Whatever. After Effects is very 'right'. If you're serious about motion design you've probably got more than just AFX sitting on your box.
Motion is just another tool...a tool I want very very badly to buy if they'd only post the friggin button.
You can roll your eyes all you want, but competition is what drives innovation. Thank God Apple is still around to force these stagnate and arrogant companies (which Apple often is as well) to actually do something with their R&D budgets.
It will be interesting to see how Adobe responds... whether they actually make an effort to compete and improve their aging, clunky AE (esp. aging and clunky on OS X), or take a Premiere-like direction and redirect After Effects to Windows-only.
I expect the former, actually. AE is too entrenched to just roll up its stuff and go home. If so, that's win-win for designers, no matter which motion graphics tool they choose.
Motion is is trimmed down Shake, and yes Shake is an AE killer.
Motion from what I can tell seems more closer to Mirage than anything. I almost bought Mirage about a week ago, but decided to puck up ZBrush instead. I sure am glad I did now.
What's the difference between Shake and Motion? Sorry, I've read the descriptions and they seem rather similar. I thought Shake was an AE killer.
While Motion is not exactly an After Effects Killer, it is a big blow to Adobe. My guess is it will either lead to the end of After Effects on the Mac or a price drop. Shake is in a whole other league than both of these apps.
If you check out the tech specs, you can see the difference, but it does take a little technical knowledge. The Qmaster advanced rendering and integration with 3D apps like MAYA are huge features. Also, Shake also runs on Linux. This probably sums it up the best from the Shake page:
Quote:
The Shake SDK provides access to virtually all of Shake?s power and functionality so you can fully customize processes to meet any automation or production challenge. Run Shake from its own interface, from scripts or from a Mac OS X or Linux command line (shell). For large facilities in particular, the Shake 3.5 SDK is an ideal platform for creating custom production pipelines.
Basically Motion is for video editors and DIY folks who need more advanced tools than FCP provides for their composites and titles.
Shake is a fully customizable software package that can be scripted and tuned to meet the heavy demands of Motion Picture projects.
From what I can tell, Motion looks more like advanced compositing for FCP than any version of Shake. They share some features, but the architecture of the UI is totally different. People who want a trimmed down Shake (or trimmed down Flame, Fire, Inferno) get Combustion
Quote:
and yes Shake is an AE killer.
I am so sick of hearing this. Shake and AE have coexisted for years (even before Apple bought Shake) and are aimed at different users/markets.
At $4950.00 Shake is not going kill off sales of anything. The average prosumer or even pro who is using AE is not going to run out and drop an extra $4000.00 for Shake.
Motion, on the other hand, will draw sales away from Adobe and Discreet. And yes this might cause the final blow to any more versions of AE on the Mac.
I wasn't referring to it as a package war (microslop monopoly type) killer. What I'm saying is Shake is the top of the heap. It's capabilities out weigh that of AE's. That's what I mean by Shake is a AE killer. Shake is a killer app. It's totally Node based just like Maya. It's hard to compete with the unmatched flexibility of the node based architecture.
I wasn't referring to it as a package war (microslop monopoly type) killer. What I'm saying is Shake is the top of the heap. It's capabilities out weigh that of AE's. That's what I mean by Shake is a AE killer. Shake is a killer app. It's totally Node based just like Maya. It's hard to compete with the unmatched flexibility of the node based architecture.
I agree with you, but it's not an AE killer because it's not in the same class. I can say that flame is an AE killer but it's not necessary... it's like comparing motorcycles to motor scooters.
The minimum machine is my current system. But I have 256MB more ram. MY video card is a GeForce 3 TI. I think it'll do. But 10 GB of drive space for Motion. It may be a better application than we are taking it for. With all that data it's gotta have some kind of fire power.
Those Graphics cards are getting as long in the tooth as mine. Apple needs new cards, and they need pro level 3D cards. I just read a rumor at the Alias forums (Formerly Alias|Wavefront forums) that a guy from Alias said Maya isn't available as Unlimited on the Mac side because Apple doesn't have support for Pro 3D cards.
Comments
Originally posted by Messiahtosh
**** Adobe, if they cant do it right then they should have to fight.
Motion is just another tool...a tool I want very very badly to buy if they'd only post the friggin button.
Originally posted by 709
Motion is just another tool...a tool I want very very badly to buy if they'd only post the friggin button.
You can roll your eyes all you want, but competition is what drives innovation. Thank God Apple is still around to force these stagnate and arrogant companies (which Apple often is as well) to actually do something with their R&D budgets.
Motion is just another tool...a tool I want very very badly to buy if they'd only post the friggin button.
Soon. This summer.
Originally posted by bunge
What's the difference between Shake and Motion? Sorry, I've read the descriptions and they seem rather similar. I thought Shake was an AE killer.
From what I can gather from the sparse Motion info, I'm thinking it's more of just an 'effects' package that ties in nicely to FCP4.
Shake is more of a compositing program, where in the case of Motion you'll probably use FCP as you're compositor.
I'm still trying to digest all of this, so I could be way off.
I expect the former, actually. AE is too entrenched to just roll up its stuff and go home. If so, that's win-win for designers, no matter which motion graphics tool they choose.
ME WANT!
Motion from what I can tell seems more closer to Mirage than anything. I almost bought Mirage about a week ago, but decided to puck up ZBrush instead. I sure am glad I did now.
Originally posted by bunge
What's the difference between Shake and Motion? Sorry, I've read the descriptions and they seem rather similar. I thought Shake was an AE killer.
While Motion is not exactly an After Effects Killer, it is a big blow to Adobe. My guess is it will either lead to the end of After Effects on the Mac or a price drop. Shake is in a whole other league than both of these apps.
If you check out the tech specs, you can see the difference, but it does take a little technical knowledge. The Qmaster advanced rendering and integration with 3D apps like MAYA are huge features. Also, Shake also runs on Linux. This probably sums it up the best from the Shake page:
The Shake SDK provides access to virtually all of Shake?s power and functionality so you can fully customize processes to meet any automation or production challenge. Run Shake from its own interface, from scripts or from a Mac OS X or Linux command line (shell). For large facilities in particular, the Shake 3.5 SDK is an ideal platform for creating custom production pipelines.
Basically Motion is for video editors and DIY folks who need more advanced tools than FCP provides for their composites and titles.
Shake is a fully customizable software package that can be scripted and tuned to meet the heavy demands of Motion Picture projects.
Originally posted by buckeye
Basically Motion is for video editors and DIY folks who need more advanced tools than FCP provides for their composites and titles.
That's it I think. Nowhere can I find any info about multiple comps or nesting, so I don't think I'll be building anything in Motion very complex.
Originally posted by onlooker
Motion is is trimmed down Shake
From what I can tell, Motion looks more like advanced compositing for FCP than any version of Shake. They share some features, but the architecture of the UI is totally different. People who want a trimmed down Shake (or trimmed down Flame, Fire, Inferno) get Combustion
and yes Shake is an AE killer.
I am so sick of hearing this. Shake and AE have coexisted for years (even before Apple bought Shake) and are aimed at different users/markets.
At $4950.00 Shake is not going kill off sales of anything. The average prosumer or even pro who is using AE is not going to run out and drop an extra $4000.00 for Shake.
Motion, on the other hand, will draw sales away from Adobe and Discreet. And yes this might cause the final blow to any more versions of AE on the Mac.
Originally posted by onlooker
Motion is is trimmed down Shake, and yes Shake is an AE killer.
Shake is not an AE killer because it's not even close in price... Motion is.
Edit: Buckeye beat me to it.
Originally posted by onlooker
I wasn't referring to it as a package war (microslop monopoly type) killer.
Now I'm quoting myself.. I must be crazy...
No seriously.. Motion isn't an AE killer either.
Originally posted by onlooker
I wasn't referring to it as a package war (microslop monopoly type) killer. What I'm saying is Shake is the top of the heap. It's capabilities out weigh that of AE's. That's what I mean by Shake is a AE killer. Shake is a killer app. It's totally Node based just like Maya. It's hard to compete with the unmatched flexibility of the node based architecture.
I agree with you, but it's not an AE killer because it's not in the same class. I can say that flame is an AE killer but it's not necessary... it's like comparing motorcycles to motor scooters.
Dual 2GHz Power Mac G5
4GB of RAM or more
Mac OS X v10.3.3 or later
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro graphics card or better
oh dear
Originally posted by Nebagakid
Did anyone see the recommended system? :
Dual 2GHz Power Mac G5
4GB of RAM or more
Mac OS X v10.3.3 or later
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro graphics card or better
oh dear
Real Time effects don't come cheap, in processor performance terms.
The Minimum System Requirements are:
Macintosh computer with 867MHz or faster PowerPC G4 or G5 processor
512MB of RAM (2GB or more recommended)
Mac OS X v10.3.3 or later
QuickTime 6.5 or later
Display with 1024-by-768 resolution or higher (1280-by-1024 resolution recommended)
One of the following graphics cards:
? NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
? ATI Mobility Radeon 9600
? ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
? ATI Radeon 9700 Pro
? ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
10GB of disk space for application, templates, and tutorial
DVD drive for installation
Those Graphics cards are getting as long in the tooth as mine. Apple needs new cards, and they need pro level 3D cards. I just read a rumor at the Alias forums (Formerly Alias|Wavefront forums) that a guy from Alias said Maya isn't available as Unlimited on the Mac side because Apple doesn't have support for Pro 3D cards.
That's fvcking pitiful.