I think he was suggesting that Apple started to release trial versions, from what I see it's not the case with Motion or any other software from Apple.
Quote:
Motion will be available this summer at a breakthrough price of $299. (US)
well you can create your own background images/video using any photo or graphics program (after effects, imovie, final cut, or motion ) and obviously you can use any sound file for background music. then once you have all of that, open up the theme window, go to customize, and change fonts, buttons, etc. i dont think you need any more custom theming than that. also, with iDVD4, you can create video intros to your main menu. does that help?
How do I create a theme with drop zones, custom shaped masks for video buttons, etc.?
I think he was suggesting that Apple started to release trial versions, from what I see it's not the case with Motion or any other software from Apple.
Sorry, I meant the "regular" Motion logo, on the box. Its a bit washed out. I assume its ripples (and I thought a gear but I was mistaken) in the backgound and the eyeApps eyeball.
I'm really liking all of Apple's software GUIs and packaging and webpages of late.
I would think it rather strange to buy this or any of these types of apps (LiveType, Compressor, Soundtrack, etc.) a la carte unless one can afford to dabble with it and see if they would want the rest of the suite. They're really designed to complement FCP and the whole digital video workflow thing, and not replace AE or something else by themselves. I think the difference here is that the intention of this pro suite of apps is that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
The thing is BuonRotto, is that After Effects is part of a greater package from adobe that they want to sell you with premiere. After Effects is really used for more so titling and simple collaging, and for compositing it gets the job done. but it's meant to tie into photoshop and premiere, and their new audio program and dvd thing now too.
I'm afraid after this all we're going to have left is photoshop and we all know apple really can't take on that quite as easy. I use Final Cut Pro to death and I know it like the back of my hand, but I was really disheartened by Soundtrack and compressor. Soundtrack is so so I mean its ok but its completely workflow it seemed like than FCP, and compressor could be cool but they don't offer compression to files other than that can be played in quicktime. And I know a lot of people in work environments that either refuse/or are not allowed to install it. And without cleaner now... I'm screwed.
I'm afraid after this all we're going to have left is photoshop and we all know apple really can't take on that quite as easy.
Maybe not, but it's easier now than it's been in years, given that Adobe has gone and implemented their own Quartz underneath their apps in a deliberate effort to moot Apple's advantage while saddling the Mac with a performance disadvantage.
Any developer willing to write an actual OS X app using OS X's native capabilities could give PS a real scare.
Say, didn't the guy behind TIFFany go to work for Apple?
There were two guys behind TIFFany, and they helped develop Expose from what I understand.
I wouldn't sprinkle rose petals at the feet of Adobe if I were Apple or anyone else. It's like Bob Cringley's article this week about MS. If you want to beat MS, you can't base your strategy around what they do, because then you're always reacting instead of innnovating. Apple shouldn't avoid pissing off Adobe, MS or Quark because they need to get ahead with or without them.
I'm just waiting for an FCP "helper" app like Motion that does more advanced image processing, uh, on multiple frames of course. Seems like so long as it ties into their video editing market, it's something Apple should do (and would have to do well) regardless of Adobe's reaction.
I'm afraid after this all we're going to have left is photoshop and we all know apple really can't take on that quite as easy.
I'm sorry you'll have to speak for yourself there. I used to use Live Picture and in many ways it was superior to Photoshop for some things. 48bit color and proxies were really cool. I kinda laugh everytime I hear someone say Photoshop can never be beat because I realize that this person propobably was told one day that Photoshop was the King and never questioned it.
Apple is not going to tread on Adobe's Print Publishing apps. They have no desire to. But they will compete with anyone for marketshare for Desktop Video. They've been more than clear about this. Funny thing about Mac Magazine/Internet writers. Apple states something and they don't believe then and then sound confused when Apple does what they say there were going to.
Quote:
I'm just waiting for an FCP "helper" app like Motion that does more advanced image processing, uh, on multiple frames of course. Seems like so long as it ties into their video editing market, it's something Apple should do (and would have to do well) regardless of Adobe's reaction.
Yes i've said in the past that Apple should create a small app that it tailored towards editing frams of video. This app should only be included with Final Cut Pro and eschew any Print Publishing features that would conflict with PS.
After Effects isn't going anywhere. It has about %40 userbase on Macs which is a far cry from what Premiere had. Even if Adobe has a problem it's moot anyways. Motion is based upon a much more efficient core framework. Adobe cannot match Motions features without a rewrite of AE. Apple on the other hand need only bolt on the "missing" features and dub the new app Motion Pro.
Apple has been very clever.
$300 Motion for the lowend
$3000 Shake for the high end. They are allowing Combustion and AE to live in the sweet spot between.
Yea i remember live picture. So much more advanced than photoshop, but a lack of support from the plugin and filter side(lots of $$ too). Photoshop is so mature, it's become old. It can be beat easily if someone is willing to put in the resources to build a new architecture and all the features/filtering from the ground up, with todays technology in mind.
Sorry, I meant the "regular" Motion logo, on the box. Its a bit washed out. I assume its ripples (and I thought a gear but I was mistaken) in the backgound and the eyeApps eyeball.
I'm really liking all of Apple's software GUIs and packaging and webpages of late.
Those are supposed to be ripples? I thought it was a lens of some kind.
Those are supposed to be ripples? I thought it was a lens of some kind.
Looks like water ripples....
Anyone know if Motion imports Photoshop files and, if so... maintains the layers like AE?
Also, what type of plug-ins are used? There are a few for AE that we use all the time at work... so until they're available for Motion, I doubt we'll do all that much with it.
Also, what type of plug-ins are used? There are a few for AE that we use all the time at work... so until they're available for Motion, I doubt we'll do all that much with it.
Yes Motion is compatible with AE plugins. Of course to what percentage is not known yet(it's the pessimism in me)
As for photoshop layers this comes from the pdf
? Import Photoshop layers with blend modes
Not sure what limitations that may or may not have.
You know after revisiting some reports last year about AE performance. I wonder if Motion was giving the greenlight after Adobe embarrassed Apple with it's "PC Preferred" ad. I thought that was in extrememly poor taste to hang Apple out to dry like that. Apple's been turning the cheek with Adobe for some time now but I wonder how long that will last.
Comments
Motion will be available this summer at a breakthrough price of $299. (US)
http://www.apple.com/motion/
Originally posted by ipodandimac
well you can create your own background images/video using any photo or graphics program (after effects, imovie, final cut, or motion
How do I create a theme with drop zones, custom shaped masks for video buttons, etc.?
Originally posted by Defiant
I think he was suggesting that Apple started to release trial versions, from what I see it's not the case with Motion or any other software from Apple.
http://www.apple.com/motion/
Except for Shake and Logic.
Ever see that anywhere else?
Cool, huh?
and
Last one from this page: http://www.apple.com/software/pro/
Guess it makes more sense to tie it into the eyeball/colorwheel logos from the other apps than have a unique icon only.
Is that a ripple and a gear?
I'm really liking all of Apple's software GUIs and packaging and webpages of late.
Originally posted by BuonRotto
I would think it rather strange to buy this or any of these types of apps (LiveType, Compressor, Soundtrack, etc.) a la carte unless one can afford to dabble with it and see if they would want the rest of the suite. They're really designed to complement FCP and the whole digital video workflow thing, and not replace AE or something else by themselves. I think the difference here is that the intention of this pro suite of apps is that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
The thing is BuonRotto, is that After Effects is part of a greater package from adobe that they want to sell you with premiere. After Effects is really used for more so titling and simple collaging, and for compositing it gets the job done. but it's meant to tie into photoshop and premiere, and their new audio program and dvd thing now too.
I'm afraid after this all we're going to have left is photoshop and we all know apple really can't take on that quite as easy. I use Final Cut Pro to death and I know it like the back of my hand, but I was really disheartened by Soundtrack and compressor. Soundtrack is so so I mean its ok but its completely workflow it seemed like than FCP, and compressor could be cool but they don't offer compression to files other than that can be played in quicktime. And I know a lot of people in work environments that either refuse/or are not allowed to install it. And without cleaner now... I'm screwed.
Originally posted by kraig911
I'm afraid after this all we're going to have left is photoshop and we all know apple really can't take on that quite as easy.
Maybe not, but it's easier now than it's been in years, given that Adobe has gone and implemented their own Quartz underneath their apps in a deliberate effort to moot Apple's advantage while saddling the Mac with a performance disadvantage.
Any developer willing to write an actual OS X app using OS X's native capabilities could give PS a real scare.
Say, didn't the guy behind TIFFany go to work for Apple?
I wouldn't sprinkle rose petals at the feet of Adobe if I were Apple or anyone else. It's like Bob Cringley's article this week about MS. If you want to beat MS, you can't base your strategy around what they do, because then you're always reacting instead of innnovating. Apple shouldn't avoid pissing off Adobe, MS or Quark because they need to get ahead with or without them.
I'm just waiting for an FCP "helper" app like Motion that does more advanced image processing, uh, on multiple frames of course. Seems like so long as it ties into their video editing market, it's something Apple should do (and would have to do well) regardless of Adobe's reaction.
I'm afraid after this all we're going to have left is photoshop and we all know apple really can't take on that quite as easy.
I'm sorry you'll have to speak for yourself there. I used to use Live Picture and in many ways it was superior to Photoshop for some things. 48bit color and proxies were really cool. I kinda laugh everytime I hear someone say Photoshop can never be beat because I realize that this person propobably was told one day that Photoshop was the King and never questioned it.
Apple is not going to tread on Adobe's Print Publishing apps. They have no desire to. But they will compete with anyone for marketshare for Desktop Video. They've been more than clear about this. Funny thing about Mac Magazine/Internet writers. Apple states something and they don't believe then and then sound confused when Apple does what they say there were going to.
I'm just waiting for an FCP "helper" app like Motion that does more advanced image processing, uh, on multiple frames of course. Seems like so long as it ties into their video editing market, it's something Apple should do (and would have to do well) regardless of Adobe's reaction.
Yes i've said in the past that Apple should create a small app that it tailored towards editing frams of video. This app should only be included with Final Cut Pro and eschew any Print Publishing features that would conflict with PS.
After Effects isn't going anywhere. It has about %40 userbase on Macs which is a far cry from what Premiere had. Even if Adobe has a problem it's moot anyways. Motion is based upon a much more efficient core framework. Adobe cannot match Motions features without a rewrite of AE. Apple on the other hand need only bolt on the "missing" features and dub the new app Motion Pro.
Apple has been very clever.
$300 Motion for the lowend
$3000 Shake for the high end. They are allowing Combustion and AE to live in the sweet spot between.
Originally posted by johnq
Sorry, I meant the "regular" Motion logo, on the box. Its a bit washed out. I assume its ripples (and I thought a gear but I was mistaken) in the backgound and the eyeApps eyeball.
I'm really liking all of Apple's software GUIs and packaging and webpages of late.
Those are supposed to be ripples? I thought it was a lens of some kind.
Originally posted by onlooker
Those are supposed to be ripples? I thought it was a lens of some kind.
Looks like water ripples....
Anyone know if Motion imports Photoshop files and, if so... maintains the layers like AE?
Also, what type of plug-ins are used? There are a few for AE that we use all the time at work... so until they're available for Motion, I doubt we'll do all that much with it.
http://www.apple.com/motion/
Photoshop Integration
Import Photoshop layers with blend modes and transparency.
I could swear I read that it imports the PSD layers so they're each editable in Motion, but I can't find it now.
After Effects Plug-ins
Use a wide variety of third-party Adobe After Effects plug-ins, including Boris Continuum, GenArts, and DigiEffects.
[edit - improved second blurb from the tech specs page]
Also, what type of plug-ins are used? There are a few for AE that we use all the time at work... so until they're available for Motion, I doubt we'll do all that much with it.
Yes Motion is compatible with AE plugins. Of course to what percentage is not known yet(it's the pessimism in me)
As for photoshop layers this comes from the pdf
? Import Photoshop layers with blend modes
Not sure what limitations that may or may not have.
You know after revisiting some reports last year about AE performance. I wonder if Motion was giving the greenlight after Adobe embarrassed Apple with it's "PC Preferred" ad. I thought that was in extrememly poor taste to hang Apple out to dry like that. Apple's been turning the cheek with Adobe for some time now but I wonder how long that will last.
Originally posted by BuonRotto
From Apple's Motion pages:
Thanks.... I can't read that's why I have to ask the questions.
Well, here are his impressions of Apple's NAB exhibit in general, and of Motion in particular.
There isn't a trace of skepticism in that article.