iMac 3g will have a strained relataionship with motion.
Well, what we all feared . . . . .
\ \ Barefeat´s test on Motion
Not happy about this, though, I will buy the Apple Production Suite.
I wish someone at Apple could go public with the reasons for the fx5200.
well.
Zon
\ \ Barefeat´s test on Motion Not happy about this, though, I will buy the Apple Production Suite.
I wish someone at Apple could go public with the reasons for the fx5200.
well.
Zon
Comments
Originally posted by zenarcade
Well, what we all feared . . . . .
Not happy about this, though, I will buy the Apple Production Suite.
I wish someone at Apple could go public with the reasons for the fx5200.
well.
Zon
Motion seems to be a pretty slick high-end app. Why would you want to run it on an iMac though? If you're doing that kind of professional work, wouldnt you just buy a Dual G5?
-M
But I do a lot of video, for my familie and friends. And especially after my sisters wedding, I realized how much fun it would be to add all kinds of stuff to the video.
My sisters wedding : Note the pathetic animation in the end. horrible. just horrible !
Well. When I bought my first Performa 5400 ( back in 96 ), I did not know that I would do dv-editing 4 years later. On my iMac 450 DV+. I think that Motion is an indicator on things to come.
People have made home-movies for years now on their macs. Now, I can see a lot of people taking a hard look at Apple Motion, and the retailprice. And they want some flair to their movies !!!
I wish someone at Apple could go public with the reasons for the fx5200.
"Go Public??" What are you talking about man? The 5200 in the barefeats test isn't the Ultra although I don't expect too much of a difference Motion will still be faster than running After Effects. Just make sure you max your RAM so that you can do the RAM preview which bumps the frame rate back up to see your handywork. We all know why Apple chose the 5200fx Cost and low heat..no suprise there.
Motion seems to be a pretty slick high-end app. Why would you want to run it on an iMac though? If you're doing that kind of professional work, wouldnt you just buy a Dual G5?
Again that "cost" word. Dual 2Ghz 1.8 is $2k add in $1299 for the Production Bundle and you've spent a lot of coin.
as for Motion the most important thing is to learn the interface and become proficient. 30fps isn't going to get you there any faster than 15fps. Motion may become a little faster in subsequent version but it may not as well..depends on what optimizations can be done. What will slow you down the most is using a lot of particle effects. The behaviours are easy. Even a "slow" Motion is going to be superior to After Effects in workflow.
Originally posted by hmurchison
"Go Public??" What are you talking about man? The 5200 in the barefeats test isn't the Ultra although I don't expect too much of a difference Motion will still be faster than running After Effects. Just make sure you max your RAM so that you can do the RAM preview which bumps the frame rate back up to see your handywork. We all know why Apple chose the 5200fx Cost and low heat..no suprise there.
But it is clearly the weakest link in the machine. There is no way to disguise that. The statement behind putting a fx5200 inside, is so obvious;"Here is your video-card. It was the lowest we could find".
Also, hmurchison, and please say that you agree with this one:
This machine is clearly aimed at the "iPod-people". I believe many of them are :
1. casual gamers.
2. dabbling with media ( 2d/3d , video )
They will notice the fx5200.
Zon
Actually right now I can understand Apple's quandry. The GPUs right now are just eating up too much power once you move to 9600xt and up. This is another area where we need to see some power improvements from lower fab technology. Apple has the right idea with the iMac G5 but other thermal issues are conspiring to keep us running bulky boxes for the time being.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Yeah I'm hoping they don't though
I agree hmurchison, I agree completely.
On the heat issue and power-management. .. I agree with you 100%.
I think many of us are simply frustrated in the continued slaps we get. I feel 5200fx is more palatable if it's at least agressive in memory size(128MB) but Apple always finds a way to cut the wrong corner. Another 64MB wouldn't bankrup a company that routinely brags about having 5 billion in cash as a debt free company.
If Apple wasn't so reliant on HW sales they wouldn't have to be so damn chintzy. Note to Apple. MS has proven that software that sells very well is like printing money. Get with the program so that Mac users can stop feeling embarassed about the new specs.
Originally posted by onlooker
I don't think Apple stated that motion is intended as a consumer level app. Being that it is in the Pro app Production Suite, and the iMac is a consumer machine I don't think apple needs to explain it any further. It's the same reason Apple gives as to why they do not include FW 800 on the consumer models. They are not intended, or created for that purpose. They have no business in that bracket. Final Cut Pro HD, DVD Studio Pro 3 and Motion Production Suite is intended for for the Pro market. Plain, and simple.
But why price it as low as 299$ ?
This "iMachine" is geared toward students and the "iPod-people". And iMovie will be limiting for many people. Our imagination should be the limit. And Apple Motion will be a giant step for many hobbyists who want to create awesome content.
Zon
A Pro friend of mine recently priced out a Dual G5 with Dual 30" displays, RAM upgrades, and other stuff he needed. It all came to about $11,000. $11,000 for that level of Pro workstation with those displays...thats a steal!
Remember, Pros make big money using this stuff, they also buy this stuff and get tax deductions on it (at least in the USA).
Plus, if you really wanted, you could wait for the QPromos that Apple has and snag a Dual 1.8 G5 for about $1500 and a Dual 2ghz for $1900.
-M
Motion on an Imac? I don't understand how someone who can't afford even a good used powermac could ever afford the production suite. I have a feeling that we're talking about pirated software here aren't we? Motion and FCP HD don't belong on an imac period!
If you're going to school make sure they have the gear to properly teach the course. If they don't you're probably at the wrong school. Besides there are other titling options available, just look for them. Further motion will do nothing to improve the look of your GFX. Why don't you get a better handle on Vector and Raster based imaging first. By the time you get that down you'll be ready to learn animation. That's the philosophy animation artists hold to the strongest. If you can really draw well and show that you have strong instincts for design, they'll teach you how to use the tools. If you can't draw they won't waste their time teaching you anything because they can't teach you to have a good eye.
Originally posted by spliff monkey
Please,
Motion on an Imac? I don't understand how someone who can't afford even a good used powermac could ever afford the production suite. I have a feeling that we're talking about pirated software here aren't we? Motion and FCP HD don't belong on an imac period!
hmm. I do calculus and the software WILL be purchased. (edu discounts). But as many others, I am trying to live in the digital age with DV-camcorders and iPod and stuff. And after making the ´nth homevideo from grandpa´s birthday or so, I want to expand. I want to make fun-looking, colourful videos. And Motion will do that for me.
And besides, the iMac I intend to buy is a 1.8GHz powerhouse. With enough RAM, the only problem I can see is the video-card.
spliff monkey and moazam:
Your comments are valid but in a sense, you reduce the iMac to a very expensive e-mail and internet box. After all, we are human beings. We WANT to explore !
Originally posted by zenarcade
spliff monkey and moazam:
Your comments are valid but in a sense, you reduce the iMac to a very expensive e-mail and internet box. After all, we are human beings. We WANT to explore !
I think this is a tad exaggerated. With a 1.8Ghz iMac, you can do C/C++/ObjC/Java/X coding, you could run iMovie, FC, iDVD, you could also run Photoshop/Illustrator/Macromedia Suite and 3D Modeling/Rendering programs. Thats a whole lot more than email and web.
You just cant run Motion and uber-high-end Pro video apps. Again, you could easily just go buy a QPromo Dual G5 instead then for $1500-$1900.
-M
Originally posted by zenarcade
We WANT to explore !
I suppose you could 'explore' Motion on an iMac, it'd just be slower than a Dual G5. Nothing wrong with that...it still works.
-M
Originally posted by moazam
I suppose you could 'explore' Motion on an iMac, it'd just be slower than a Dual G5. Nothing wrong with that...it still works.
-M
heh
I am typing this on a 450MHz G4 Cube. I am used to waiting !
Zon
I thought Core Video was going to be the app that would integrate the graphics card into the apps that could use the benefits offered by its FPU.
Originally posted by zpapasmurf
.... this is true in the PC world, but IDK about the Apple side of things.. but the graphics card has nothing to do with the rendering of video, 3d scenes etc...
I thought Core Video was going to be the app that would integrate the graphics card into the apps that could use the benefits offered by its FPU.
I'm sure there are rendering apps that do/will take advantage of the video card GPU for 3D...but remember, this is afterall a 1.8Ghz G5 and it does have pretty kickass floating point (specfp) numbers. They're not going to just have all rendering offloaded to the GPU...it'd be a waste of the G5 CPU.
-M
I'm sure there are rendering apps that do/will take advantage of the video card GPU for 3D...but remember, this is afterall a 1.8Ghz G5 and it does have pretty kickass floating point (specfp) numbers. They're not going to just have all rendering offloaded to the GPU...it'd be a waste of the G5 CPU.
It seems as if the graphics card would not be the reason for this application to run poorly. My point is that a 1.8Ghz G5 is pretty darn fast and it seems unreasonable to blame the performance in an App that doesn't rely on the GPU solely on the GPU itself... maybe the slower FSB is to blame?
(About the apps that take advantage of the graphics card: It was my impression that the applications that rely on very fast, high performance graphics cards have to do with 3D modeling, not the rendering of text and 2d graphics.)
I know several people that have purchased FCP and aftereffects for their home movies. Some people are going to buy a new iMac for $1900 and expect it to run programs like motion.
The Academic pricing of the production suite is only $499.00 and a lot of people will want it who cannot afford to spend the $2500 it costs for a dual 1.8GHz G5 (Radeon9600XT, and 3rd party memory and cheap crt monitor).
Even I'm thinking about getting the production suite at the full $1299 price, but I don't have a fast enough Mac to run it on right now.
Originally posted by Res
Some people are going to buy a new iMac for $1900 and expect it to run programs like motion.
Again, it'll run. It'll just slower than a Dual G5. Isn't this obvious?
A Porsche Boxster does not run as fast as a Porsche 911. People buying the Boxster know this when they buy it. If they want all the uber-torque and power...well, they should upgrade to the Porsche 911.
-M