It is patently obvious…

[Charlie Austin]

I had to. 🙂

Title!!

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Herb Sevush]

Well then I guess the next time your cutting a 3D Imax fantasy adventure story on your FCPX kit the 3D titles will come in handy.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Simon Ubsdell]

It is of course not without irony that every single one of your examples is a retro franchise in one way or another … so yes, you could say that 3D text is emblematic of everything that’s “old-fashioned”.

On top of that some of them look as though they may have been done as 2D anyway … a texture and a bevel on their own don’t make 3D.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com

[Jeremy Garchow]

I’m glad you took the time to do this Charlie, as trailers were the first thing that came to mind when everyone was bashing 3D text, and I think X does well in trailers/promos right now. Is this an example of Apple building tools as a direct response to their customer feedback?

There’s a place for 3D text, and now it’s easy to do in X, and I don’t see the big deal. Even if it’s just adding texture and reflection to flat text, this is now much easier in X.

Also, I squeal like a young boy when I see the Star Wars trailers. I hope this saga is as much fun for my son as the originals were for me.

[Aindreas Gallagher]

mmm. rather – I’d take any of these any day of the week.

https://annyas.com/screenshots/2000-2004/

Wes Anderson has been working neatly with perfect weights and placements of Futura in whites yellows and hot pale blues for twenty years.

The idea that the presence of material shaders, brass rust and complex profile bevels equates to typography like the fancy films do it kind of says everything about FCPX and its natural market cheerleaders. In terms of successful titling, you’d think the fact that its keyframing system is mangled would be considered a bit of a serious problem. But… apparently not, given it can produce cheesy 3D titles that look just like them there big fancy fantasy films

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Tony West]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “big fancy fantasy films”

Outside of that……

T-mobil has a national ad out, that I saw yesterday with 3D graphics

Somebody better tell them that they don’t know what they are doing so they can yank it

[Walter Soyka]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Also, I squeal like a young boy when I see the Star Wars trailers.”

3D type, much like the Force, may be used for good or evil.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Charlie Austin]

[Herb Sevush] “Well then I guess the next time your cutting a 3D Imax fantasy adventure story on your FCPX kit the 3D titles will come in handy”

I cut trailers Herb. They will come in handy.

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Andy Neil]

I feel like it’s super weird to get angry over a feature. I can see people wanting to have had their pet improvement take a higher priority than one they feel they won’t get much use out of, but to actively bash the titles as being “cheesy” is really to be missing the point.

One: The titles are NOT cheesy. Or more correctly, they are only cheesy when created that way either by intent or inexperience. Basically, this is the issue with pretty much every single transition effect that exists in every single NLE. Does that mean we shouldn’t have them? Of course not, it just means that some people will be able to get good quality out of a feature, while others will not.

Two: There is no mandate that all titles must now be 3D. Sure, I bet you’ll see an uptick in you tube videos with 3D titles from those who are playing with the new feature. But who cares? It’s not your work. If you’re busy being annoyed by what other people are doing with their videos, then you need a hobby.

Three: What is now popular and “correct” will not always be so. Ok. So 3D titles are looked down upon in favor of clean, flat titles right now. But if you think that the 90s was the only time in video history where 3D titles were popular, then you haven’t been in this game long enough. At some point, the pendulum will swing the other direction and 3D will be extremely popular again. Why rail against having a tool to make them?

Four: There is something larger that this all means. It’s weird to me that all this talk has centered around 3D titles when MY takeaway has been that Motion can now create and use true 3D objects. This could be the start of something. Simple object creation. 3D light effects and smoke, volumetric lighting, 3D modeling program compatibility. 3D text is exciting for what it could mean down the road.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos

[Charlie Austin]

[Andy Neil] “I feel like it’s super weird to get angry over a feature.”

Yes it is… good post. Look, I know all the examples i posted are action franchises as Simon says… they were just easiest to find. And I too appreciate the nice, clean typography Aindreas writes of. Really, I do.

But like you said, it’s a nice feature to have now. They work really well, look great, and offer some cool possibilities. That’s all.

Also, I had fun making the Farce Awakens title. This sh*t is really gonna improve my YouTube cat videos! 🙂

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~