Forum Replies Created

Page 127 of 285
  • Simon Ubsdell

    July 7, 2014 at 3:19 pm in reply to: Default text color

    Call up the HUD tool (F7) and set the color there before you create your shape or whatever – that will then stay as the default till you change it.

    Simon Ubsdell
    tokyo-uk.com

  • Simon Ubsdell

    June 27, 2014 at 7:13 pm in reply to: FCP X or not?

    [Walter Soyka] “There’s a certain je ne sais quoi in Apple’s “think different” trade-off for simplicity (which was evident in neither Macromedia’s Key Grip nor the old traditional workstation Mac Pro).”

    You’ll be eating your words when you see the new 5.1.1 Motion update, Mr Soyka, just see if you don’t.

    Simon Ubsdell
    tokyo-uk.com

  • Glad to hear you got it to work – hope the client is happy 😉

    Simon Ubsdell
    tokyo-uk.com

  • You can create some pretty cunning linked assemblies using Match Move – it’s a bit tricky to explain but it works. Have you tried that yet?

    Simon Ubsdell
    tokyo-uk.com

  • Simon Ubsdell

    June 27, 2014 at 12:27 pm in reply to: FCP X or not?

    [Walter Soyka] “For more advanced designers, I’ve developed an Ae technique using invisible text layers and expressions which allows the editor to hijack text entry fields for more generalized rigging.”

    Brilliant. I love it.

    Simon Ubsdell
    tokyo-uk.com

  • For anyone still interested, here’s the tutorial that shows how to do this:

    https://youtu.be/sTr9PJ2CvDM

    The great thing about building your own “layer styles” in Motion is that you can publish the results for use in FCP X (either as Titles or as Effects that can be applied to titles or artwork) – allowing for considerably greater flexibility than if you have to use flattened Photoshop layer styles.

    And of course you can easily introduce organic-looking light animations – which you can also control within FCP X if you publish the right controls.

    Don’t forget that you can also easily save off “favourites” to the Motion library, so it’s easy to build up a collection of your best creations.

    Simon Ubsdell
    tokyo-uk.com

  • [Walter Soyka] “keep an eye on (see what I did there?) other packages”

    Quite so 😉

    I was a dedicated (even perhaps an avid) Fusion user back in the very early days and it’s become a very serious contender that I may well revert to …

    Have you had a go with it recently?

    Simon Ubsdell
    tokyo-uk.com

  • [Walter Soyka] “Because it was first EOL’ed eight years ago in 2006 and finally discontinued five years ago in 2009? Doesn’t that make you a little nervous about using it in production going forward?”

    Oddly enough, Shake continues to inspire me with more confidence than almost any other application I have ever worked in – I think there a massive simplicity and elegance to the underlying architecture that makes it incredibly resilient.

    I mean, it’s still working fine in Mavericks – that says a helluva lot about it.

    Objectively speaking, of course, you’re totally right – but how can you give up on something that is so deep and powerful and such an incredible pleasure to work with?

    Although I’ve lost touch with that community a bit in the last couple of years, I bet there are still a goodly number of VFX people who are still using it for one thing or another. The deep and lasting affection for it was really quite something …

    Simon Ubsdell
    tokyo-uk.com

  • [Walter Soyka] “Egads. Friends don’t let friends use Shake in 2014.”

    Why ever not???

    Granted there are plenty of other options out there, but I recently installed it on Mavericks and it works a treat – just as it has always done.

    It’s still crazily powerful – albeit lacking a raft of more contemporary features. I was amazed to be reminded that the installation is just 100MB. What a class act!

    I can’t yet see the day when I’ll be giving up on Shake entirely – it’s still a real pleasure to work with.

    Simon Ubsdell
    tokyo-uk.com

  • [David Mathis] “Two things that are missing are expressions and null objects.”

    Actually, you can easily make null objects in Motion and I use this technique all the time – simply create a dummy shape of your choosing and link whatever you like to it.

    Expressions are indeed missing but if you really push the parameter behaviors you can get to a very similar place, as I’ve mentioned before:

    https://youtu.be/nwAZ3ryjYQY

    Obviously the level of complexity you can achieve with Ae expressions is essentially unlimited – on the other hand, the ease of setting up extremely complex expression-type interactions in Motion can be pretty mind-boggling, on top of which the real-time feedback you get as you work is a massive advantage over Ae expressions … which in my mind makes up for a very great deal.

    Simon Ubsdell
    tokyo-uk.com

    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.

Page 127 of 285

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy