View Full Version : Aura 2.5b vs. After Effects

02-27-2003, 01:36 PM
Okay, so I'm tempted by this new deal offering Aura for $300 to existing Lightwave users. I looked around a bit and found I can get AE 5.5 Standard for about $340. I'm in dire need of a good compositing package (right now my Premiere 4.2 just isn't cutting it), and so I'm trying to figure out which package will be better for me. Can anyone who's used both Aura and AE or know some differences share (objectively :))? From initial exploring, it sounds like Aura is more a painting app than compositing.

Specifically, I guess I'm wondering how the color correction and motion tracking compare. Also, I heard something about how it's hard to undo stuff once you've done it in Aura (like moving things and applying filters?); how is that handled in 2.5b?

Thanks for all help/opinions offered :D

02-28-2003, 09:21 AM
Well it's true that Aura isn't a compositing package although it is possible to do compositing with it. It's kind of a cross between Photoshop and After Effects - it allows you to paint and apply filters on a multiple layer timeline.

I use Aura for painting texture maps, editing short clips together, layering effects, transitions, titling and such. I put my whole showreel together using just Aura and LightWave.

I haven't really used Aura's motion tracking (although it outputs LightWave motion paths which is v.cool). As far as the undos go - certain filters and operations can't be undone but this is the exception rather than the rule.

I'd guess if compositing is the main thing you need you should go for After Effects but why not try out the Aura demo here (ftp://ftp.newtek.com/pub/Aura/Patches/AVP25_installer.exe)?