[Robin S. kurz]

[Tangier Clarke] “Did mVFX and PixelFilmStudios achieve this using tools and features already built into Motion that somehow are less known/used”

No. I can’t speak to PFS (since I don’t care and they’re in an entirely different league anyway), but in the case of mVFX, it’s just “regular ol'” proprietary C++ coding packed into FXPlug.

[Tangier Clarke] “how much of Shake actually made it into Motion do you think?”

Nothing. At least technically. Intellectually a bunch, since Apple bought Nothing Real and that team went to work for Apple… creating Motion.

[Tangier Clarke] ” I can’t help but wonder if Apple decided to kill Motion, would that essentially be the death knell for FCP X?”

So basically you’re not asking anything different than “Will Apple kill FCP?”, since they both pretty much cancel each other out. In which case I could only ask “By which logic could they possibly want to?”. If they actually didn’t care, why would they even bother COMPLETELY redesigning it (and FCP) from the ground up in the first place? If there was ever a perfect time to kill either, then certainly BEFORE making 5 or X, which entailed completely scrapping everything up until then anyway.

Wouldn’t it be far more likely that AVID kill MC, considering the current state of affairs of both company and software?? I sure would say so, but oddly I don’t see anyone asking that.

I’d argue that Motion is exactly where Apple both wants and needs it to be. Nothing more, nothing less. If that’s not where I want or need it to be… oh well. ????????‍♂️ There are numerous alternatives out there. Motion has never and will never be positioned or intended as some sort of competition to the After Effects and Nukes of this world, as seemingly so many think it could or even should be. If that’s what I need, then that’s what I need to be using.

For me, it’s like Pages vs Word. If I need massive tabbing options, macros or whatever else it is that Word does that 95% of users don’t ever need, I’d be an idiot to use Pages, no?

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook

[Robin S. kurz]

“Yes, but I only have to generate the clip once, then reuse it whenever I need.”

Ah. I mistook It to mean that you generated in Resolve each time you need it. My bad.

“… it took less time to just generate the clip in that than trawling through the internet trying to find a plugin or something for FCPX,“

Given the needed color bars, it would take me about 10 seconds to make the title/generator and have it available in FCP.

“… especially when I need 25p and most of the plugins are based on some other frame rate.”

Said title/generator, as with any title/generator, will adapt dynamically to both resolution and frame rate of the project that I’m using it in. Send me a link to an image of the color bars you need and I can make it for you to download.

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook

[Robin S. kurz]

[Michael Gissing] “adding extra codecs might limit the scope of what the cameras other processing or operational software can do.”

Then there’s the EVA1 which can only do 5.7K when recording to PRRaw. Similar conditions with various other cameras (FX9 anyone?). So actually the exact opposite is clearly the case.

[Michael Gissing] “and personally I won’t want ProResRAW.”

Only that PRRaw is actual RAW, B”RAW” isn’t. But to each his own I guess.

[Joe Marler] “That said, if Apple doesn’t further increase the momentum behind ProRes RAW, they could end up in a position like Intel when they temporarily refused to advance the x86 CPU to 64 bits. “

Not sure how anyone can argue that PRRaw is the one behind the other by any stretch. How many major camera OEMs actively support PRRaw? How many B”RAW”? Exactly. Which has been supported by more NLEs and grading apps etc. first/for longer?

And it’s not even like the VAST majority even actually NEED raw or even have any real knowledge of what it means. For 99% it’s little more than a “nice to have”. So to shoot in a format that you can’t even read in post just… because??

And it would seem to me like a lot of people are grossly overestimating BMDs position in the market, especially if we’re talking about the high-end. That being the only area of the market that is relevant in the end to establish a new standard, as ProRes has done before. With a lot of the exact same counter-arguments seen in 2007 as well. I guess history does repeat itself.

[Joe Marler] “It could include significant performance tuning for FCPX on high-core-count hardware…”

Apple has already stated publically that the next update will be completely rewritten to support Metal 2, which covers all the bases, yes.

[Jeff Kirkland] “but Apple haven’t felt the need to add support for any other raw format (CDNG for example)”

Huhwha? ???? I’ve edited cDNG sequences many times over in both FCP and Motion.

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook

[Robin S. kurz]

[Jeff Kirkland] “Personally, I just got Resolve to generate the bars and tone as a clip and I bring that into FCPX as needed.”

Really? ???? You could of course simply import whatever color bars you have into a Motion title project, save, done. With that, you’d have direct access to them in FCP forever. Simply apply the “Test Oscillator” filter to any random audio and you have your KHz (or whatever) tone to go with it. Certainly much easier and flexible than going out to Resolve of all things.

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook

[Robin S. kurz]

[Simon Ubsdell] “The puppet tool in After Effects is probably the most commonly used feature”

Most definitely something I would beg to differ on, especially since with (already) MOVING pictures it has a FAR more limited use case. But sure, many may well use it in AE as a quick and easy(er) fixer for something that they could easily have used something else just as well, no doubt. But that doesn’t make it indispensable or necessary for everyone. For me, it’s one of those IF you ever need it, i.e. it’s actually the most effective approach for a task, then you’re extremely glad you have it.

In fact, I’ve seen it used many times where it was arguably the WORST possible choice for the task at hand and was just used out of laziness or plain ignorance to alternatives, so there’s that.

[Simon Ubsdell] “But if that tells us anything, it tells us about Apple’s approach to Motion.”

Yes, that it isn’t and never has been intended for any higher-end VFX work in the league of AE & Co., as so many would love to see it, but really only because it’s CHEAP. But then it’s certainly my go-to tool for fast and effective rotoscoping, cleanups, mid-level compositing, and the likes. But first and foremost it’s a MOGRAPH tool. Though Apple may well have pondered making it a gateway drug to Shake (or other rumored apps of the time, a lá iLife) in the first couple of versions, but clearly canned that idea quickly.

[Simon Ubsdell] “this is a beautifully designed, very powerful and very affordable plug-in from the amazing team at motionvfx that any serious Motion user will definitely want to grab.”

Agreed. At that price definitely something one can easily justify having as an ace up one’s sleeve for whenever that special use case arises where it will very quickly make up for its cost. But again, very limited niche cases for the vast majority of Motion users IMHO.

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook

[Robin S. kurz]

mVFX simply know there’s (understandably) absolutely no way Apple will develop something like this as a standard feature since it’s something maybe 0.2% of users actually NEED as apposed to would lust like to have to play around with. Never mind that a measly 69 bucks still puts you hundreds if not thousands below the alternatives. So if this is, in fact, something someone NEEDS, then they won’t think twice about whether this is “worth it”. Even if Apple DID come out with their own version in a year or two. Which, as I said, I don’t see ever happening.

Just like a camera solver, another something that mVFX are working on for the same reason.

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook

[Robin S. kurz]

[Oliver Peters] “As long as you are recording to an external device (Atmos or Codex, for instance) […] or an image sequence (like cDNG), then you are generally OK, AFAIK.”

Erm… unfortunately no, that’s the problem. Otherwise AtomOS wouldn’t have been bullied into paying RED “licensing fees”, for whatever those are even for. For reading a raw sensor data? For using (an entirely different) compression? For writing data to a disk? Because unless I’m missing something that RED themselves can actually lay intellectual claim to beyond that, that’s essentially all that the patent covers (simplistically put of course). Those things in combination.

So, again, unless someone can point to something RED in fact contributed intellectually to the procedure that can be considered unique enough and that others such as AtomOS are doing, the patent is ludicrous imho and merely born of ignorance at a time where I guess no one really understood what it was they were patenting i.e. the ramifications.

And if cDNG is not effected, then why did BMD recently remove it from their cameras if not because of RED looming over them? Granted, it’s even more useless now than it ever was, with all the newer RAW formats, even BMD’s, but they didn’t exactly make some die-hard DNGing purists happy.

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook

[Robin S. kurz]

[James Culbertson] “I’ve been calling it FCP 10 for awhile now; everybody knows what I am talking about.”

And that’s the only thing it should be called, yes. It’s “TEN” not “EX”. The only time I’ve ever said “EX” is when abbreviating, e.g. “FCPX”. Pretty much every (competent) Youtuber for example calls it TEN as well. You’ll also never hear anyone from Apple say EX, obviously. If anything, they’ll correct you if you do. ????

And no, I don’t think it will go away for a very long time. Just as there may never a macOS 11 either.

But then… who really cares?

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook

[Robin S. kurz]

It’s there for me for any of the HEVC presets. ????????‍♂️

I’d post a screenshot, but everything is apparently all screwed up here. Half the links don’t work (like the one to this thread) including the one for uploading images. Sorry.

EDIT: AH! as HTML apparently it’s fine. ????

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook

[Robin S. kurz]

Now all they need is a ProRes RAW license like Scratch to top it off. ????

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook