Robin S. kurz
Forum Replies Created
-
Personally, I wouldn’t want to edit RED on any of those machines, even if it did work. I have enough grey hair as it is, thanks.
Nor do I even get how anyone editing material from a $40.000 camera can’t use or afford a machine from so much as the last FIVE years. Just seems weird.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook -
Exactly. Never only update ONE of the apps!
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook -
[Dirk de Jong] “The combination of Parameter Behaviors (such as Link) and the “Rigging” feature is actually very powerful, way more powerful than most people would think (I suspect it’s probably more powerful than people at Apple would think)”
Bingo. Several brilliant examples of exactly what I’m talking about. I’m especially impressed with the GLITCH effects and their functionality. Kudos!
Perfect examples of why “Motion vs. AE” as a whole is not a thing, nor has it ever been (at least for those in the know). None of the above would have been possible with AE. Plain and simple. So again, if you’re using AE in the context of FCP for anything even vaguely along these lines, things Motion was and is designed for(!) you’re shooting yourself in the foot. As there are many things that AE caters to that would be nonsensical to expect from Motion. But people do it anyway. Usually just to prove why somehow AE is “superior” and flat out the better choice (i.e. to justify their choice, without knowing anything about Motion), with no regard for actual and relevant context.
[Walter Soyka] “we ourselves require project files from any subcontractors 100% of the time. End clients almost never actually use the files”
My point exactly, yes. Thank you.
[Walter Soyka] “but if you’re going to invest significant money in their creation, why on earth wouldn’t you want them?”
So if I write a poem for a client I also give them the original Word document? Of course not. That would be ridiculous.
Again, if the original project files are of any actual practical use to them (which to this day never has nor would have been), then I seriously question why they’re even having me make them, to begin with. If that’s different in your world, so be it. ??♂️
That’s not including the actual project files that I, of course, have to give to a client for my work to even fulfill its purpose in the case of Motion i.e. as with my example. But since none of that is even possible with AE, that’s not what we’re talking about anyway.
The only possible reason I could think of why the files could be of any relevance to them (outside of that obvious case) is if they intended to pass them along to yet another party to build upon or copy my work. Something that I am not inclined to facilitate. But then my clients know all of that in advance anyway (that they are not getting original project files from me), so they would never ask to begin with, nor have they ever.
[Walter Soyka] “Maybe it’s been a while since you’ve used Ae, but this is not impossible anymore. Ae/Pr added support for dropdown lists sometime last year.”
Maybe it’s been a while since you’ve used Motion, or… have you ever? Because there is no comparison as to what each offers in terms of “dropdown lists”. That being one of three possibilities, btw. Motion has infinitely more options, possibilities, and flexibility. Sorry, but what AE offers in that respect in comparison is truly on an entirely different, very small planet.
[Walter Soyka] “Ae has native support for CSV and JSON data, so this workflow could be 100% automated in an Adobe workflow — with no data re-entry required by the editor.”
Aside from the fact that the need to use either would have set a hurdle high enough to once again relegate the use of said templates to only a select few editors in the group, as opposed to everyone, neither would have even made any practical sense in the aforementioned example. So while that functionality is surely great and super powerful when needed (given the expertise to even implement it, to begin with… which includes, what? a low single-digit percentage of AE users?), it’s irrelevant in this case.
[Walter Soyka] “Basic comps can play in real-time now, too. Motion still has a massive performance advantage, but truly simple comps do just play.”
So how often to you pull out AE of all things to do “basic” or “truly simple comps”? Ever? You wouldn’t just do them in PPro?
And even then that would be entirely dependent on the machine you’re using whether that even holds true. In other words on e.g. a low-end MacBook even those “basic comps” would struggle. My example on the other hand played realtime on said MacBooks, which is/was essential, so as not to falsify the intended or rather expected result for even the most novice of users. At least that’s the difference that counts for me, the client, and the VAST majority of users I deal with on a daily basis. Not C4D integration, scripting, 3D trackers, (all of which you can get from 3rd parties btw, if so inclined) or whatever else super-specialty use-case you can come up with as an argument. Those people for whom the lack of those things are somehow a deal-breaker are a huge minority and obviously would never even consider Motion. And if they did, I’d have to seriously question their knowledge and expertise in that area anyway. That’s like dogging Pages for not having MACROS. Nonsensical and completely missing the most basic point of its intended purpose or existance.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook -
Ok, THAT is an entirely different scenario than I imagined.
[Tangier Clarke] “Having an intensity of “0” causes the underlaying image go to black”
Well, yes. I would have thought that’s obvious. Once IN 3D any ACTIVE light is the ONLY source of illumination for any given object. If no lights are present, then a global, ambient light is the only default source. You would have the exact same effect in e.g. AE, so Motion is no exception.
[Tangier Clarke] “and fading up just the glow falloff”
How do you figure? You need to imagine the scene as A ROOM! How would it behave any differently if you had just ONE lightbulb in a room with a red wall and you slowly faded THAT up? Clearly you would have to start from complete darkness, no? ?
The only way I could see this working in any way is that you have an AMBIENT (maybe even directional) light in addition to the point light, which you DECREASE (or cross-fade) so that ultimately just the point light is left.
OR you just plain have the first and second condition as AN IMAGE and crossfade those.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook -
Not sure what the issue is on your end, because simply keyframing the INTENSITY of any given light is absolutely possible and results in a fade as described.
The only thing I can think of is that your object(s) are NOT 3D, in which case they are not affected by lights to begin with. Faded or otherwise.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook -
[Dom Silverio] “TB4 needs to be introduced”
Exactly. Whereby it will have to be USB4 or rather 5, since “Intel” will be a bad word in the future. ?
Before that… what’s the point? Great drivers or not. For the sake of upgrading an aging Mac that doesn’t have a dedicated GPU? Because that’s the only time it can make a bare minimum of sense. But then, why would I want to even blow $1K on a Mac Mini or MacBook?? ?
But it’s always fun to see how some people intentionally buy either of them for the purpose of hooking an eGPU up to them, seriously thinking they are somehow getting a much better deal and performance than an iMac or MacBook Pro.
Oh well.
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook -
[greg janza] “This is what I’m referring to when I say that in 25 years I’ve never encountered a Motion project or person.”
? ??♂️
We’ll just ignore the fact that Motion hasn’t even been AROUND for 25 years nor did hardly anyone even know AE existed 25 years ago and simply quote what a great man once said…
“The problem with anecdotal stories in any direction is that they always lead to the wrong conclusion. “I don’t need this” becomes “I don’t know anybody who needs this” becomes “NOBODY NEEDS THIS”, or “It’s edge cases only” when “nobody” and “edge case” in this industry could refer to millions of people, and millions of people beyond them in their extended workflows.”
-
[Marcus Moore] “The only time Ive used AE in the last few years has been for 3D Camera tracking, a feature which I’d very much like to see make it’s way into Motion- natively or as a plug-in.”
Just as a little FYI.
https://youtu.be/2QjJ8jR60Ys
Next to the also upcoming camera tracker, yes.
https://youtu.be/-4hlGQ3on3c
?– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | FacebookSome 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.
-
[greg janza] “I’m 25 years into my career and I’ve yet to encounter a single motion graphic artist who uses Motion.
Sorry if I don’t see how that has anything even vaguely to do with my point nor how it poses an answer to a) OR b) in any way, shape, or form. As opposed to merely being diversionary solipsism. But, yeah. Sure. ??
Oh… and maybe try on some motionVFX action, as one of many examples, to encounter MANY extremely talented motion graphic artists who use Motion. Sorry you missed it. ??♂️
Let me know how much of what you see you can put together yourself in your “industry standard” and how long it takes you. That being the ACTUAL point here. Since I’m sure you’re an accomplished AE artist that is the best possible judge of what can be considered worthwhile and great motion graphics… right?
[greg janza] “the arguments that Motion or FCPX are a more affordable solution are laughable at this point.”
?… if you say so! Also, let me know if you need to borrow a working calculator.
-
[Shawn Miller] “I think you’re missing my point… it’s not about what Motion can’t do, it’s that big beefy projects require big beefy workstations regardless of application or platform.”
Actually, you’re missing MY point i.e. Winston’s. Motion is not intended for your “big beefy projects”, period. As well as apparently not being intended for YOU or what it is you seemingly do.
But that said, those “big beefy projects” will still perform exponentially better in Motion, even on old hardware, no “big beefy” needed. “Good average” will do just fine. Fact. Even if that just means 5 frames a second vs. 5 frames a minute. Or did you not watch the videos? Motion has been largely realtime SINCE 2005! AE isn’t even close to that today with even the simplest of projects, 15 years later. Go figure. It’s pretty pathetic and embarrassing actually.
[Shawn Miller] “Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. In 20+ years of doing this kind of work, I’ve exchanged AE project files with others for a number of different reason”
Okay then. Then you clearly need to stick with AE! No question about it. All the power to you. You’re a full-time mograph person, therefore you don’t even fall into Motion’s target group to begin with, so the discussion is really completely off-base to begin with. If it’s not meant for you, then clearly it can’t be for you. Makes total sense. No push back from here!
Just like if you need things like macros in your text editor then you obviously need to be using Word. If not, and you’re on a Mac, then Pages is most likely more than enough and clearly the better choice. For financial reasons alone, but also for the sake of speed, design, usability and integration. Exact same difference. Or take color correction as an example. Until FCP 10.4 I was constantly sending projects to Resolve. Since 10.4 I’ve maybe done it once for something very specific. Am I saying Resolve is useless or no one needs it? Of course not! I’m saying that for me, and I know for a lot of other FCP users, the newly introduced color tools are perfectly sufficient if not MORE than enough for 99% of things we need to get done. And staying in FCP is and will always be the best option if available. The only thing I’m missing “natively” are trackable power-windows and even those I have with Color Finale in FCP.
Again, Motion is first and foremost for (fcp) editors that need quick, easy, highly customizable, great looking graphics and animations without ever leaving FCP. The next in line are those that make those graphics and/or plugins for said FCP editors. So, again, if neither the first nor latter describe you or anything you need, then I’d say the entire discussion/comparison is rather pointless. Motion would be a horrible choice for you. 100% agreed! No one is trying to take AE away from anyone. The question is “Is anyone using Motion?”. The if and why.
Because if neither you nor any of the aforementioned colleagues/clients use FCPX, then, as I already said, there’s little point or advantage to using Motion. It’s called “horses for courses“.
[Tim Wilson] “The problem with anecdotal stories in any direction is that they always lead to the wrong conclusion. “I don’t need this” becomes “I don’t know anybody who needs this” becomes “NOBODY NEEDS THIS”, or “It’s edge cases only” when “nobody” and “edge case” in this industry could refer to millions of people, and millions of people beyond them in their extended workflows.”
But then I don’t see where anyone wrote anything even remotely resembling “NOBODY NEEDS THIS”. I know I certainly didn’t. I was merely asking if that’s in fact a high priority since in 30+ years I have rarely seen the need for it myself. Obviously I can only speak to my own experiences?
Mind you, I explicitly asked about exchanging files with clients, not co-workers/partners! Those are obviously two entirely different things. So when’s the last time you had to exchange actual project files with a client? Just as I don’t send original, editable text documents to clients, but rather printouts, PDFs, whatever, I don’t know why I would want to send original project files to a client. If they have the app and can work it (why else would they need them??), then what am I working for them for? ?
[Tim Wilson] “for Motion vs. AE manifests itself when you remember, oh, right, there are many millions more users of After Effects than Motion, and millions of those are making their living as full-time After Effects artists, when relatively few people can be said to making a full-time career in Motion.”
Oh there are plenty of people making a lot of money with Motion. Only they’re doing entirely different things! Ergo: I guess no one actually read and understood my point? Because, again, this (for me) is NOT about AE vs. Motion per se. I love both apps for entirely different reasons, but the comparison at its onset is just silly and utterly futile, as I’ve already said. Nor is it really even the topic/question at hand to begin with. Once again: Motion will not and cannot replace AE nor the other way around. Because it is not nor was it ever intended or positioned in a way to be it. Ever. So why are we talking about “After Effects artists”? They’re irrelevant. Motion is not about the “Multi-layered 16-bit .exr files with deep effects stacks and animations on top” (the usual, exceptional scenario that only concerns 0.1% of users to begin with, AE or otherwise). Because if that’s what you’re doing then, yes, do yourself a big favor and stick with AE!
I am talking about what/who Motion is factually intended for. Again: editors. Editors that are NOT mograph artists nor people making their money off of mograph work, but need mographs, effects (as in filters not VFX), transitions etc. in their projects (which is what? 100% of them?), all of which they can create using Motion in the context of FCP. Not process 16-bit .exr files. You also can’t take Motion out of the context of FCP (as you can so easily take AE out of the context of PPro) since that, by now, is nearly its sole reason for existence: support app for FCP. Never mind that large parts of Motion are firmly integrated into FCP. Which is why you get 100% of Motion’s performance in FCP.
99.9% of FCP’s titles, effects, generators and transitions… are Motion projects!
And still, no one has mentioned a single thing they think you can’t do in Motion, outside of some super-specialty scenario, that 95+% of users i.e. first and foremost editors need. Anything? Because yes, that’s extremely relevant to my point of shooting yourself in the foot for no sensible reason.
[Tim Wilson] “I don’t agree with that, and I politely and gently contend that more FCPX’ers will agree with me than you.”
That’s your prerogative. But unless you can actually show me those users and show me what it is they’re doing (e.g. they are not fulltime or primarily mographers working for others) that AE is factually the better and more sensible choice, then I politely and gently say: you’re wrong. And no, I’m not counting those that merely use AE because they know it better and can’t be bothered to learn Motion. That in and of itself does not make it the better choice overall nor negate the fact that, yes, they are more likely than not shooting themselves in the foot. If not both feet. Otherwise: show me how they’re not. Most of all: show me they actually know Motion and understand what it does and can do, and STILL say AE is the better, more sensible choice.
Are you a fulltime editor, Tim? Do you use AE on a regular basis? Do you use FCPX? Have you ever used Motion in production? I honestly don’t know. Because I would think you’d have to be able to say “yes” to at least two if not all of those to be able to be so confident about that claim, no? I for one can say yes to all. Well, aside from maybe using AE on a regular basis. Not since I quit at Adobe. ? I’m also a certified trainer of all of the above and have been using every one of them since their v1.0.
Need an actual real-world foot-shooting example? One that I encounter in this and similar form over and over and over?
An all FCPX regional news broadcaster here showed me their two weather maps that had three regions in it with 13 possible (animated!) conditions for each region. Rain, snow, sun etc. etc. plus temperatures high/low for each plus an animated background, intro/outro.
(for reference)They obviously had to make a new version every single day. And what were they doing? They were stacking something like 15+ layers in their timeline to get the result they needed. Different ones each and every time. Do the math! Do you realize how many different assets they had to have available at all times just for that map?? That works out to nearly 300 possible combinations… not even counting the temperatures. Sometimes they were even—you guessed it—rendering it out from AE! Which was clearly even more moronic. And why all of that? Because the mograph dude was plain too lazy and comfortable to simply learn Motion. And everyone else didn’t care since they didn’t have to (and couldn’t) do it themselves and were in awe of his super-skillz (which he enjoyed).
I took those 50+ assets for both maps and made one Motion title from them with merely three pop-up menus for each region to choose the condition from, and one for which map.
That being the first thing that is a complete impossibility in AE, btw.
Obviously, being a title, they could simply edit the temperature in the viewer. At least one thing that you can (finally) do with AE/PPro as of a couple of versions ago, so there’s that.
Then I made a custom transition in the same style of the graphic for in and out. Again, an impossibility with AE/PPro.
All this took me all of maybe an hour. Result: after spending an easy 10+ minutes setting this up before, they were now reduced to seconds. Literally three clicks and three numbers. DONE. With zero rendering, all realtime (in fact the Motion project played in realtime with all 50+ layers active… try that with just two layers in AE), and they (as in: any and everyone there) were able to do it on all not just the previous two machines.
So tell me: how were they not shooting themselves in their collective feet, day in, day out? How was or could AE have been the better, more sensible choice? When, where, and how is it ever in the context of an FCP editor? No, NOT a motion graphics artist.
But if the direct comparison is so important, then show me anything you (i.e. anyone) has done in AE without any specialty filters that
a) I can’t replicate in Motion and
b) can’t do it in a fraction of the time.So are there as many people making money using Motion compared to AE (if that’s even relevant)? Nope, probably not. But then maybe the question should be how many are saving money using Motion? By doing it themselves or using some of the endless, amazing plugins/templates for Motion/FCP (that far outnumber those for PPro btw) instead of hiring Mr. Super-Skillz? Templates that, again, are literally impossible to make for PPro.
I’d say the scale tips quite favorably to Motion on that. So I guess it’s not quite so black and white.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook
