[David Mathis]

For some reason 3D text reminds me of Live Type being brought back to life from a mad scientist. Evil laugh.

[David Mathis]

Bingo! Looks like Live Type is being brought back to life. 😉

[David Mathis]

I hear you. Had to watch a few videos to figure out what a library was and how everything interacted with each other. Then it made sense though my head felt like it was on a deranged merry go round.

I do like the interface, clean and not cluttered. Wish there was a way to save custom layouts but those keyboard shortcuts work, at least for now. There could be a few more buttons here and there. I do see how others would perceive the interface as a toy tough.

I am interested in testing Resolve once it is available but not ready to jump ship just yet.

[David Mathis]

Unless, by some odd chance, I went of the deep end this side of the pond, Resolve sure looks like X buth with tracks. Only thing missing is 3D text and that my friends, is of great importance. No where did I put those silly glasses? Want to see that text in all its glory!

[David Mathis]

[Bret Williams] “[David Mathis] “After all it does not have the power of After Effects and is not a competitor.”

Can you expand on this? And I promise I’m not trying to be argumentative.

I kinda feel like: painting – better, particles -better, replicators – no contest, groups vs. pre comps – way better, rigging & publishing – no contest, true 3D (text) – better, 3D extendables (mObject) – similar if not better to the Andrew Kramer thing and certainly cheaper, performance – way better, and the list goes on.”

Expressions vs Parameters: Both are good but expressions open up a much more opportunity for more complex animations. There are no if then conditions in Motion which there are in After Effects, for example.

One way expressions could be useful would be in how particles behave. You could have the speed of another layer determine how many particles there are (if any) or determine other physical aspects of the particles such as size. This would be if one is using Trapcode Particular, which is an added cost.

Parenting, this can be done in Motion but requires linking properties together and adding another layer to the mix, on occasion.
While you can choose which properties to link, they are all there in After Effects, which requires a little less tweaking.

Masking tools are a mixed bag. The feather (softness) property affects both the x and y values inside of Motion. With the tools in After Effects, these can be controlled independently. On the flip side image masks are more flexible then say a track matte.

On the flip side, Motion does have content built in that After Effects does not. There is also true 3D text which is nice. I also prefer groups, much easier to maintain and handle. Not having to render everything is also very nice.

I guess it all boils down to what the needs of the end user are. I hope I have clarified my points a bit more, if not I will be happy to answer any more questions.

No offense taken and hope none given. Always nice to see other points of view. This is why the Cow is such a great place to go for advice and debate!

[David Mathis]

I do not think Motion is a joke but can understand that perception. It has been an extension of Final Cut Pro since its inception an looks to be that way over the long term. After all it does not have the power of After Effects and is not a competitor. Given the development cycle, or rather the lack of it, there is no reason for me to believe that Motion will be anything than a companion application.

As much as the 3D text feature is super cool, the generators are useless other than creating motion sickness.
Behaviors are nice but expressions are much more powerful. One other thing that bothers me is the lack of transitions. After all, they are important which is why After Effects has them built in. The only transitions that Motion will ever have, for the moment, are the ones being made for use in FCP X, hence an extension.

Rather then waste time and money on useless stuff, bug fixes with meaningful tools being added would be a better use of resources. Then again, with price point and target audience, those factors must not be all that important. My two cents on the subject.

[David Mathis]

Fair point.

[David Mathis]

Tracks?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Fy3rjQGc6lA

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.

[David Mathis]

I hear you. At least the voice inside my head would quit saying, “Hey now! There is always Resolve after all, deal with it!” Apple, please add support for Cinema DNG raw, don’t feel like seeing the psychiatrist or going to the nut house.

[David Mathis]

I want the hologram version. Could use it to edit while going for a walk or waiting for the elevator to arrive.