Obviously I can only speak to my own experiences?

Mind you, I explicitly asked about exchanging files with clients, not co-workers/partners! Those are obviously two entirely different things. So when's the last time you had to exchange actual project files with a client? Just as I don't send original, editable text documents to clients, but rather printouts, PDFs, whatever, I don't know why I would want to send original project files to a client. If they have the app and can work it (why else would they need them??), then what am I working for them for? 🤨


[Tim Wilson] "for Motion vs. AE manifests itself when you remember, oh, right, there are many millions more users of After Effects than Motion, and millions of those are making their living as full-time After Effects artists, when relatively few people can be said to making a full-time career in Motion."

Oh there are plenty of people making a lot of money with Motion. Only they're doing entirely different things! Ergo: I guess no one actually read and understood my point? Because, again, this (for me) is NOT about AE vs. Motion per se. I love both apps for entirely different reasons, but the comparison at its onset is just silly and utterly futile, as I've already said. Nor is it really even the topic/question at hand to begin with. Once again: Motion will not and cannot replace AE nor the other way around. Because it is not nor was it ever intended or positioned in a way to be it. Ever. So why are we talking about "After Effects artists"? They're irrelevant. Motion is not about the "Multi-layered 16-bit .exr files with deep effects stacks and animations on top" (the usual, exceptional scenario that only concerns 0.1% of users to begin with, AE or otherwise). Because if that's what you're doing then, yes, do yourself a big favor and stick with AE!

I am talking about what/who Motion is factually intended for. Again: editors. Editors that are NOT mograph artists nor people making their money off of mograph work, but need mographs, effects (as in filters not VFX), transitions etc. in their projects (which is what? 100% of them?), all of which they can create using Motion in the context of FCP. Not process 16-bit .exr files. You also can't take Motion out of the context of FCP (as you can so easily take AE out of the context of PPro) since that, by now, is nearly its sole reason for existence: support app for FCP. Never mind that large parts of Motion are firmly integrated into FCP. Which is why you get 100% of Motion's performance in FCP.

99.9% of FCP's titles, effects, generators and transitions… are Motion projects!

And still, no one has mentioned a single thing they think you can't do in Motion, outside of some super-specialty scenario, that 95+% of users i.e. first and foremost editors need. Anything? Because yes, that's extremely relevant to my point of shooting yourself in the foot for no sensible reason.



[Tim Wilson] "I don't agree with that, and I politely and gently contend that more FCPX'ers will agree with me than you."

That's your prerogative. But unless you can actually show me those users and show me what it is they're doing (e.g. they are not fulltime or primarily mographers working for others) that AE is factually the better and more sensible choice, then I politely and gently say: you're wrong. And no, I'm not counting those that merely use AE because they know it better and can't be bothered to learn Motion. That in and of itself does not make it the better choice overall nor negate the fact that, yes, they are more likely than not shooting themselves in the foot. If not both feet. Otherwise: show me how they're not. Most of all: show me they actually know Motion and understand what it does and can do, and STILL say AE is the better, more sensible choice.

Are you a fulltime editor, Tim? Do you use AE on a regular basis? Do you use FCPX? Have you ever used Motion in production? I honestly don't know. Because I would think you'd have to be able to say "yes" to at least two if not all of those to be able to be so confident about that claim, no? I for one can say yes to all. Well, aside from maybe using AE on a regular basis. Not since I quit at Adobe. 😏 I'm also a certified trainer of all of the above and have been using every one of them since their v1.0.

Need an actual real-world foot-shooting example? One that I encounter in this and similar form over and over and over?

An all FCPX regional news broadcaster here showed me their two weather maps that had three regions in it with 13 possible (animated!) conditions for each region. Rain, snow, sun etc. etc. plus temperatures high/low for each plus an animated background, intro/outro.


(for reference)

They obviously had to make a new version every single day. And what were they doing? They were stacking something like 15+ layers in their timeline to get the result they needed. Different ones each and every time. Do the math! Do you realize how many different assets they had to have available at all times just for that map?? That works out to nearly 300 possible combinations… not even counting the temperatures. Sometimes they were even—you guessed it—rendering it out from AE! Which was clearly even more moronic. And why all of that? Because the mograph dude was plain too lazy and comfortable to simply learn Motion. And everyone else didn't care since they didn't have to (and couldn't) do it themselves and were in awe of his super-skillz (which he enjoyed).

I took those 50+ assets for both maps and made one Motion title from them with merely three pop-up menus for each region to choose the condition from, and one for which map.

That being the first thing that is a complete impossibility in AE, btw.

Obviously, being a title, they could simply edit the temperature in the viewer. At least one thing that you can (finally) do with AE/PPro as of a couple of versions ago, so there's that.

Then I made a custom transition in the same style of the graphic for in and out. Again, an impossibility with AE/PPro.

All this took me all of maybe an hour. Result: after spending an easy 10+ minutes setting this up before, they were now reduced to seconds. Literally three clicks and three numbers. DONE. With zero rendering, all realtime (in fact the Motion project played in realtime with all 50+ layers active… try that with just two layers in AE), and they (as in: any and everyone there) were able to do it on all not just the previous two machines.

So tell me: how were they not shooting themselves in their collective feet, day in, day out? How was or could AE have been the better, more sensible choice? When, where, and how is it ever in the context of an FCP editor? No, NOT a motion graphics artist.

But if the direct comparison is so important, then show me anything you (i.e. anyone) has done in AE without any specialty filters that
a) I can't replicate in Motion and
b) can't do it in a fraction of the time.

So are there as many people making money using Motion compared to AE (if that's even relevant)? Nope, probably not. But then maybe the question should be how many are saving money using Motion? By doing it themselves or using some of the endless, amazing plugins/templates for Motion/FCP (that far outnumber those for PPro btw) instead of hiring Mr. Super-Skillz? Templates that, again, are literally impossible to make for PPro.

I'd say the scale tips quite favorably to Motion on that. So I guess it's not quite so black and white.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 6, 2020 at 8:12:44 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Mind you, I explicitly asked about exchanging files with clients, not co-workers/partners! Those are obviously two entirely different things. So when's the last time you had to exchange actual project files with a client? Just as I don't send original, editable text documents to clients, but rather printouts, PDFs, whatever, I don't know why I would want to send original project files to a client. If they have the app and can work it (why else would they need them??), then what am I working for them for? 🤨"

We are asked for project files about 50% of the time, and we ourselves require projects files from any subcontractors 100% of the time. End clients almost never actually use the files, but if you're going to invest significant money in their creation, why on earth wouldn't you want them?

We sometimes even send project files to competitors, because agency work is highly collaborative. Everything in a campaign has to work together.


[Robin S. Kurz] "I took those 50+ assets for both maps and made one Motion title from them with merely three pop-up menus for each region to choose the condition from, and one for which map. That being the first thing that is a complete impossibility in AE, btw."

Maybe it's been a while since you've used Ae, but this is not impossible anymore. Ae/Pr added support for dropdown lists sometime last year. Also, Ae has native support for CSV and JSON data, so this workflow could be 100% automated in an Adobe workflow -- with no data re-entry required by the editor.

Basic comps can play in real-time now, too. Motion still has a massive performance advantage, but truly simple comps do just play.

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

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 20, 2020 at 6:09:43 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jul 20, 2020 at 6:27:46 pm

[Dirk de Jong] "The combination of Parameter Behaviors (such as Link) and the "Rigging" feature is actually very powerful, way more powerful than most people would think (I suspect it's probably more powerful than people at Apple would think)"

Bingo. Several brilliant examples of exactly what I'm talking about. I'm especially impressed with the GLITCH effects and their functionality. Kudos!

Perfect examples of why "Motion vs. AE" as a whole is not a thing, nor has it ever been (at least for those in the know). None of the above would have been possible with AE. Plain and simple. So again, if you're using AE in the context of FCP for anything even vaguely along these lines, things Motion was and is designed for(!) you're shooting yourself in the foot. As there are many things that AE caters to that would be nonsensical to expect from Motion. But people do it anyway. Usually just to prove why somehow AE is "superior" and flat out the better choice (i.e. to justify their choice, without knowing anything about Motion), with no regard for actual and relevant context.


[Walter Soyka] "we ourselves require project files from any subcontractors 100% of the time. End clients almost never actually use the files"

My point exactly, yes. Thank you.


[Walter Soyka] "but if you're going to invest significant money in their creation, why on earth wouldn't you want them?"

So if I write a poem for a client I also give them the original Word document? Of course not. That would be ridiculous.

Again, if the original project files are of any actual practical use to them (which to this day never has nor would have been), then I seriously question why they're even having me make them, to begin with. If that's different in your world, so be it. 🤷🏼‍♂️

That's not including the actual project files that I, of course, have to give to a client for my work to even fulfill its purpose in the case of Motion i.e. as with my example. But since none of that is even possible with AE, that's not what we're talking about anyway.

The only possible reason I could think of why the files could be of any relevance to them (outside of that obvious case) is if they intended to pass them along to yet another party to build upon or copy my work. Something that I am not inclined to facilitate. But then my clients know all of that in advance anyway (that they are not getting original project files from me), so they would never ask to begin with, nor have they ever.


[Walter Soyka] "Maybe it's been a while since you've used Ae, but this is not impossible anymore. Ae/Pr added support for dropdown lists sometime last year."

Maybe it's been a while since you've used Motion, or… have you ever? Because there is no comparison as to what each offers in terms of "dropdown lists". That being one of three possibilities, btw. Motion has infinitely more options, possibilities, and flexibility. Sorry, but what AE offers in that respect in comparison is truly on an entirely different, very small planet.


[Walter Soyka] "Ae has native support for CSV and JSON data, so this workflow could be 100% automated in an Adobe workflow -- with no data re-entry required by the editor."

Aside from the fact that the need to use either would have set a hurdle high enough to once again relegate the use of said templates to only a select few editors in the group, as opposed to everyone, neither would have even made any practical sense in the aforementioned example. So while that functionality is surely great and super powerful when needed (given the expertise to even implement it, to begin with… which includes, what? a low single-digit percentage of AE users?), it's irrelevant in this case.


[Walter Soyka] "Basic comps can play in real-time now, too. Motion still has a massive performance advantage, but truly simple comps do just play."

So how often to you pull out AE of all things to do "basic" or "truly simple comps"? Ever? You wouldn't just do them in PPro?

And even then that would be entirely dependent on the machine you're using whether that even holds true. In other words on e.g. a low-end MacBook even those "basic comps" would struggle. My example on the other hand played realtime on said MacBooks, which is/was essential, so as not to falsify the intended or rather expected result for even the most novice of users. At least that's the difference that counts for me, the client, and the VAST majority of users I deal with on a daily basis. Not C4D integration, scripting, 3D trackers, (all of which you can get from 3rd parties btw, if so inclined) or whatever else super-specialty use-case you can come up with as an argument. Those people for whom the lack of those things are somehow a deal-breaker are a huge minority and obviously would never even consider Motion. And if they did, I'd have to seriously question their knowledge and expertise in that area anyway. That's like dogging Pages for not having MACROS. Nonsensical and completely missing the most basic point of its intended purpose or existance.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 20, 2020 at 9:32:31 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "So how often to you pull out AE of all things to do "basic" or "truly simple comps"? Ever? You wouldn't just do them in PPro?"

Literally, all the time. I know there's some people who like mogrts and use them inside of Premiere Pro but to me the endless level of customization available in AE makes it a no-brainer to do even simple comps there. And Walter is correct, comps play back just fine in AE. I have no issues playing back comps in real time in AE.

Also, AE projects are shared between motion graphics artists and editors on many projects and so it makes no logical sense to use Motion when most people are using AE as their primary motion graphics software.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
http://tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 3:49:17 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] " I haven't seen anything anyone has put together in AE for any average everyday production in the past many many years that they a) couldn't have just as well done in Motion, and b) for not only in a fraction of the time, but also for a fraction of the cost, assuming they used Motion for more than 3 months (or just one month, depending on their subscription 😏)"

I'm 25 years into my career and I've yet to encounter a single motion graphic artist who uses Motion. AE is the industry standard and since Adobe is platform agnostic AE will most likely remain the standard for the foreseeable future. And the arguments that Motion or FCPX are a more affordable solution are laughable at this point.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
http://tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Winston A. Cely
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 4:16:42 pm

I'm starting to wonder what "industry standard" even means anymore...

It just seems that chunks of the entertainment/broadcast/film world (and whatever niche work is listed under those broader categories) are set in their ways, but that those ways are all varied from each other, and varied even more within their own category. I mean, at what point do we put "industry standard" to bed and recognize that it doesn't mean much anymore? I may be wrong, but it seems like this phrase used to mean the difference between something looking and feeling professional versus something that was obviously finished by "non-professionals," but even that doesn't mean what it used to. See: what constitutes pro-work on YouTube nowadays...

The only thing left is workflow. If this forum has taught me anything, it's that there is no "industry standard" in a workflow, at least in terms of a single system that covers TV, Film, Web, etc. Some groups may be larger than others, but that doesn't mean they're any less or more professional than the next one, and therefore the workflow that one uses compared to the next doesn't mean anything. Or at least the differences mean much less now than they ever have in the past.

When I started in post back in 2006 (yes, I am a very young pup compared to some of you, and there's no offense meant in that!!!) there were systems in place that we followed. Often times these systems were used out of habit, not a necessity. It was the industry standard to do it that way, but as we went on, we would constantly ask ourselves is there not a more efficient way to do things? "Yeah, but is that the way everyone does it? No, but it'll save us time and money and we'll get the same end product. OK, do it!"

I've had this conversation many times with administrators at my school, my professional advisors still working in post-full time, and even other professionals not in our business. We've certainly not come to any single idea of what "industry standard" means other than an antiquated catch-all for implying that a workflow component has little to no value compared to another because "no one I know uses it."

Thoughts?

Winston A. Cely
ACTC Media Broadcasting Video Instructor
Apple Certified Editor FCPX 3

"If you can talk brilliantly enough about a subject, you can create the consoling illusion it has been mastered." - Stanley Kubrick


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 5:32:55 pm

[Winston A. Cely] "We've certainly not come to any single idea of what "industry standard" means other than an antiquated catch-all for implying that a workflow component has little to no value compared to another because "no one I know uses it."
Thoughts?"


When it comes to tools, sometimes it boils down to critical mass. If you use the NLE, DAW, or MoGfx tool that the majority of the community around you uses, then a) you have a better chance of getting a job within a company, and b) it's easier for a project to be moved around and shared.

For example, if the majority of local artists use AE, then it's easier for a client to use one artist for the original project and receive the project files upon completion. If there are changes months later and the original artist isn't available, then the client can easily pass the revision on to a different artist.

But in the context of this discussion, there's no reason not to use both Motion and AE. For example, Motion is great for quick ideation and generating proofs-of-concept. Once you get an idea approved, move to AE for the actual execution if that's your preference.

Also, it's not just a Motion versus AE game. HitFilm Pro is a pretty decent AE competitor for many styles of VFX and MoGfx work.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 5:45:24 pm

[Oliver Peters] "For example, if the majority of local artists use AE, then it's easier for a client to use one artist for the original project and receive the project files upon completion. If there are changes months later and the original artist isn't available, then the client can easily pass the revision on to a different artist."

This is what I'm referring to when I say that in 25 years I've never encountered a Motion project or person. In our collaborative business ease of workflow is everything. I regularly receive motion graphics projects from motion graphics artists. Their talents are essential and I'm always appreciative of their work but often the end client requests small tweaks that I can do as the editor. Therefore, the collected AE project will be sent to me so that I can make changes to renders.

This workflow is very efficient and smooth. And yes, it's also often that one motion graphics artist passes a project onto another artist and that too is easy and efficient when it's an AE project because of the fact that AE is the industry standard program.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
http://tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 6:10:19 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jul 3, 2020 at 6:26:33 pm

[greg janza] "This is what I'm referring to when I say that in 25 years I've never encountered a Motion project or person."

🙄 🤦🏼‍♂️

We'll just ignore the fact that Motion hasn't even been AROUND for 25 years nor did hardly anyone even know AE existed 25 years ago and simply quote what a great man once said…

"The problem with anecdotal stories in any direction is that they always lead to the wrong conclusion. "I don't need this" becomes "I don't know anybody who needs this" becomes "NOBODY NEEDS THIS", or "It's edge cases only" when "nobody" and "edge case" in this industry could refer to millions of people, and millions of people beyond them in their extended workflows."


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 4:43:43 pm

[greg janza] "I'm 25 years into my career and I've yet to encounter a single motion graphic artist who uses Motion.

Sorry if I don't see how that has anything even vaguely to do with my point nor how it poses an answer to a) OR b) in any way, shape, or form. As opposed to merely being diversionary solipsism. But, yeah. Sure. 👍🏼

Oh… and maybe try on some motionVFX action, as one of many examples, to encounter MANY extremely talented motion graphic artists who use Motion. Sorry you missed it. 🤷🏼‍♂️

Let me know how much of what you see you can put together yourself in your "industry standard" and how long it takes you. That being the ACTUAL point here. Since I'm sure you're an accomplished AE artist that is the best possible judge of what can be considered worthwhile and great motion graphics… right?


[greg janza] "the arguments that Motion or FCPX are a more affordable solution are laughable at this point."

😂… if you say so! Also, let me know if you need to borrow a working calculator.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 9:55:58 pm
Last Edited By greg janza on Jul 3, 2020 at 10:05:01 pm

The question was whether people are using Motion. I'm sure there's folks out there using the program and I'm sure they're making great motion graphics with it. That's not what was being asked. My interpretation of the original question was whether Motion is being used in the real world by professionals.

You volunteered that there's a lot of projects that could very easily be done in Motion and that the program is inexpensive to boot. I'm sure that's true. My point simply was that I personally haven't worked with any motion graphics artists that use it and over the years, I've worked and collaborated with many companies and motion graphics artists in my market.

And I'm sure there's a fair number of folks who use Motion and are happy to not be giving Adobe their money. Good for them. However, since Adobe CC is a nominal cost it's kind of pointless to argue the cost savings.



https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
http://tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 11:12:38 pm

[greg janza] "I'm sure there's folks out there using the program and I'm sure they're making great motion graphics with it."

Anecdotally, I've actually worked with a couple of designers who did use Motion instead of other apps. But ironically, that was back in the FC Studio days. Nothing since FCPX. I've also worked with a few who have used Photoshop for animated lower thirds and such. So there is a lot of variety out there. But of the strong AE artists I do work with, I've had little luck in getting them interested. I've shown them Simon's tutorials and they are really impressed, but it never seems to get past that.

There are simply certain tools that are "standards" in specific segments. For example, if you do a lot of large corporate presentations, the live keynote screen graphics behind the stage presenter are largely created with - and played back from - PowerPoint. Not some video MoGfx application or a typical broadcast graphics tool. Go figure.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 1, 2020 at 11:55:22 pm

[Shawn Miller] "So, what would inspire you to pick Motion up again? Does it need a complete overhaul in your opinion, or is it just missing a few very important features/capabilities?"

That's a great question. At this point, the only thing I'd use Motion for an FCPX-native graphics package. As a standalone application, the few important capabilities I'd really want -- multiple comps per project and scripting -- would probably constitute a complete overhaul.

Workflow isn't everything; it's the only thing. Ae is slow, but it's so flexible. It doesn't matter that it's not state-of-the-art because it can do so much for us.

But as far as real-time graphics go, Motion isn't exactly state-of-the-art either. Why use Motion when I can have Notch, Smode, Unreal, or Ventuz?

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

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 2, 2020 at 12:50:52 am

[Walter Soyka] "Workflow isn't everything; it's the only thing. Ae is slow, but it's so flexible. It doesn't matter that it's not state-of-the-art because it can do so much for us."

Yup, totally understand! As a general-purpose problem solving and image processing tool, AE is unique and hard to replace - especially if your feeder applications are from Adobe or Maxon.

[Walter Soyka] "But as far as real-time graphics go, Motion isn't exactly state-of-the-art either. Why use Motion when I can have Notch, Smode, Unreal, or Ventuz?"

That makes a lot of sense. Do you have a favorite among those programs for live event graphics?

Shawn



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 2, 2020 at 6:16:39 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Do you have a favorite among those programs for live event graphics?"

Notch for media server integration, Smode for Ae/C4D familiarity, and Ventuz for data-driven/procedural/broadcast graphics.

I think that Unreal is eventually going to eat up most of the real-time market, though. There's just so much cash behind it, why try to compete as a renderer? There will continue to be a market for specialized UIs and controllers, but I expect most first-party real-time renderers will ultimately be rendered obsolete.

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

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 2, 2020 at 6:56:46 pm

[Walter Soyka] "[Shawn Miller] "Do you have a favorite among those programs for live event graphics?"

Notch for media server integration, Smode for Ae/C4D familiarity, and Ventuz for data-driven/procedural/broadcast graphics."


That's good to know, thank you. I get asked about live event graphics from time to time, but I have next to zero knowledge about these things, so it's nice to have a starting point for general research. Next time, I'll just tell them to contact you. ☺

[Walter Soyka] "I think that Unreal is eventually going to eat up most of the real-time market, though. There's just so much cash behind it, why try to compete as a renderer?"

You're probably right. For large scale scenes, layout, and real-time raytracing, Katana, Clarisse and others may need to watch their backs! ☺

Shawn



Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 1, 2020 at 7:41:12 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Don't you start!

Otherwise, I might have to make a reappearance ..."


LOL - that seems more like an enticement than a deterrent. ☺ It might be fun to hear what others think the state of the industry is considering current tools, technology, and processes.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 1, 2020 at 11:33:23 pm

[Shawn Miller] "[Simon Ubsdell] "Don't you start!

Otherwise, I might have to make a reappearance ..."

LOL - that seems more like an enticement than a deterrent. ☺ It might be fun to hear what others think the state of the industry is considering current tools, technology, and processes."


But of course! These conversations don't freeze in time. Things change.


[Walter Soyka] "Ae's MOGRTs have grown up a lot and cover most of my titling needs, but there is still no equivalent to Motion footage dropzones or effects. I miss them sometimes, but it's been a couple years since I've even opened Motion."

This is what I'm talking about. Any evaluation that somebody made about Motion vs AE in 2016 would necessarily be at least a LITTLE different because the feature sets are different in AE, and maybe the lack of progress in Motion has become a dealbreaker now when it wasn't in 2016.

And I do confess some curiosity about this. Do any Motion folks find that something missing has become a problem? Or is Apple's stasis point sufficient for now?

And yeah, does all the other progress we're seeing suggest a new version on the way?


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 3, 2020 at 7:27:26 pm

I will, in the parlance of our times, "just leave this here".

In the quest for "the best tool for the job" we often inadvertently skip over the advantages of using several tools for the same job.







Simon Ubsdell

hawaiki


Return to posts index

Jason Watson
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 1, 2020 at 11:41:33 pm

I'm not a Motion user any more, but I'm in conversations all the time with people who use FCPX and are very vocal about their preference for FCPX, but I almost never hear about any of them using Motion. As others have echoed, I've worked with many different of clients and agencies, and the unspoken assumption is that the project will be done in Ae. All the files I get that involve any sort of animation or mograph are Ae. At the beginning of the project any deliverables that involve source files presume those will be Ae files. It would be very difficult to actually use Motion in my workflow even if I wanted to. So at least in my circles, Motion is practically non-existent. I've heard more about Cavalry than I have about Motion.

It's a shame, because it is a really great tool for lots of workflows. I sometimes recommend it to people who are really only wanting to do some basic animations and such, but they almost always end up going with Ae anyway, possibly because they're usually already using Photoshop and Illustrator.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 2, 2020 at 12:20:54 am

[Jason Watson] "I've heard more about Cavalry than I have about Motion."

I love Cavalry's approach (and the name is very fitting for this thread), but I haven't actually seen that in the wild yet, either...

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

Tony West
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 2, 2020 at 4:30:58 am

I love Motion. I was using it before X came out and I actually wan't going to look at X if they didn't have a new version of Motion with it. Once I saw they did, I decided to try FCP X out and have stuck with them both since.


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 2, 2020 at 6:58:49 am

[Tony West] "I was using it before X came out and I actually wan't going to look at X if they didn't have a new version of Motion with it. "

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that you MIGHT be the only person for whom that's the case. 🤣 That's awesome though!

Can you tell what you're doing with it? What about Motion was so compelling that compatibility with Motion was your go-no go for adopting X?


Return to posts index

Winston A. Cely
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 2, 2020 at 1:02:32 pm

I also have been using Motion since it was released, prior to FCPX, and was happy to make the transition from LiveType to Motion! I've never looked back, even when pressured by my boss and other producers.

I try opening AE every now and then, and then quickly close it. Even before I made my transition from Photoshop to Pixelmator Pro, I was never comfortable in the AE environment. I was fortunate that when I was working in post-production (before I became a teacher) our workflow was almost entirely in-house; from writing, all the way to sending the master to the dub-house. With that in mind, we could use whatever we were comfortable with. And even when we did have to use outside contractors, especially for graphics, it was usually just exchanging image sequences, or low-res until we had final sign-off.

Winston A. Cely
ACTC Media Broadcasting Video Instructor
Apple Certified Editor FCPX 3

"If you can talk brilliantly enough about a subject, you can create the consoling illusion it has been mastered." - Stanley Kubrick


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 4, 2020 at 4:16:52 am

[Tim Wilson] "Can you tell what you're doing with it? What about Motion was so compelling that compatibility with Motion was your go-no go for adopting X?"


Hahahaha I know it sounds crazy Tim, I admit it. I wasn't really doing anything super over the top, just making dollar bills fall from the sky, glowing radioactive signs, but clients seemed to like stuff I was coming up with in it.

I could do anything that came to mind with it and I really hadn't trained on it at all. I found it simple to use and It allowed me to do more than simple cutting in the timeline.

I didn't know much about X when it came out but I heard from some people that it was a toy and not a real NLE. I thought if it were a toy it wouldn't need Motion and Apple would kill it and I would go back to Avid and start working with AE.

Once I saw that they had a new version of Motion to go with it I figured X might not be a toy, so I decided to try it.


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 5, 2020 at 8:21:37 pm

[Tony West] "Hahahaha I know it sounds crazy Tim, I admit it. I wasn't really doing anything super over the top, just making dollar bills fall from the sky, glowing radioactive signs, but clients seemed to like stuff I was coming up with in it."

Tony, nobody is ever going to get mograph judgement from me. I started working with the first version of Boris FX in 1995, when the hottest feature was DVE cubes. LOL Easy to laugh at now, but for local spots, I had HUGE demand for this kind of thing, and made redonkulous amounts of money with it.

When I started working with Boris (the man AND the company) in the late 90s, I helped develop the preset library. A TON of the DVE presets were cheesy, not because Boris (the man, the company AND the product lines) was especially cheesy, but because I got on the phone and called many hundreds of customers and asked what they needed. The answer was frequently some variation of "more cheese." LOL

(This was before email was widespread, and many facilities forbade the internet in production studios for fear of viruses. If I was going to speak to actual users, it was the phone or nothing. And I do mean MANY hundreds of phone calls.)

I'll give you an example. When we introduced a number of includes shapes to use as graphic elements for lower thirds, masks, 3D extrusion, etc., one of 'em was a heart. Pathetic, right? LOL My phone started ringing off the hook -- "Man, I'm beggin', build me a whole category of heart presets. Valentine's Day is coming up, and my boss/client/news director/morning talk show host is demanding more heart graphics and transitions."

Done. I created a couple dozen of these, enough to show what you could do with them as masks, using the masks to build transitions, mapping video to extrusions, and so on. All for free, if you give us your email address. You will probably not be shocked to hear that this was our most successful harvesting of email addresses in company history.

People need what they need, even if they don't WANT to need it. LOL Even if they want desperately NOT to need it. This is also why they don't want to waste time building this stuff themselves. It's not what drives them creatively, but it's going to drive revenue, or at least get someone off their back -- and what should ANY software developer care more about than helping customers make money and relieve pain?

And this is why I loved Motion from when I first saw it, a year before it launched, before the product even had a name -- which, I will note again, was developed by my predecessor at Boris FX!!!! I didn't work with him at Boris at the same time, but I'd bought Boris FX on the day it was launched at MacWorld Boston 1995, and as a customer who used it a ton, wrote tutorials for it in the COW's first incarnation, then eventually as full-time outside demo artist, I spoke to him quite regularly.

Many of the concepts at the heart of Motion are concepts that he first developed when he was at Boris -- auto-animation (applied motion effects do something before you add any keyframes), auto-keyframing, libraries of graphic elements, presets out the wazoo....I could go on and on, but virtually EVERYTHING I saw in early Motion came DIRECTLY from what he'd learned at Boris.

How was I not going to love it? And envy the ever-loving shit out of it. LOL

Right after that, and before Motion's official launch, I had moved from Boris to Avid, and guess what I encountered when I began working with hardcore broadcast and film editors? Requests for more presets, more automation, more graphic elements.

Maybe the film crowd wanted fewer DVE presets, but you better believe that many of the broadcast guys had already installed the heart presets from Boris. LOL

I'll tell you one more story from the dawn of time to underscore why I never prejudge anyone for what they do or don't do with mograph. If you work for a living, your art HAS to be driven by commerce, and clients often have terrible taste. LOL

Elastic Reality is a company that invented morphing as we know it. It existed in the precursors of film going back to the early 1800s, but a lot of people, including me, first saw it on a large scale in Willow in 1988. (Look up "Willow morphing scene" on YouTube, and watch how fast YT autocompletes it for you -- this still looks incredible.) That was done by ILM, but they did it the hard way. The guys from Elastic Reality wanted to make it easy, and they succeeded. They won a Technical Academy Award for it, too!

Turns out that you can't make enough money *only* selling high-end VFX tech, so they sold a consumer version of it that was FANTASTIC. They also productized their morphing technology into a set of DVE transitions called Transjammer that evvvvvverybody had. Maybe you wouldn't use the Falling Cows transition -- which, as you might guess, filled up the screen with falling cows LOL -- but you might use the variation with falling dollar signs. Or the incredibly high-quality ripples and bulges and such, which weren't treated as distortions, per se, but warped transformations.

Elastic Reality's "Willow moment" came in 1994, with two movies. In Forrest Gump, there's a feather that lands on Forrest's shoe. The real feather just wasn't cooperating LOL so Zemeckis brought in the guys from Elastic Reality to perform a morph to make it land juuuust right. And in Stargate (which I think holds up really well!), they used morphs to animate the masks on and off the Egyptian soldier god thingies. (I said that the movie holds up, not that it makes any more sense. LOL)

So what was Elastic Reality promoting in 1993 that made Hollywood come calling in such a big way? THIS, their 1993 demo reel.




I'm not a fan of high-brow/low-brow distinctions in much of nuthin'. I'll tell you about my Ivy league graduate degree if you make me, but you'll have to yell loud enough for me to put down my book about teenage vampires in love to answer you. LOL

But I really REALLY don't want to hear anything from anybody about the "right" way to do mograph. LOL


Return to posts index

Dirk de Jong
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 6, 2020 at 12:57:42 am

Wow, such a long thread I decided to add another post to it...

In the course of creating these effects for use in Final Cut Pro I've come to know Motion well and there's quite a lot that you can do with it (and it's still pretty fast on my mid 2015 MacBook Pro, and it costs less than buying one sushi dinner for my family : )

-




-




-




-





The combination of Parameter Behaviors (such as Link) and the "Rigging" feature is actually very powerful, way more powerful than most people would think (I suspect it's probably more powerful than people at Apple would think)


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 6, 2020 at 2:05:35 am

[Dirk de Jong] "Wow, such a long thread I decided to add another post to it...

In the course of creating these effects for use in Final Cut Pro I've come to know Motion well "


Ladies and gentlemen, Dirk De Jong, aka my one tether to sanity while working at Boris FX. LOL

I don't ever want to drag anyone else into my nonsense just because they ever worked at a company at the same time I did, but he's definitely one of the most creative guys I've ever worked with. (As well as kind, generous, hilarious, and killer music taste.) In addition to Simon Ubsdell at Hawaiki, one of the FX Factory developers you really need to pay attention to is Dirk at King Luma.

Our colleague Gabriele de Simone was a few desks away from us, banging away on Apple's new Quartz display technology, and felt it offered a lot more than OpenGL, but Boris insisted on a cross-platform solution. (Ironically, since Boris was the most adamantly Mac person I may ever have met.)

Gabe was a neighbor of mine, lived around the corner, and witnessed the version of our wills that my wife and I updated before heading to Rome (with a day trip to see Gabe's peeps in Sorrento)....

...but not at all pleased with the thought of wasting his time on OpenGL when Quartz was singing her siren's song, so he left Boris FX to found Noise Industries and FX Factory.

(So yes, Boris FX was the seed bed for both Motion and FX Factory!)

I'm very happy to have an excuse to talk about some of this stuff again. Filters, presets, included assets, and extensibility for the kinds of work people do every day is what drew me to Boris FX as a customer, and advocate, and a developer, and it's what made me flip for Motion, too. I love that folks like Simon and Dirk are out there still making it better.

Note how I stopped before adding, "even if Apple isn't" LOL since for all I know, a fantastic new version is right around the corner.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 6, 2020 at 8:30:06 pm

[Tony West] "I could do anything that came to mind with it and I really hadn't trained on it at all. I found it simple to use and It allowed me to do more than simple cutting in the timeline."

I agree with you, Tony. I had some After Effects experience, but it was Motion and its immediacy (back in the v1-3 days) that really put me on the path to motion design.

I always viewed Motion as a kind of a sketchpad -- a great place to play, almost. A place to experiment, see what you can do, and iterate really, really quickly. But it's an imperfect analogy, because unlike my sketchbook, Motion's output is suitable for public consumption.

I also think that Apple has done a great job of making Motion discoverable. As a new user, you can ease yourself into it -- before you get into the layering complexity that Dirk and Simon are talking about. Adobe is making some efforts here in Ae with some content and new features, but the core of Ae still presents a significant learning curve.

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

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 6, 2020 at 8:42:19 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Jul 6, 2020 at 8:44:34 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I always viewed Motion as a kind of a sketchpad"

I will break my vow and jump in here.

The sketchpad thing is precisely why I am still using Motion.

These days I will almost always finish in After Effects (in large part because it's essential that I can hand off to other designers at a moment's notice), but for rapidly working towards an initial design concept through instant iteration, Motion still makes a lot of sense to me.

Many motion graphics designers have weeks or months to design a concept. I usually have about an hour.

I'm not going to waste that hour in an application that doesn't allow me as many iterations as Motion.

Good design is iterations.

It really is as simple as that.







Simon Ubsdell

hawaiki


Return to posts index

Winston A. Cely
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 6, 2020 at 9:16:35 pm

This is slightly off-topic, but a number of you have mentioned making initial concepts or comps for clients. That was one of the most frustrating things for me because I almost always had issues with the client being unsatisfied with the comp. This, of course, was after they already agreed to the idea of having comps used as a way to preview the direction they/we wanted to go. Conversations would usually go something like:

Client: It doesn't have x, y, z. It doesn't look finished.

Us: This is the "pre-vis" of the direction we discussed going with this animation. It's only a place holder for now as we create the finished design.

Client: Right, but it doesn't look good.

Us: Of course. This is just a low-resolution mock-up of the direction we're going. It's not the finished animation.

Client: Oh yea, I know, but it doesn't look good. Where's x, y, and z?

Us: This is only the first draft. We're still working on getting to the finished animation. It will take a few rounds before we get to higher resolution animation that contains x, y, and z. This was on the schedule and we discussed this in our pre-production meetings.

Client: Right! Right. I just wish it looked more...finished.

Us:

Anyone else had that?

Winston A. Cely
ACTC Media Broadcasting Video Instructor
Apple Certified Editor FCPX 3

"If you can talk brilliantly enough about a subject, you can create the consoling illusion it has been mastered." - Stanley Kubrick


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 6, 2020 at 9:38:17 pm

For better or worse, the days when you could show a client "work in progress" are long gone.

Simon Ubsdell

hawaiki


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 7, 2020 at 12:09:59 am

[Winston A. Cely] "Anyone else had that?"

All the time. I grade & do sound post so it is typical that I send a grade pass with the editors original rough audio or a mix with ungraded pics depending on the workflow. Half the notes will be about work yet to be done. No matter how many times I say in notes that it is "only the grade - audio is temp" I often get copious misdirected notes. I am beginning to wonder if there is a generation of directors and producers that have zero imagination and need everything in a finished state to make any decisions about anything.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is anyone using Motion?
on Jul 7, 2020 at 4:15:39 pm

Simon, I just watched your video -- well done as always!

Since you've already broken your vow, could you talk a little bit about your transition from prototype to production?

Is your client in with you on the process, or do you keep the prototype to yourself? Do you always go from prototype to production, or do you find yourself going back and forth a lot? Do you ever struggle to get your production work polished enough to best the prototype?

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

VIEW ALL   •   PRINT
© 2020 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]