Is anyone using Motion?

[Jason Watson]

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.

[Walter Soyka]

[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   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Shawn Miller]

[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

[Walter Soyka]

[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   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Shawn Miller]

[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

[Tony West]

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.

[Tim Wilson]

[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?

[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. 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

[Winston A. cely]

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

[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.

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   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]