Motion, Combustion or Shake ?

Discussion in 'Digital Video' started by evil_santa, Mar 6, 2006.

  1. evil_santa macrumors 6502a

    evil_santa

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Location:
    London, England
    #1
    I am finally about to move across to FCStudio at work, but have a slight problem with motion. I have been working on Quantels Editbox for the last 10 years making ads promos & short form work, after doing some training on fcp & motion last week i found it can not do the following.

    True 3d work space.
    I need to be able to move layers of video about in 3d workspace, the Editbox dose this very well. here is an example of the sort of thing i need to do...
    http://homepage.mac.com/editbox/mov/cube.mpg

    Paint & clone, Tracking & stabilization

    what would be the best app to cover all of the above? I need to get this sorted out before i can fully move across to the FCP suite.

    Thanks
     
  2. pdpfilms macrumors 68020

    pdpfilms

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Location:
    Vermontana
    #2
    I believe AE can handle this quite well, but I may be wrong. What are you moving from?

    EDIT: I'm getting an error message from your link.
     
  3. Espnetboy3 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2003
    #3
    I do all of those things with After Effects. Its a great tool .Shake is very expensive, whats your budget?And will this work be a sorce of income?
     
  4. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #4
    after effects is probably the best in terms of ability vs money. that said, combustion is very powerful... are you used to node based compositing or layers? if it's the former, combustion would probably be the way to go. and it has great tracking. after effects is layer based, so if that's your preference, then ae may be the way to go. they recently redid their tracking too, i believe, so that could make them a better option

    shake is probably too high end, to the point where unless you KNOW you need it, you don't.
     
  5. evil_santa thread starter macrumors 6502a

    evil_santa

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Location:
    London, England
    #5

    Im using Quantels Editbox, it a hardware edit suite that runs on its own platform. 10 years a go it was the state of the art edit/compositer & cost $200,000

    http://www.quantel.com/
    http://www.refinery.co.za/services_editbox.htm

    link seems to be ok
     
  6. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #6
    Motion's *****.

    I think Jello's nailed it, you should be able to pick up After Effects in an afternoon, the layer based metaphor certainly has a significantly easier learning curve than node based app's.

    I'm not convinced by the quality of After Effects 3D support and renderer, it's pretty ropey if you ask me... but it'd match what you posted.

    Budget for plug-in's too.
     
  7. evil_santa thread starter macrumors 6502a

    evil_santa

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Location:
    London, England
    #7
     
  8. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #8
    Always best to tell it like 'tis. ;)

    Motions great for people that use iMove, but it's use in pro-environments is currently... limited.

    It'll get there though... just as Final Cut Pro has.

    Oh if it's between After Effects and Combustion... Combustion all the way mate ;) no question.

    I started off in After Effects 10 or 11 years ago, and migrated to Combustion and then Shake a few years ago when I needed better effects, compositiing and output quality.

    I found After Effects to be massively easy to use, very intuitive... the layer based metaphor being something that I understood from working with Director (and would later stand me in good stead for Flash and LiveMotion) but it's always sucked at quite a few things, it's keyer is utter bollocks for example, it's 3D support was non existent until version 5??? or 6 I can't remember and even now... it's still crap, it's paint tool is ***** and you have to spend a serious wedge on plug-ins too for even relatively basic functionality, or at least to achieve reasonable quality.

    That said, I still use it a lot for animating type of all things... really great for that kind of stuff, and it's also always had pretty good network rendering abilities too... as well as seamless intergration with Photoshop and Illustrator.

    I prefer Combustion for compositing and effects though, it's particle system is reasonably good, it's keyer and colour correction are infinitely better and it's tracker is pukka... and it's a good spring board for Discreet's even higher end comping and effects systems.

    Download the demo's and have a play around, Combustion 4 was released last month on the Mac (months behind the PC :rolleyes: ) as was After Effects 7.
     
  9. howinson macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    #9
    combustion and shake is somehow alike. It's just the workflow.

    Layers vs nodes.

    In fact combustion also has node base editing in another viewer(correct me)
     
  10. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #10
    well given that combustion is about 1k, and ae is more than that for the professional, i'd lean towards combustion also. the only reason i don't use it more is because i do relatively little compositing, and when i do i don't give myself enough time to use combustion (i'm more familiar with ae, so figuring out how to do it in combustion might take a while longer).

    ae's 3d support was very sketchy back in version 5.5 or so (i think that's when they added it). there were serious render issues. that said, it might (should be) better now. combustion seems to have the better tracker, color correction, particles, etc. so i'm not sure where ae would win if you're comfortable with nodes...

    gav- anything new and great in combustion 4? i haven't upgraded...
     
  11. Sdashiki macrumors 68040

    Sdashiki

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Location:
    Behind the lens
    #11
    people who says AE sucks when compared to Shake or anything of the sort are missing a HUGE thing:

    AE is not exactly the best "compositor" on the market, its is best at layered video and 3D effects, usually. Its interface, the layers, works well for this.

    When you talk about REAL composition, you need a node based app like Shake. It gives you much more control over ALL aspects of a comp., whereas AE gives you controls over the layer and the effects on the layer but you cant "connect" your effect across multiple files.

    I dont use Shake or Combustion, so I am no expert, but its an apple/oranjes thing when comparing Shake/Combustion to AE, because Shake is LESS of a NLE than AE is! I mean AE is an all around program.

    Combustion is a tiny facet of the HUGE software palace that is Discreet/Autodesk, so saying AE is more $$$ than Combustion is not true.

    Discreet® Inferno®
    The ultimate interactive design system for high-resolution visual effects.

    Discreet® Flame®
    Industry-leading real-time visual effects design and compositing system.

    Discreet® Flint®
    Advanced visual effects system for post-production and broadcast graphics.

    Autodesk® Toxik™
    Interactive, collaborative compositing solution for feature film pipelines

    Autodesk® Combustion®
    Comprehensive desktop software for motion graphics, compositing and visual effects.


    youll notice there is ALOT of overlap in these programs. So you have to ask why use one over the other? They are media specific, whereas AE is an all around workhorse.
     
  12. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #12
    You know what they say... jack of all trades, master of none. That sums up After Effects perfectly.
     
  13. hsilver macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    New York
    #13
    Shake is very powerful but both it, Motion and AfterEffects are at best 2.5D. Neither are 3D. I don't know about Combustion.
     
  14. virus1 macrumors 65816

    virus1

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    LOST
    #14
    i don't think motion is even 2.5. i know combustion is at least 2.5 maybe 3.
     
  15. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #15
    EH???? ;)
     
  16. Temujin macrumors 6502a

    Temujin

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Copenhagen
    #16
    Try 4
     
  17. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #17
    Dammit... my ignore list ain't cutting it. ;)

    Not really had chance to try it fella... (I've not bought it yet) so can't really pass comment.

    Not got all that much motion work on at the mo, seem to be working more on the interaction stuff.
     
  18. virus1 macrumors 65816

    virus1

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    LOST
    #18
    4d? i doubt that.
     
  19. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #19
    I think it's safe to say that he misunderstood muddling it with the version number.

    Motion is 2D, After Effects and Combustion are 3D as is Shake.
     
  20. evil_santa thread starter macrumors 6502a

    evil_santa

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Location:
    London, England
    #20
    I would agree to that Gav,

    I think Combustion suits my needs the best , but I think the company wants to go with AE as its used by our designers.
     
  21. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #21
    Get them to pony up for both. ;)
     
  22. jaduffy108 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    #22
    >> These are not true 3d, rather... "postcards in space". The 2.5d description is "accurate". My two cents...Shake is clearly the best choice for compositing.
     
  23. ChrisBrightwell macrumors 68020

    ChrisBrightwell

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Location:
    Huntsville, AL
    #23
    I'm not sure I'd say that it was *****, but I always saw Motion as LiveType Pro.

    Maybe that's an unfair over-simplification.
     
  24. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #24
    i think we'd all agree, that ignoring budget, shake is best. unfortunately, it's impossible to ignore budget for 99% of people. ;)
     
  25. virus1 macrumors 65816

    virus1

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    LOST
    #25
    its also very difficult to learn, and slow to work with.
     

Share This Page