Originally Posted by palegolas
I'm working with animation, visuals and post production. I like to stay in detailed control, and to have a great overview of my setup, and work fast.
Every time I work with Motion I have the feeling I'm using something very big and clumsy. I agree that the rendering engine itself seems pretty powerful, but I just think the user interface is too square. Also the constant hick-ups and unexplainable sudden wait-freezes that has been there from version 1.
The UI in Shake, (a software that Apple bought and discontinued, and assigned those developers to Motion and Final Cut I think)
has another take on UI, it's "node based" and you can connect things the way you like... like a "mind map", as with the professional alternative Nuke etc. They might have a steeper learning curve, but developing for professionals I think you should go for the UI that can take you the furthest. Not necessarily the UI that is the easiest to grasp. We can learn complex tools. No problem. If they thought the node based UI was too hard to grasp, instead of going backwards to a good old list with a timeline - they should have gone "This Node based view has real advantages. How do we make THAT even more accessible?
It's not always the best solution to lay pieces of images in a stack. Sometimes you need to spread them out on a big light box and connect different results in a smarter way than just from top to bottom. If someone, then Apple should understand this... think different, the crazy ones
But this is really not a Node View vs List View issue.
No, my biggest remark is the following:
If they made this software as a part of a pro package, and it turns out the users who appreciate it the most are users like yourself, home enthusiasts and hobbyists that like to go beyond iMovie - and then people who liked Shake, (that they bought and discontinued),
moved on to professional products like Nuke... then I think they missed the mark with Motion.
Thanks for the considered answer.
I, too, find the Motion UI a bit "clunky" -- it just seems to take soooo many levels to accomplish something -- you do lose your place.
I dabbled a bit with QC but it quickly becomes too cluttered.
I briefly experimented with a node-based (FCP Color FX) system -- but found it less than intuitive.
Of all the points you made, the following hit home:
It's not always the best solution to lay pieces of images in a stack. Sometimes you need to spread them out on a big light box and connect different results in a smarter way than just from top to bottom. If someone, then Apple should understand this...
Can you spread your "images" out on a light table, and have each effect (filter, whatever) you create display the result rather than the underlying details of the node?
That, to me, would be very intuitive -- something like:
1) Tap an image to create a duplicate of the original
2) Select the new duplicate and specify whatever filter, effect, etc.
3) Deselect the duplicate and the result
Repeat the above as many times as desired and one result
node can be dropped on top of another to form a composite result