Shawn Miller
1
COW Coin
Forum Replies Created
-
[Andy Neil] “[Shawn Miller] “Fine if you don’t want to learn programming, but I’m not sure it’s fair to call it clunky.”
Having to learn programming as an editor is the very definition of “clunky” in my opinion.”
I suppose I can understand this to a point, and maybe agree that editors don’t typically want to jump that deeply into scripting. But I also think you have to put AE in context. It’s not a tool strictly for editors, it never was. Editors may not depend on writing their own scripts… but mograph and VFX artists often do. That’s why I think it’s unfair to call this capability clunky, it’s essentially saying that anything that you don’t use in your workflow is unnecessary.
[Andy Neil] Motion behaviors sacrifice some flexibility for ease of use. AE expressions sacrifice ease of use for flexibility. I think there could be some kind of middle ground and I wish Apple or Adobe would pick up the gauntlet to figure it out.”
To be honest, I think Apple has figured this out. IMO, Motion is a great tool for editors who create motion graphics, and not a general tool for motion graphics and VFX artists. That’s not a knock on Motion, but I do think there is a reason why people who specialize in mograph and VFX, haven’t adopted Motion in the nine (or so) years that it’s been available. Again, not a knock on Motion… just an observation that mostly editors seem to use it.
Shawn
-
[Andy Neil] “Expressions can have a lot of flexibility, but they’re also clunky in implementation (too much like a programming language, and requiring specific numbers that don’t tell you much in context about how it will animate).”
Might be because AE’s expressions language is a specialized version of javascript. 🙂 Fine if you don’t want to learn programming, but I’m not sure it’s fair to call it clunky.
Shawn
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “don’t care. the thing is an abomination. except for WinNT4 – which deserves a place in valhalla.”
Sooo… did you not care for Windows 2000 either? It was really just a more stable version of NT with a better UI…
Shawn
-
[Herb Sevush] ”
I’m not monogamous when it comes to operating systems – I can be had, all they have to do is whistle.”LOL – I am definitely going to steal this. I promise to give full credit though. 🙂
Shawn
-
[Oliver Peters] “Because, I have experienced using comparable Macs and PCs running the same apps (Premiere, AE, Media Composer, various encoders). While in some cases, renders and encodes may be faster on the PC side, I find the overall editing experience faster and more fluid on the Mac. AE would tend to be the exception.”
I think you’re pointing more to software optimization here, otherwise AE wouldn’t be an exception. It might also be worth noting that many VFX and 3D artists prefer PCs for the same reason… because they’ve had better experiences on Linux or Windows.
[Oliver Peters] “Until people run side-by-side benchmarks, with similarly optimized software (like FCP X on a Mac Pro versus application XYZ on the PC), I don’t think you can simply say that slapping in two GPUs makes the machine equal to the Mac Pro.”
Agreed – conversely, you can’t then argue that the Mac Pro is just faster even when the hardware might be nearly identical to a PC. 🙂
Shawn
-
[Oliver Peters] “[Shawn Miller] “I didn’t say anything about price.”
I think the only argument is price.”
Well… with respect Oliver, this isn’t the only argument. You and Phil have both made claims that a similarly spec’d Mac Pro will outperform a PC:
[Phil Hoppes] “…and while you can build a 12 Core Xenon PC with dual Radeon cards I doubt very seriously that it’s performance would even come close to what the current raft of benchmarks are delivering for the MacPro.”
[Oliver Peters] “If you look at the pricing for HP’s best machine, the Z820, and compare equivalent specs to the Mac Pro, the Z820 is more expensive. Yes, it is more expandable, but otherwise is actually a less capable machine based on the internal parts.”
My only question is why you think this. I’m even willing to concede the cost argument (pitting DYI and HP against Apple). 🙂
Shawn
-
[Oliver Peters] “[Shawn Miller] “You can configure the Z820 with up to three GPUs.”
And that price is?”
I don’t know the price, but I’ll check. I thought your point was about similar configurations and performance. That was actually my question to you… how can the similarly spec’d Mac Pro outperform it’s PC counterpart? I didn’t say anything about price.
Shawn
-
[Oliver Peters] “[Shawn Miller] “I guess I’m not following here, Oliver. How is a similarly spec’d HP less capable than the Mac Pro? ”
Because the top end option is similar, but not the same. 1 GPU, versus 2, for example.”
You can configure the Z820 with up to three GPUs.
Shawn
-
[Gary Huff] “[Shawn Miller] “Now I’m sort of wondering why Apple opted to put a Xeon processor in the Mac pro instead of an i7… why go with the more expensive Xeon if you can only put one in the machine?”
The 1150 socket maxes out with i7s at 4-cores…you have to go socket 2011 for the 6-core varieties, and there aren’t any boards with that socket that have TB2 ports that I am aware of.”
Ah, that does make sense then. Thanks Gary.
Shawn
-
[Oliver Peters] “If you look at the pricing for HP’s best machine, the Z820, and compare equivalent specs to the Mac Pro, the Z820 is more expensive. Yes, it is more expandable, but otherwise is actually a less capable machine based on the internal parts.”
I guess I’m not following here, Oliver. How is a similarly spec’d HP less capable than the Mac Pro?
Shawn