PDA

View Full Version : Shake for OS X


arn
Jul 22, 2002, 02:40 PM
Today Apple released Shake for OS X (http://www.apple.com/shake):

Shake 2.5 will be available for Mac OS X for a suggested retail price of $4,950 (US) with annual maintenance of $1,199 (US), and for Linux, IRIX and Windows for a suggested retail price of $9,900 (US) with annual maintenance of $1,485 (US). Existing Shake customers will be given the option to double the number of their existing licenses at no additional cost by migrating to Mac OS X.

Dunepilot
Jul 22, 2002, 02:49 PM
One step closer to Pixar being dependent on Apple?

jadam
Jul 22, 2002, 02:52 PM
HAHAHAHHAHAAH DAMN APPLE!! ! wont run on my ibook 700 :-/
ohh well, HAHAHAHAHAHA to all of you who bought the 667 thinking thats all that you would need :p and what happens to the new iMacs who dont have a 1280x1024 resolution or emacs? or the 800mhz 15" iMac???

foniks2020
Jul 22, 2002, 02:57 PM
Suggested retail prices for Linux, Irix, etc are TWICE what you pay for the OS X version...

"Shake 2.5 will be available for Mac OS X for a suggested retail price of $4,950 (US) with annual maintenance of $1,199 (US), and for Linux, IRIX and Windows for a suggested retail price of $9,900 (US) with annual maintenance of $1,485 (US). Existing Shake customers will be given the option to double the number of their existing licenses at no additional cost by migrating to Mac OS X."

Wow, Apple is really gonna catch some **** for this, even though the opposite has been industry standard practice for at least the last five years.

sparkleytone
Jul 22, 2002, 03:03 PM
holy god thats a lot of friggin money.

Quark
Jul 22, 2002, 03:07 PM
Anyone catch the Mouse requirement under the Macintosh Requirements list. It's the last item.

"Three-button mouse"

Hmmm... will Apple make a new Pro mouse with at least three buttons?

As far as I know, this is the only/first software, from Apple, that has that listed as a Requirement. I might be wrong, but like I said, this is based on what I know.

Quark

drastik
Jul 22, 2002, 03:12 PM
wow, talk about sticking it to everyone but the MAc users! And talk about incentive to switch. Half price and twice the liscences. This is great. Companies who use Shake are gonna come over or fork over. I would think it rude except Office X cost twice as much as Office XP (though Office X is a much nicer program:D ) The money is not so out of the ordinary. This is PRO ish, render farm stuff.

As to anyone who thought that it would run on iBook or 667 Ti, you were fooling yourself, this is top of the line, key in on the clusters.;)

drastik
Jul 22, 2002, 03:17 PM
anyone know what it used to cost?

sweetaction
Jul 22, 2002, 03:24 PM
Quark mentioned this as well, but that is pretty hot. You know this will come out blazing on the new Powermacs.

Go Apple.

sjs
Jul 22, 2002, 03:26 PM
With software like this, I hope that is an indicator of good stuff in the hardware pipeline...couldn't Shake benefit from a G5 more than most programs would? Certainly benefits from altivec.

A nice convergence:
Heavy duty software like Shake
Jaguar
DDR
Faster chips
2 CD/DVDs
4 gigs memory

It all adds up!

Mr. Anderson
Jul 22, 2002, 03:34 PM
ouch, that's a tough pill to swallow, looks like I won't be buying that any time soon. Its more than a new machine! Not to mention the friggin price of maintenance.

But with the non-mac platform price, you're almost better off buying a mac and Shake - it'd be cheaper.:D

Stike
Jul 22, 2002, 03:38 PM
Apple is bashing Windows-Shake Users especially! They want them to switch, and here is the reason:

"*Shake 2.5 for Windows is available to existing Shake 2.46 Windows customers only. "

Older versions are supported only if the users are NOT running Windows!:D

backspinner
Jul 22, 2002, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by dukestreet ouch, that's a tough pill to swallow, looks like I won't be buying that any time soon. Its more than a new machine! Not to mention the friggin price of maintenance.
this are normal prices for business software, in all fields

Durandal7
Jul 22, 2002, 03:43 PM
I like the new pricing plan. Apple seems to be taking a bit of revenge against Windows for all the suffering we've had at the hands of M$.

etoiles
Jul 22, 2002, 03:49 PM
Apple cracks me up ! :D :D LOL !

Originally posted by drastik
And talk about incentive to switch. Half price and twice the liscences.

ehm...I think it is twice the licenses because of half the price...2apples=1lemon...it is a math thing
;)

Sayer
Jul 22, 2002, 03:51 PM
Every product Apple sells is not for EVERY SINGLE MAC USER.

People who need to run Shake are not using iMacs, or eMacs, or iBooks. They will be getting the new G4 which has apparently a much better mobo than before with slightly updated G4 chips.

Shake 2.5 is coming out along with Mac OS X 10.2 (minimum system requirement) which is also bout when the new G4 should arrive.

Gee what a COINCIDENCE!

And if you think this software costs too much, you are obviously not in the targeted market. People who work on Hollywood movies are getting a sweet deal (if they buy a new G4/DDR Mac to go with it).

Anyone else gets the SAME PRICE AS BEFORE.

Gee whiz you people really are all nuts. Apple is recreating the high end non-SGI graphics dominance it once had in the new dgitial video/moviemaking field. If this helps the bottom line GOOD. Maybe the stock price will go back up to more sane levels now.

eddit
Jul 22, 2002, 04:07 PM
Weta Digital (aka Lord of the Rings) reciently spent USD 1.5 million on new hardware to run this software (pentium 4 clusters) - so don't think this sort of thing runs on your powerbook!!

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=2097801&thesection=technology&thesubsection=general

http://www.stuff.co.nz/inl/index/0,1008,1219393a28,FF.html

avkills
Jul 22, 2002, 04:12 PM
I like the pricing as well. Heh heh. Anyway, Shake is not for the "Home Studio" market. This is extremely high-end and is actually not that much money, when you price a SGI Inferno or Flame system out.

I'm thinking G4 Dual, Cinewave, FCP, Shake, Maya, FCP FilmTools and DVD Studio Pro and massive amounts of FibreChannel storage. Man that would be SWEEEEET! Anyone want to donate to my cause...heh heh.

-mark

Ifeelbloated
Jul 22, 2002, 04:33 PM
Cool beans.;)

firewire2001
Jul 22, 2002, 04:46 PM
imho, i think this is a very stupid move on apples part...

many companies really want to use shake... but they cant afford to waste time with apples processors -- i mean, if you cut through all the crap, apple jus really needs to get ahead on their cpu speeds and clean up their act...

though we lower end users can say all we want about how much macs are better in other areas... but my 1800 xp amd beats the crap outta my 1ghz mac when i really need to get work done quickly (ie photoshop and blener rendering)... (blender is a 3d znimation program..)...

when it comes down to it, i think that apple is just tyring to get ppl to mac -- but many studios and stuff would prolly rather spend more jus to get the job done faster.. then slower on a cheaper mac...

i think the best way for apple to get more pros is by boosting hardware... i mean, for gods sake.. their still using 20th century technology! apples software is great, but they really need to catch up in other ways.

daRAT
Jul 22, 2002, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by drastik
wow, talk about sticking it to everyone but the MAc users! And talk about incentive to switch. Half price and twice the liscences. This is great. Companies who use Shake are gonna come over or fork over. I would think it rude except Office X cost twice as much as Office XP (though Office X is a much nicer program:D ) The money is not so out of the ordinary. This is PRO ish, render farm stuff.

As to anyone who thought that it would run on iBook or 667 Ti, you were fooling yourself, this is top of the line, key in on the clusters.;)

Office for Mac OS X = 439$

Office XP Pro = 495$

Office XP standard = 409$

Just to get your facts straight :] Yes Mac office is 10x better than windows version. On the matter of Shake, never heard of it, won't use it, couldn't care less. Having said that, the higher Windows, Linux platform price just leaves the door open for a competitor to Shake to arise :P


My 2 bits ...

shadowfax0
Jul 22, 2002, 05:07 PM
its supposed to be used on these (at least!)
http://www.sgi.com/workstations/comparison.html

And to ::ahem:: revise that list :D :

what I'm thinking:

G5 Dual, Cinewave, FCP, Shake, Maya, FCP, Cinema Tools and DVD Studio Pro and massive amounts of Xserve RAIDS :D

Beej
Jul 22, 2002, 05:09 PM
He he... I bet we don't see any more Photoshop benchmarks at MacWorlds... they'll all be SHAKEmarks now :) I bet it is optimised to high hell for the G4! :D

Apple is going to get itself in a lot of trouble with MS... I bet Office won't exist on the Mac in 2 years... And IE will be gone. Perhaps that's why Apple is working on its own browser? I bet they're souping up Apple Works too...

arn
Jul 22, 2002, 05:14 PM
Originally posted by daRAT


Just to get your facts straight :] Yes Mac office is 10x better than windows version. On the matter of Shake, never heard of it, won't use it, couldn't care less. Having said that, the higher Windows, Linux platform price just leaves the door open for a competitor to Shake to arise :P


Well, don't be too sure about that... What was the retail price of Shake before the Apple buyout? Apple lowered the price for the Mac version... but kept the Linux/Windows versions the same price.

arn

avkills
Jul 22, 2002, 05:16 PM
Of course I meant G5s :p

For the post about blender....I doubt it is optimized for G4 use. And I seriously doubt your AMD "beats the pants" of the dual Ghz. It is faster, but probably not by much. I am talking seconds. And as far as you being more productive on your AMD, that is probably because you are used to the Windows way. Since I am really used to Macs, using Photoshop on a PC slows me down considerably.

20th century technology :confused:

For christ sake the SGIs still run at 600Mhz (and cost >$5000). About the only thing Apple needs to really do is increase memory bandwidth and the FSB, and then their systems will rule. Everyone in the world already knows the G4 does more clock for clock than the AMD, Intel offerings.

-mark

gandalf55
Jul 22, 2002, 05:22 PM
i'd love to see Apple come out with a balls-out PRO machine... meant ONLY for serious 3D rendering and video processing... even if it was a 1-off prototype. Or perhaps an XServe Raid shown processing files... say a 30-server config, each processing a frame out of each second... and see what happens. i don't imagine this would get regular users excited. i'm talking about industry people. i hear the pains about rendering speeds... and i suffer through them constantly. network rendering is a help, but the macs here still chug on fairly easy renderings. imagine someone trying to render a MystIII or Riven image on Macs... UGH. I love Macs, but to serve the industry Apple seems to want to conquer... they need to deliver horsepower. i don't care if that means going to Intel chips... speed, speed, speed.

MacAztec
Jul 22, 2002, 05:23 PM
Funny how alot of you people say "too expensive, won't work on my machine" or "bad move apple."

Can't you see apple is entering the pro market again? If you read about shake, all it says is it is for PROFESSIONAL USERS. Now you people that say its too expensive, probly have never made a movie over 15 minutes. Its not too expensive if you do it for a living.

And, odd that it releases the same day as Jaguar aint it? So, new powermacs?

varta123
Jul 22, 2002, 05:36 PM
Guys, I think you shouldn't fear too much about "Oh it's not running on my iBook ...". I am a Shake compositing artist (on Windows at the moment) and the actual Windows version runs on almost every PC. It won't be really fast but I think you can work with it on a iMac, iBook, ... A bigger problem is screen resolution because it's not really fun to work on 800x600 or 1024x768 with Shake, but it's possible!

atomlbca
Jul 22, 2002, 05:56 PM
Shake shake shake
shake your boo-tay

most 3d companies use their own software anyways.

According to Shrek DVD, they used only 20% off the shelf software and wrote the rest from scratch.

gelbin
Jul 22, 2002, 06:12 PM
ms office is more expensive on mac.

at least educationally, about 100$ more.

and you get more with it on the pc (access).

but this pricing, from what people have said, does not raise any price, just lowers the mac price. which is good.

the problem, as we all know, is that we need hardware to make it worth the $4K.

let's get new pmacs.

drastik
Jul 22, 2002, 06:19 PM
Originally posted by daRAT


Office for Mac OS X = 439$

Office XP Pro = 495$

Office XP standard = 409$

Just to get your facts straight :] Yes Mac office is 10x better than windows version. On the matter of Shake, never heard of it, won't use it, couldn't care less. Having said that, the higher Windows, Linux platform price just leaves the door open for a competitor to Shake to arise :P


My 2 bits ...

well, if your looking for a deal, Best Buy was advertising 249$ for it in our sunday paper. I don't know the price normally, really couldn't care:D

jelloshotsrule
Jul 22, 2002, 08:01 PM
Originally posted by MacAztec
Now you people that say its too expensive, probly have never made a movie over 15 minutes. Its not too expensive if you do it for a living.


just for clarity... there are a decent amount of professional movies that are less than 15 minutes.... primarily animations which would use these types of software packages (along with maya, etc). running time is not much of an indicator of "professional" or not.

this is great news... if nothing else, the hardware/software that is used here... ie, shake and then the hardware that is needed to run it (let's hope it's something very powerful)... that technology will eventually trickle down to the lower pro user and consumers... while i doubt we'll see an "iShake" or anything like that... we might see a bit more compositing type options in apple's lesser software.... maybe

oldMac
Jul 22, 2002, 08:22 PM
While the "retail" price of Office XP is close to that of the Mac OS X version, the trick is that nobody pays "retail".

If you're an organization, you do a deal with Microsoft that ensures more of their software on your machines for reduced prices.

Otherwise, you just buy PCs (from Dell and the usual crowd) that have it pre-bundled for approximately $100. (See Dell's build-to-order site: Upgrade to Microsoft® Office XP Small Business w/EducateU [add $100] )

bretm
Jul 22, 2002, 09:57 PM
Originally posted by Stike
Apple is bashing Windows-Shake Users especially! They want them to switch, and here is the reason:

"*Shake 2.5 for Windows is available to existing Shake 2.46 Windows customers only. "

Older versions are supported only if the users are NOT running Windows!:D

As I understand it, when apple bought shake they announced that future versions/upgrades will support other platforms for a year. So the folks will be forced to switch eventually.

bretm
Jul 22, 2002, 10:11 PM
Originally posted by drastik


well, if your looking for a deal, Best Buy was advertising 249$ for it in our sunday paper. I don't know the price normally, really couldn't care:D

Well if I were you and you're REAL sure that it's not an upgrade (the standard upgrade to office is $229 on the best buy website) I'd run down there and buy as many copies as you can since the best buy web site sells it for $449 which is $50 cheaper than the standard retail price of $499 for both Mac and Windows.

Office has been $400+ dollars for about as long as I can remember. Guess how much they'll charge you just for MS Word? About $350. Now you know why everyone has the whole office suite.

My guess is somebody forgot to add the word "upgrade" to the ad. They don't have to sell it to you for that. It could also be the previous version, which would cost $229 to upgrade. Not a deal.

My recommendation... go get it and then Ebay it!

Scottgfx
Jul 23, 2002, 02:41 AM
Originally posted by atomlbca
most 3d companies use their own software anyways.

According to Shrek DVD, they used only 20% off the shelf software and wrote the rest from scratch.

Shake is not a 3D program. It's a compositing application, so it's closer to After Effects.

iGav
Jul 23, 2002, 04:59 AM
Personally I think this is stonking news.... and totally the way to go by pricing it competitively.... and knocking almost half the price off for the Mac version is totally outrageous.......

Nice to see that the winjers are still complaining that it's expensive...... or that it won't run on a G3........ welll cost is relative..... knocking half the cost off is a big move....... as is offering to double the licenses....... sounds like solid deal to me...... although obviously not good enough for those that were expecting a free iShake iapp........ :rolleyes:

As avkills has said this is ULTRA HIGH END compositing software........ (not for ********* iMovie) more along the lines of Discreet Flame.... there really isn't much difference in price for a configured Flame hardware/software system and building yourself a Mac/Shake hardware/software solution....... and Shake is already seemingly already established in the Post market, so I don't think that Apple will have any major problems here........

Judging by the specs 800Mhz isn't that bad..... neither is the RAM, but you can bet that Apple has some serious hardware in the pipeline to really capture the whole hi-end post market...... also the need for a three button mouse...... lets just hope that as well as having the above in the pipeline, they also have a graphics tablet....... tablets IMHO and experience....... are so much better for this type of work than any mouse.....

Well I look forward to going to some of the seminars that Apple will hopefully be planning to demonstrate exactly what this package can do........ and maybe even make me leave my beloved Discreet Combustion package in the trash.. :) ;) :D :p

iH8Quark
Jul 23, 2002, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by jadam
HAHAHAHHAHAAH DAMN APPLE!! ! wont run on my ibook 700 :-/
ohh well, HAHAHAHAHAHA to all of you who bought the 667 thinking thats all that you would need :p and what happens to the new iMacs who dont have a 1280x1024 resolution or emacs? or the 800mhz 15" iMac???

okay, we should all get something straight. This program will not run on a desktop machine. about the only thing you could do with this program, even with the top of the line PowrMac, is view the "About Shake" window. As a matter of fact, I would be extremely suprised if this program would even boot up with less than 2 gigs of RAM. And that's still really, REALLY cutting it close.

This program has to be run on an Xserve cluster. No less than 2 dual-proc. configs maxed out with RAM. Period.

Compositing on an iMac...*snicker*..give me a break. :rolleyes:

varta123
Jul 23, 2002, 08:14 AM
Originally posted by iH8Quark


okay, we should all get something straight. This program will not run on a desktop machine. about the only thing you could do with this program, even with the top of the line PowrMac, is view the "About Shake" window. As a matter of fact, I would be extremely suprised if this program would even boot up with less than 2 gigs of RAM. And that's still really, REALLY cutting it close.

This program has to be run on an Xserve cluster. No less than 2 dual-proc. configs maxed out with RAM. Period.

Compositing on an iMac...*snicker*..give me a break. :rolleyes:

Do you really mean this or did I miss the joke? Shake is a "normal" application as most other apps. You can run it on very different machines: it will be fast on highend macs and slower on not-so-highend macs. But you don't need a Xserver cluster. At the moment you can't even run it on a cluster without thirdparty render management software.

iH8Quark
Jul 23, 2002, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by varta123


Do you really mean this or did I miss the joke? Shake is a "normal" application as most other apps. You can run it on very different machines: it will be fast on highend macs and slower on not-so-highend macs. But you don't need a Xserver cluster. At the moment you can't even run it on a cluster without thirdparty render management software.

now i'm stuck wondering if you realy know what you're talking about. i work with a few large post houses. most of our high end compsiting is done on Inferno systems or using Shake. Granted, Shake is typically what we use for an offline composite, but it is almost always running on a rediculously powerful workstation, not a desktop.

I guess it all depends on what you're doing with it. I suppose you may be right, if you're keeping it relatively simple. I suppose you could equate it to combustion, but...

Different experiences with it, I guess. Or perhaps I'm just wrong.

varta123
Jul 23, 2002, 08:50 AM
Originally posted by iH8Quark


now i'm stuck wondering if you realy know what you're talking about. i work with a few large post houses. most of our high end compsiting is done on Inferno systems or using Shake. Granted, Shake is typically what we use for an offline composite, but it is almost always running on a rediculously powerful workstation, not a desktop.

Sure, I could use Shake on a PowerMac, or an iMac to composite DV. But why in the world would i do that? The resolution isn't high enough.

I guess it all depends on what you're doing with it. I suppose you may be right, if you're keeping it relatively simple. I suppose you could equate it to combustion, but...

Different experiences with it, I guess. Or perhaps I'm just wrong.

I think we both mean almost the same :) I earn my money as a feature film effects shake artist, so I know what I'm talking about. Of course you're right, it's not real fun to do 2k or 4k comps on a ibook or powerbook. But for video resolution or film tests/previews (where you work with proxys) it should work quite well.
I'm working here on a single CPU Athlon 1,3 GHz PC with 2k and 4k directly from the server (with Gigabit Ethernet) and that works fine. So running shake on an actual (dual 800 or 1Ghz mac) machine with alot of RAM should be really fine.

wchamlet
Jul 23, 2002, 08:54 AM
Shake is not a 3D program. It's a compositing application, so it's closer to After Effects.

I am pretty sure he meant that a lot of large studios either write there own programs or add to existing programs to where they are almost completely different from their off the shelf cousins. And besides that, I am quite positive that Shrek went through some sort of compositing program when it was edited for the movie. It definetely was not rendered exactly like you see on screen.

I also think that Apple must have some sort of hardware that is capable of running Shake on systems that are at least similar to what is out there now on the PC side. If they don't, I somehow don't see anyone willing to move to much slower machines, even if the liscences are doubled. That doesn't mean that most companies can hire double the amount of people to get the work done, does it? They would pretty much have to though if Shake is that much slower on the current Powermacs.

Anyway, like I have said before, none of this Shake business bothers me anyway. I want a Powermac that will outperform a PC. The price is set like it can, but the performance level says otherwise.

Future Man
Jul 23, 2002, 11:20 AM
I would just like to let ppl know that you can use a logitech scroll mouse for a 3 button mouse. at least in maya on osX you can.

drastik
Jul 23, 2002, 11:43 AM
Futureman's right, for that matter, you can use it in IE, and I do. Still, its different to have ability to do three button and the rewuirement, Apple could just bundle a 3rd party mouse. Hell, I used to work for a company that gave you a PC included in the cost of softare.

jadam
Jul 23, 2002, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by firewire2001
imho, i think this is a very stupid move on apples part...

many companies really want to use shake... but they cant afford to waste time with apples processors -- i mean, if you cut through all the crap, apple jus really needs to get ahead on their cpu speeds and clean up their act...

though we lower end users can say all we want about how much macs are better in other areas... but my 1800 xp amd beats the crap outta my 1ghz mac when i really need to get work done quickly (ie photoshop and blener rendering)... (blender is a 3d znimation program..)...

when it comes down to it, i think that apple is just tyring to get ppl to mac -- but many studios and stuff would prolly rather spend more jus to get the job done faster.. then slower on a cheaper mac...

i think the best way for apple to get more pros is by boosting hardware... i mean, for gods sake.. their still using 20th century technology! apples software is great, but they really need to catch up in other ways.

ever heard of XServe??

redAPPLE
Jul 23, 2002, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by Scottgfx


Shake is not a 3D program. It's a compositing application, so it's closer to After Effects.

is that a fact?

really? :eek:

i have never used after effects, 'coz i didn't know, what i could do with it. :D

that's really cool to know...

Rocketman
Jul 23, 2002, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by sjs
With software like this, I hope that is an indicator of good stuff in the hardware pipeline...couldn't Shake benefit from a G5 more than most programs would? Certainly benefits from altivec.

A nice convergence:
Heavy duty software like Shake
Jaguar
DDR
Faster chips
2 CD/DVDs
4 gigs memory

It all adds up!

Apple should not be in the mouse business. Let third parties make 2 and 3 button mice, trackballs and tablets.

The price was 9990 before and is still unless you go OSX.

This sort of software is likely used in conjunction with servers and server farms, not so much single user computers.

Although a top end powermac can also run it.

Vertical market software typically delivered on UNIX variants is a market Apple is going after with its developer outreach and this is good news for top end vertical applications which are about to become alot easier to use, more widely available, and in some cases lower price.

The era of client server is back and now with the internet everywhere we are very close to Star Trek:TNG webpads and **** Tracey watches.

Rocketman

Moonlight
Jul 23, 2002, 01:46 PM
I just love that windows users have to pay more than we do for the same thing...that makes me happy:)

varta123
Jul 23, 2002, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by Rocketman

This sort of software is likely used in conjunction with servers and server farms, not so much single user computers.

Although a top end powermac can also run it.

Rocketman

Thats not really true. Shake itself is a single machine only software. You don't have a cluster manager or something like this. So your "normal" work is always done on single machines.

Because its script and commandline based, its easy to write a render manager to run scripts on a renderfarm. For Windows there is a render manager called "smedge" for example. It shouldnt be to difficult to write such a thing for OS X.

iGav
Jul 23, 2002, 03:05 PM
Originally posted by varta123


Thats not really true. Shake itself is a single machine only software. You don't have a cluster manager or something like this. So your "normal" work is always done on single machines.

Because its script and commandline based, its easy to write a render manager to run scripts on a renderfarm. For Windows there is a render manager called "smedge" for example. It shouldnt be to difficult to write such a thing for OS X.

We have a Shake user on the boards...... totally cool...... ;) :)

As I have no experience of using Shake........ is it really as groovey as it sounds??? Also what's it like to use??? and will I be able to figure out and enjoy it like I do Combustion???

From a dedicated Combustion user...... :)

varta123
Jul 23, 2002, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by iGAV


We have a Shake user on the boards...... totally cool...... ;) :)

As I have no experience of using Shake........ is it really as groovey as it sounds??? Also what's it like to use??? and will I be able to figure out and enjoy it like I do Combustion???

From a dedicated Combustion user...... :)

Yes, I earn my money with shake :)

I like it very much, because it is not like combustion (or lets say its not like combustion 1) :) It's completely node tree based and does not use the "layer" concept of combustion or after effects. You have a big tree with lots of nodes, where each node does a specific task (color correction, layering, filter, ...). You have always access to each node and parameter.

Very important thing: shake is more like a script language. It started as a command line tool and later they added the GUI. That makes it very flexible: you can link each parameter to another with expressions (for example you can use tracking data to manipulate the Brightness if you want). And it is very easy to write macros for your personal needs.

Next very important feature is its ability to work in float mode. Normally you have 8 and 16 bit, Shake can handle 32 bit (per channel) as well. That means that your value range is not limited to the range from 0 to 1, but you have values higher than 1 and lower than 0. Thats very useful for complex color corrections and when you work with film.

Hope that explains some aspects. Ask me if you want to know more!

ibjoshua
Jul 23, 2002, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by arn

Well, don't be too sure about that... What was the retail price of Shake before the Apple buyout? Apple lowered the price for the Mac version... but kept the Linux/Windows versions the same price.


yeah. how many of you guys didn't read the original post?

i'd also say that apple have probably assessed the situation and decided that they can support OSX users at a lower cost and they've decided to pass this saving on as an incentive to switch.

thedude
Jul 23, 2002, 06:29 PM
-------okay, we should all get something straight. This program will not run on a desktop machine. about the only thing you could do with this program, even with the top of the line PowrMac, is view the "About Shake" window. As a matter of fact, I would be extremely suprised if this program would even boot up with less than 2 gigs of RAM. And that's still really, REALLY cutting it close.

This program has to be run on an Xserve cluster. No less than 2 dual-proc. configs maxed out with RAM. Period.

Compositing on an iMac...*snicker*..give me a break. ------

Um, no. It'll run fine on a PC with 512M ram, and a dual xeon p3 at 500mhz.

Give me Tremor!

Scottgfx
Jul 24, 2002, 12:18 AM
Originally posted by redAPPLE


is that a fact?

really? :eek:

i have never used after effects, 'coz i didn't know, what i could do with it. :D

that's really cool to know...

Yeah, whatever.

iGav
Jul 24, 2002, 08:33 AM
Originally posted by varta123


Yes, I earn my money with shake :)

I like it very much, because it is not like combustion (or lets say its not like combustion 1) :) It's completely node tree based and does not use the "layer" concept of combustion or after effects. You have a big tree with lots of nodes, where each node does a specific task (color correction, layering, filter, ...). You have always access to each node and parameter.

Very important thing: shake is more like a script language. It started as a command line tool and later they added the GUI. That makes it very flexible: you can link each parameter to another with expressions (for example you can use tracking data to manipulate the Brightness if you want). And it is very easy to write macros for your personal needs.

Next very important feature is its ability to work in float mode. Normally you have 8 and 16 bit, Shake can handle 32 bit (per channel) as well. That means that your value range is not limited to the range from 0 to 1, but you have values higher than 1 and lower than 0. Thats very useful for complex color corrections and when you work with film.

Hope that explains some aspects. Ask me if you want to know more!

Sounds cool....... I get the whole node idea.....

What's the scripting like??? is it based on an existing language or unigue to Shake?? so I take it that you can script your own unique 'Expressions' as well as modify existing ones with little difficulty then?

Can't wait to see a demo of this package in action..... I'm really hoping that Apple Uk might be putting on some seminars so I can have a moochy......

Cheers for your answers by the way!! Muchly appreciated......!! ;) :)

MacArtist
Jul 24, 2002, 11:09 AM
low to mid-range compositing apps:
Commotion Pro 4: $995;
After Effects: $649 Standard version $1499 Production Bundle;

mid to high-end compositing apps:
Combustion: $4995;
Digital Fusion: $4,995;

high to uber high-end compositing apps:
Shake: $4,950 Mac OS X, $9,900 other platforms
Nuke: will be @ $10,000 when released
Flame & Inferno: @ $100-200k depending on configuration

some typical new workstations for use with Shake:
SGI Fuel workstation: $11,495 for base configuration includes a 500MHz R14000A MIPS

Dell Precision 340: @$1500 1.7 P4/Linux/256MB/40GB/Quatro EX 32MB/no monitor
Dell Precision 540: @$2600 1.8 Xeon/linux/256MB/40GB/Quatro 900XGL 128MB/no monitor

Power Mac D1GHz: $3250 2x1GHz G4/OS X/512MB/80GB/Geforce4 Ti 128MB/no monitor

The previous is just a sampling of several compositing apps, their prices, and target markets, as well as a few current system prices.

For those of you who are complaining that this won't run on your iBook, go and get After Effects standard, it'll do more than you'll probably ever need it to do. Shake is aimed at the Feature Film industry and those who make their money from producing film and video. It is not intended for those of you who find it fun two make an iMovie of your friends. Maybe Apple will be nice enough to put together a nice little iComposite or something but don't expect it do even a 10th of what Shake can do.

As for new hardware from Apple, we all know it's coming. So be patient, Apple will catch up soon. Remember that Apple doesn't make the chips so we have to rely om Motorolla to get it in gear. As for the other parts of a Power Mac, I think that they are hindered by the limitations of the chip.

nanumac
Jul 24, 2002, 11:31 AM
Hello varta123

Nice to see (win)shake users on the board.

One question: How hard would it be to learn shake from scratch? I have used after effects for a while in our film/video production company. But now we are now considering shake, just curious about the learning curve.
javascript:smilie(':confused:')

varta123
Jul 24, 2002, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by nanumac
Hello varta123

Nice to see (win)shake users on the board.

One question: How hard would it be to learn shake from scratch? I have used after effects for a while in our film/video production company. But now we are now considering shake, just curious about the learning curve.
javascript:smilie(':confused:')

Yes, I'm a win-shaker at my job :) But its good to have a Mac at home, its always fun to come home to a nice system :)

About your question: the learning depends on how flexible you are in switching to this node tree based working in comparison to the layer based of AE. If you are, its not that difficult (for me, it works exactly like the way I am thinking about compositing, so it was very easy). If you are really happy with the layer concept, it could be hard.
Maybe you know the book "The art and science of digital compositing"? It's not about shake, but it explains compositing almost like shake works. This book is really good for every compositor!

varta123
Jul 24, 2002, 12:55 PM
Originally posted by iGAV


What's the scripting like??? is it based on an existing language or unigue to Shake?? so I take it that you can script your own unique 'Expressions' as well as modify existing ones with little difficulty then?

Can't wait to see a demo of this package in action..... I'm really hoping that Apple Uk might be putting on some seminars so I can have a moochy......

I can't tell you exactly if the language is based on an existing language because I'm not a programmer. But I think its similar to C and has a lot of functions that every modern language has.

You have several possibilites of using this script language: the easiest way is to use expressions in the GUI. You can link parameters of different nodes with expressions (that could look like "Move2D2.xScale=sin(2*Move2D1.yScale@@time-1)" ). Second way is by doing a script macro which is a cleartext file that contains some nodes and commands.
If you want to create complex plugins which are also render expensive, you can use a SDK to create compiled plugins. These are running faster than the normal macros.

Hope that answers your question!?

Abraham

Q-bert
Jul 24, 2002, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by varta123


Yes, I earn my money with shake :)

I like it very much, because it is not like combustion (or lets say its not like combustion 1) :) I have used both Combustion and Shake, and a lot of what is in Shake is also in Combustion 2. It has a real node tree not like the one in After Effects, much better than that, and it also works in float color space, as well as 8 and 16 bit. It doesn't have expressions or scripting, though, Shake is much better in that area.

But, Shake has paint, but it's not very good, Combustion's paint is a lot better. Plus Combustion has a cool particle system that they bought from Illusion, it's really great if you have a good graphics card.

primalman
Jul 25, 2002, 11:31 AM
with the cost for the OS X version half of the others, you can buy Shake, a PM and a 22" Cinema for the Windoze version cost. I thin kthis is an effort to drive SW and HW sales together.

thedude
Jul 25, 2002, 12:40 PM
As far as learning shake, it isn't all that different in CONCEPT
than any other comp program. Wanna put something on top of something else? Create an over node and attach them. Again, it's about the concepts. Now if you're one of those AE filter nuts that wouldn't know additive from multiply, then you'll have a hard time with it. But if you understand how it works, then it's just finding the right buttons. (granted the buttons will look a lot nicer in osX!):)

Dignan
Jul 25, 2002, 02:13 PM
Stupid question-

What makes shake so good that it goes beyond the rest? I know nothing about these types of programs. anyone drop a few basics on why its the best?

sentinal
Jul 28, 2002, 10:11 PM
Originally posted by Dignan
Stupid question-

What makes shake so good that it goes beyond the rest? I know nothing about these types of programs. anyone drop a few basics on why its the best?

It's fast- really fast.

it's fully programmable- any function can be linked to any other function with simple expressions- and you can wrap any math functions you need into your expressions.

it works in floating point- 32 bits per channel- not constrained to zero to one or zero to 255 like an eight or 16 bit packages, which makes it perfect for compositing CGI.

sentinal
Jul 29, 2002, 01:57 PM
Originally posted by varta123


Yes, I'm a win-shaker at my job :) But its good to have a Mac at home, its always fun to come home to a nice system :)

About your question: the learning depends on how flexible you are in switching to this node tree based working in comparison to the layer based of AE. If you are, its not that difficult (for me, it works exactly like the way I am thinking about compositing, so it was very easy). If you are really happy with the layer concept, it could be hard.
Maybe you know the book "The art and science of digital compositing"? It's not about shake, but it explains compositing almost like shake works. This book is really good for every compositor!

No accident, since the book was written by one of the lead shake developers.

ricktowers
Aug 21, 2002, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by sentinal


No accident, since the book was written by one of the lead shake developers.

Just to clarify,

Ron Brinkmann (the guy who wrote the book) worked for Nothing Real (Apple now?) not as a developer but more as a consultant, trainer, and documentation guy and all around expert on digital compositing after Shake was developed. He does not write code. The lead developer and creator of Shake is Arnauld who was also one of the principals of Nothing Real.

748s
Aug 22, 2002, 02:14 AM
Originally posted by thedude
-------okay, we should all get something straight. This program will not run on a desktop machine. about the only thing you could do with this program, even with the top of the line PowrMac, is view the "About Shake" window. As a matter of fact, I would be extremely suprised if this program would even boot up with less than 2 gigs of RAM. And that's still really, REALLY cutting it close.

This program has to be run on an Xserve cluster. No less than 2 dual-proc. configs maxed out with RAM. Period.


just got back from the launch of shake in .au
it was running fine on a quicksilver. the rendering was fast as well. one of the people doing the show ran shake from a laptop for tvc work (on a pc laptop, before the osx version was out). so dude, be surprised.

bobbyG4
Aug 24, 2002, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by iH8Quark


okay, we should all get something straight. This program will not run on a desktop machine. about the only thing you could do with this program, even with the top of the line PowrMac, is view the "About Shake" window. As a matter of fact, I would be extremely suprised if this program would even boot up with less than 2 gigs of RAM. And that's still really, REALLY cutting it close.

This program has to be run on an Xserve cluster. No less than 2 dual-proc. configs maxed out with RAM. Period.

Compositing on an iMac...*snicker*..give me a break. :rolleyes:


Do you people even remotely know what you are talking about?

I dont understand why so many people are posting, that have NO idea!
Shake is a composition package (pretty High End), It WILL run on a 'normal' desktop machine. It doesnt need Quad processors! It doesnt need a XServe cluster.
Of course, the more powerful the machine, the better it will run.
I work with film and video, and in my home studio i use a G4, FCP and AE for compsition. In House we use fcp, and also AVID and discreet products (which cost considerably more than shake!)
The target users are not really home users. Although shake will run on a modern g4 desktop without any problems. The main reason for it not being targeted toward the 'home' user, is that it is more productive to use it using clusters. And not many home users have clusters..........
But of course, it would work!

BTW, SG is going down..... down to chinatown. When Apple get sorted, which should be some time in the near future......