-
Is anyone using Motion?
-
“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.
-
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 -
“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 😉
-
[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 -
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.
-
[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.
-
[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 -
[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.
-
[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 -
[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
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up