fcp complete compared to Nitris, paint module?

[Tom Wolsky]

Sorry. You don’t get that for $1300.

[Walter Biscardi]

[paul] “What are the big plug-ins that people are using to achieve paint instead of going to after effects, combustion”

After Effects and Motion are much better suited for Paint and Motion Tracking than FCP. FCP is not really designed to handle those features, which is why you see Motion bundled with it.

Better yet, pick up Shake for $499 and I understand it has outstanding motion tracking. We just picked it up ourselves and will figure where it fits best in our workflow.

Apple hasn’t positioned FCP to be the “all in one wonder app.” It works in tandem with other apps to bring a full suite of apps capable of doing pretty much anything you need. We run FCP, AE, Motion and Photoshop as our core suite of tools. As good as plug-ins might be for FCP, I find for things like tracking and paint, there’s still no substitute for a true compositing app.

Walter Biscardi, Jr.
https://www.biscardicreative.com
HD Editorial & Animation for Food Network’s “Good Eats”
HD Editorial for “Assignment Earth”

“I reject your reality and substitute my own!” – Adam Savage, Mythbusters

[Adolfo Rozenfeld]

Hello, Walter.
I’m afriad Motion is not much better suited for paint and motion tracking. In fact, it’s not suited at all: those two are notorious omissions in its’ feature set. Paint means having proper brushes, not vector shapes or something like that. We all hope that it’s going to get them at some point, along with some form 3D space features.

After Effects has really good paint -a subset of Photoshop brushes, in motion- and motion tracking (the later used to be quite bad, but improved a lot in both reliability and speed the last few versions).

Tom: You do get those for $1000, just not in FCP 🙂
All the best,
Adolfo

Adolfo Rozenfeld
Buenos Aires – Argentina
https://www.adolforozenfeld.com
adolfo(AT)adolforozenfeld.com

[Tom Wolsky]

Yes, but then you can’t really edit in After Effects. Basically, there is no plugin for FCP. Only other standalone applications, AE or Shake or Combustion.

[Annaël Beauchemin]

Combustion has a better paint module than AE. If you’re doing lots and lots of roto, tracking and paint, combustion will probably serve you better.

If you want to stay inside FCP and want a tool to fix problematic shots (as opposed to complex graphic effects and compositing), then take a look at the Silouhette Roto plugin. It’s cheap, has outstanding paint, roto and tracker modules. The downside is that it loads its own interface, so it’s more limited for complex effects and compositing because you can’t use third party plugins inside of it.

Go to https://www.silhouettefx.com/index2.htm. They have a demo version… you’ll be amazed.

[Lee]

I had heard of this plug-in some guy i know was using it in after effects.

seems like the best option to buy bott the roto and paint and use Combustion for everything else with the automatic duck export. You are right Le Coyote about combustion they are the best however for quick access to media for simple fixing this might be the way to go.

now if this set up is 25 k compared to 100 + plus for HD nitris, I dont mind an occasional drawback!

[Annaël Beauchemin]

[paul] “now if this set up is 25 k compared to 100 + plus for HD nitris, I dont mind an occasional drawback!”

If you’re comparing to symphony nitris, maybe… but DS nitris will still be much more efficient than a full blown FCP setup in many aspects.

[Adolfo Rozenfeld]

[paul] ” You are right Le Coyote about combustion they are the best however for quick access to media for simple fixing this might be the way to go.”

Saying that Combustion is better overall than After Effects is as arbitrary as saying the opposite. They’re like two big boxers exchanging really powerful blows. The last two versions of Combustion, for example, were mostly about adding things that AE has had for years: like expressions and material options. In the same way, the last versions of After Effects really improved on the compositing side, like the motion tracker, which is now more or less on par with Combustion’s.

There’s this false notion among some Combustion fans: they want to believe it is a desktop version of Flame.
The truth is Combustion comes from a lo-end product Discreet bought years ago called “Illuminaire”, later morphed into “*effect” and *paint”. There are only a few tools coming in a direct way from Flame, like the Keyer (mind you, not the current keying technology in Flame).

Returning to the original question, CHV software has a Motion tracking package for FCP. It’s called the CHV Tracking collection. I have no idea how good it is. But since is written in FXscript, I doubt it’s nearly as efficient as the specialized solutions.

Adolfo Rozenfeld
Buenos Aires – Argentina
https://www.adolforozenfeld.com
adolfo(AT)adolforozenfeld.com

[Annaël Beauchemin]

[Adolfo Rozenfeld] “Saying that Combustion is better overall than After Effects is as arbitrary as saying the opposite.”

I was talking about the paint abilities only. AE’s paint and clone tools are MUCH less complete than what combustion has to offer. But then AE is much better in alot of other areas like motion graphics and it is also more stable and faster.

This wasn’t meant to be a AE vs combustion discussion 😉

[Lee]

Alfredo

This was not meant to be after effects v combustion

we were talking about paint modules, hence the subject!