-
FCPX and Fusion
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “Yes, it would be completely wrong to say that Nuke/Fusion/AfterEffects/Motion have tracks rather than layers – although of course I just did exactly that ☹”
No worries, I had a feeling that you meant to say layers. ☺
[Simon Ubsdell] “[Shawn Miller] “I see tracks as immovable time-based object containers, and layers as containers for time independent objects.”
That’s a nice description of tracks, but I’m not sure I quite understand what you mean by a “time independent object”.
In Nuke/Fusion each node (tool) is a layer. The consequence of this is that not only can you change the timing of a clip (in and out points and position in time), you can also move the overall timing of any operation up and down the Timeline as well as its individual keyframes, without having to invoke a Graph Editor”
My thinking (broadly) is that objects inside of a layer container don’t’ have the kind of intrinsic temporal relationships that objects inside of a track or a timeline do… i.e., in a layer container, you can’t use object A to (temporally) split object B and move everything before the split left (backward) in time and everything after the split right (forward) in time. ☺ (sidenote: thinking about it, you can’t really even split layers, you can only duplicate and trim them) Objects inside of a layer have their own independent temporal properties (duration, or sometimes frame rate) but they can’t interact on a temporal level with other objects in that layer.
I hope that makes sense. ☺
[Simon Ubsdell] “But I’ve probably not grasped your definition properly.”
It’s okay, I think I’ve done a terrible job of explaining what I mean! ☺
Shawn
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “Most After Effects users are so accustomed to Precomps that they probably assume this is the only away of approaching grouping. Motion by contrast uses Groups in place of the Precomp concept and it’s a much more open way of working. A Precomp is essentially a closed container and we have to work around that in various ways, whereas a Motion Group is an open container and that offers considerable benefits. In other words, in Motion you can access (not simply view) the overall architecture of the composition without having to dive into closed containers.”
I definitely agree here – I think Motion works more like Photoshop in this way. Pre-comping is a terrible way to organize compositions. That’s what I like most about working with nodes… finding and reusing assets is SO much easier than digging through layers.
[Simon Ubsdell] “But there’s an even bigger and more powerful difference and that lies in Motion’s use of Clones. These are very little understood even by many Motion users so here’s a basic primer:”
This is another big pet peeve of mine about AE. A powerful cloning tool should be a no-brainer – but for some reason, Adobe has left it for third party plugin developers. In truth, I thought the Trapcode plugin was really good, until I started using the cloner tool in Cinema 4D. Now, the exclusion of that capability just seems like a monumental oversight on Adobe’s part (to me).
Shawn
-
[Simon Ubsdell] ” Motion by contrast uses Groups in place of the Precomp concept and it’s a much more open way of working. A Precomp is essentially a closed container and we have to work around that in various ways, whereas a Motion Group is an open container and that offers considerable benefits.
But there’s an even bigger and more powerful difference and that lies in Motion’s use of Clones. These are very little understood even by many Motion users so here’s a basic primer:”
This is exactly right. As someone who came to Motion from AE (really to make templates for FCP X). The grouping and cloning really amaze me with their power. It’s also head scratching that AE hasn’t copied it. It makes me wonder if they simply are unable to with the code base they have. My guess is that AE will never have grouping as the complexity of the product increases for every feature that is tacked on.
Of course, Motion’s power is occasionally undone with flakiness. For example it wouldn’t let me link a parameter (Z-position) to the layer I was using for an Image Mask. Why? No good reason, it just didn’t work. I could go on and on about inexplicable flakiness. And often there is that effect you need that is simply just not there.
So if Apple intends it to be primarily for Template development, Motion would be well-served with more robust scripting – how about an if/else capability? And better temporal controls other than the “Ramp” single parameter control.
I do think Motion suffers from a lack of resources dedicated to it by Apple.
-
Would you be able to create this type of animated video with Fusion or Motion?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=YEdQ3mwyrQ4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1004&v=WRkYP7wnD40
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
AE already has clones for the most part. They’re just precomps. There are some slight differences, but what do you use clones for mostly? To make duplicates of a group that are always the same as the group. Well, that’s what compositions ARE in AE. You want to clone a comp in AE, you just duplicate the comp. All duplicates link back to the same comp. Clones are a necessity in Motion because of Motion’s short falling that it doesn’t have multiple compositions.
_______________________________________________________________________
https://BretFX.com FCPX Plugins & Templates for Editors & Motion Graphics Artists
Hang Tag https://bretfx.com/product/hang-tag
Overshoot Text https://bretfx.com/product/overshoot-text/
Outliner https://bretfx.com/product/outliner/
Clock Maker https://bretfx.com/product/bretfx-clock-maker/ -
[Bret Williams] “AE already has clones for the most part. They’re just precomps. There are some slight differences, but what do you use clones for mostly? To make duplicates of a group that are always the same as the group. Well, that’s what compositions ARE in AE. You want to clone a comp in AE, you just duplicate the comp. All duplicates link back to the same comp. Clones are a necessity in Motion because of Motion’s short falling that it doesn’t have multiple compositions.”
I can’t speak for Simon, but when I think about cloning, it has more to do with having control over an array of objects using a set of controls in a plugin or tool – like Trapcode’s PlaneSpace.
https://www.redgiant.com/products/planespace/
I would like something even more powerful in AE, like Cinema 4D’s cloner object.
Shawn
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
Group layers are to Motion what Pre Comps are to AE. Clones are duplicates of anything. Which doesn’t really translate into AE other than multiple instances of the same Pre Comp.
Clone/Group layers are a little more than Precomps. The main power is that they are in your composition. Whereas a Precomp lives outside your composition and layers within it can’t interact with elements in the composition, such as masking layers. And, of course, you’re always flying blind with a Precomp. No way to see how changes affect the final Comp. The other really powerful feature of clones has to do with templates. The source of the clone layer can be changed with a rig, like a drop down box. For example, one template I did recently was a grid with various wipe shapes to bring it in. I used clones to select the wipe shape with a drop down box.
The short falling of Motion not having multiple Comps to me doesn’t have anything to do with Precomps. More that sometimes a project has more than one output and its better to keep it contained in one Project. I just can’t think of a way Group layers are not superior to Precomps.
-
Given the way he built the 3D models manually with layers, I don’t think you could do this with Motion. The Bezier tool in Motion doesn’t work in 3D space. With a different process using mObject, you could likely do it. But this is a pretty specific example that really only requires that one “trick” of drawing in 3D space.
-
I came across an interesting post yesterday in Resolve user group on Facebook and thought I would share it here. Definitely a very useful and time saving feature when utilized properly. Not sure whether to call it a child parent relationship as in After Effects but very interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XG4iFoYdxh4 -
Also from last year, his Fusion for AE artists presentation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxVmz1ps2oo
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up