ins and outs of plugins…

[Walter Biscardi]

Results should be the same as AE. AE works much better at things like scaling and motion effects.

Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Creative Genius, Biscardi Creative Media
https://www.biscardicreative.com

Now in Production, “The Rough Cut,” https://www.theroughcutmovie.com

Now editing “Good Eats” in HD for the Food Network

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

G5 Dual 2.0, AJA Kona 2, Medea FCR2X

[Chris Poisson]

Yes, In this case the result would be the same. This is because CF launches the same interface in each, much like Boris or Silhouette Roto. However, there are plugins like DVmatte Pro, which each work inside AE’s or FCP’s effects windows, and the results can vary wildly. A very god question, Chris.

[Chris T]

Yes, indeed there is the difference between those plug-ins which have their own user interface versus those that try and work inside the software packages ‘fx panel’, and that can really throw a plug-in functionality. However, i was also wondering (and i’m not sure if this is what you meant walter), does FCP, or AE have any influence in the way the plug-in’s effects are rendered on a piece of footage – assuming that we are rendering out to the same format, uncompressed avi or whatever in both FCP and AE?

[Chris Poisson]

Chris,

I don’t think one or the other make much difference, other than your ability with each user interface. Although, even with FCP5’s improved scaling, AE still probably does a better job with sub-pixel rendering. I seem to get better mattes, for instance, using DVmatte Pro in AE rather than FCP.

But again, darn good question. Maybe some tech-head will chime in.

[Chris T]

Yeah, I just have a feeling that since FCP seems to struggle with image quality when scaling and rendering pretty basic DV effects, it may also have trouble with other plug-ins which create similar effects…
your example with the difference of quality of the mattes between FCP and AE is exactly the kind of thing i’m talking about.