PDA

View Full Version : Shake compositing for Lightwave



CommandZ
06-15-2004, 08:08 AM
I'm still a "Lightwave Rookie" but I was wanting to know if Shake is compatible with Lightwave? I've seen all of the similarities for use with Maya, but didn't know if there are just as many options using it with Lightwave? Looking at picking up and learning some compositing software and hadn't seen a thread on the subject. Thanks.

CommandZ

Signal to Noise
06-15-2004, 12:04 PM
Wow! Shake is one hell of an app to simply "pick up and learn"!;)

Are you a Mac user? Is that why you want to learn Shake?

I don't know too much about Shake because I use a Windows machine and DFX+ for compo'ing. Albeit a newbie with DFX+.

I was just curious as to why Shake? Have you considered Combustion which is also now made for Macintosh. And much cheaper!

CommandZ
06-15-2004, 01:40 PM
Hell! I'm up for anything! :) I'm working in the world of Macintosh and had a buddy "talk up" Shake. After hearing the "glorious wonders of Shake cinematic delight", I thought I would investigate. I have a budget for some software and wanted to make sure that I was equipped for whatever came down the pipe. Is there a Mac compositing equivalent that is easier/cheaper than Shake? Combustion, you say? Being inexperienced, I hadn't heard of it, I'll take any suggestions I can get! I'm off to investigate further. Thanks,

CommandZ

pdrake
06-15-2004, 03:29 PM
shake is super expensive. worth the money for what it does. you need to ask yourself what you need and what you can get by on for awhile.

if you can, sit down in front of shake and look at it first. that's what i did. i've been using after effects and final cut for years and shake made my head hurt. until i'm getting paid by spielberg i will keep using what works and what i know.

especially since that's about $2500 vs $3000 and a yearly maintenance fee.

CommandZ
06-15-2004, 03:59 PM
Thanks for the heads-up thoughts. Always appreciated.

I'm doing my research on options. In my search I found a discussion forum on both Combustion and Shake. Might be helpful for folks looking for opinions about both packages and how they stack up. This might have previously been posted... but here it is just in case...

http://www.highend2d.com/

It looks like Combustion has a lot of great options and works with many AE filters. I'm sure there's an argument either way, if you have unlimited funding ;) (wouldn't that be NICE). Thanks again for your help. Onwards and upwards!

CommandZ

munky
06-17-2004, 01:18 PM
Hi There,

I use Combustion for comping my Lightwave stuff and for motion graphics. I personally prefer it to After FX just because I like the interface better. I think that comes from my broadcast background. The integrated vector based paint toolset is pretty useful and the particles are good albeit that they are 2d. The discreet keyer is pretty fantastic! It's not so hot on sound, but I don't think that shake has sound at all. Also it now seems better on the mac than C2 was, but don't quote me on that as I never really do too much really complex stuff in it. I have the sapphire plugins for it which cost more than Combustion itself but which are excellent.
I'd demo afx C3 and shake and see which is best suited to what you want from a compositing package. The plus for C3 and Afx is price, what you save , you can spend on some kicking plugins.


regards

paul