PDA

View Full Version : Motion 2 = Shake?



eidetiken
07-13-2007, 02:09 PM
I loaded up Final Cut Studio 2 and see some of Shake incorporated into Motion 2. Is Motion 2 the new Shake?

dsol
07-18-2007, 10:21 AM
Definitely not. Motion *3* (the version that comes with FCPS2) has some Shake tech incorporated, like motion tracking, optical flow tech for slo-mo, but the two are definitely not comparable as FX packages.

I've just used Motion 3 on a job for Samsung - it's a frustrating app to work with. It's almost brilliant, but full of show-stopping limitations and bugs. It's also almost completely GPU-bound, so virtually unusable unless you have a highend GPU (which on a Mac will cost you dearly)

Shake's sucessor is in the works, codenamed "phenomenon". I imagine it'll be rather similar to Digital Fusion, with all the realtime FX from Motion. Hopefully it'll be awesome. It may appear some time this year. Assuming the engineers aren't all working on iPhone now!

Nigel Baker
07-18-2007, 01:19 PM
Hi there,

Yes Motion 3 is great but terrrible.
it can do a lot of different things and is lovely to work in.
But once there is a lot happening in it not a lot happens.
A twist of faith. The new Shake development is under way true — but I thought it will be 2-3 years before a release.

I do hope it looks and acts a lot more like motion in the sense of GUI compared to the SHAKE user interface.

Parts of shake seem to have been split up into Final Cut / Motion and the new colour tool "COLOR.

The whole Studio2 is a great all round package from start to end.

Regards,
Nigel

Sarford
07-18-2007, 04:20 PM
Hi there,

I do hope it looks and acts a lot more like motion in the sense of GUI compared to the SHAKE user interface.


I have to disagree with you there. I realy, realy, realy like the shake interface and would love if apple choose to go that way with their GUI designs. It is modular, clear, and unconfusing, much better than their designs wich are full of little buttons, little texts, functionality spread allover the app, bad contrast and a depressing color of gray.

Apple hardware design is great, apple GUI design is... wel, not so great.

By the way, have you noticed that navigating in Shake works the same as LightWave?

Nigel Baker
07-18-2007, 04:32 PM
Hi Sarford,

I would not say that Shake is a bad interface.
Maybe it is just the eye candy I like.
The truth is I am new and uncomfortable to shakes work flow environment.

However I did spend a bit of time in there a few weeks ago on a video job and after a while I was really enjoying it.

Only getting to grips with the edges and I see it has a vast amount still to offer even in it final version.

Regards,
Nigel.

brunopeixoto
07-18-2007, 05:08 PM
lookes like the best shake replacement it's called Nuke.
There are some comparison on net. Some time ago it was ported to mac OS X. Actually it is developed by The Foundry:

http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/

Appears to be fast than shake for preview and render, but withou FCP integration. Has 2d and 3d enviroment (can import 3d objects and render then).

Take a look.

BigHache
07-18-2007, 08:40 PM
I've used motion to knock out some projects real quick, which it has been great for. But yeah, it's a CPU hog since it doesn't RAM preview like AE or create render files like FCP so playback can be iffy depending on how complex your project is.

I've found the drag-n-drop text effects to be particularly handy though especially in tight deadlines. Given the choice I'd still rather use AE.

LiveType has some decent looping backgrounds that you can export as QuickTimes too. Haven't used it for much else.

mlinde
07-18-2007, 09:59 PM
lookes like the best shake replacement it's called Nuke.
There are some comparison on net. Some time ago it was ported to mac OS X. Actually it is developed by The Foundry:

http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/

Appears to be fast than shake for preview and render, but withou FCP integration. Has 2d and 3d enviroment (can import 3d objects and render then).

Take a look. Nuke is a VERY different animal in use than Shake - but it is another High-End compositor. Current release is 4.7, and apparently it's getting a lot of attention since it was recently purchased by the Foundry (like this spring). One of the original minds behind Nothing Real (aka Shake) is consulting the Foundry on the development of Nuke.

As for the workflow differences, sometimes a nodal compositor has significant advantages, especially when you want to understand and control exactly how an effect is achieved. I'm not really familiar with Motion, but from what I've seen it's more like AE than like Shake, which means it's more of a motion graphics tool than a nodal compositor.

dsol
07-19-2007, 05:53 AM
Motion is a strange beast. If there was a sliding scale of FX apps in terms of compositing power/flexibility it'd probably run something like this:

Shake -> After Effects -> Motion -> Final Cut Pro

Motion feels more like an FX-focused version of FCP than anything else. I could almost imagine the two apps merging - and the end result would be an almost seamless entity.

jeremyhardin
07-19-2007, 06:34 AM
I'd be careful about Nuke until the new owner decides for sure what he's doing...


fxguide: What’s happening with Nuke and Digital Domain?

Michael Bay:I bought The Foundry in England, too. We’re taking all our software there. They’ll hot-wire Nuke. It needs add-ons and stuff. I brought some guys over from ILM.

brunopeixoto
07-19-2007, 08:55 AM
There is (or was, since I can't see the web site anymore) a Motion plugin to do keying and nodal comps. It's called conduit from dvgarage:

http://www.dvgarage.com/

Anybody knows something about...

jeremyhardin
07-19-2007, 09:11 AM
just seen video demos. it wasn't intended to do complex nodal flows, but it relies heavily on the GPU (like motion) so you can get some realtime nodal flows if you've got a nice setup. seemed pretty interesting.

dsol
07-19-2007, 05:56 PM
Conduit is almost awesome, but sadly it's uttterly hobbled by the fact you're limited to the basic node toolset it's shipped with (which doesn't include any of the filters built into motion). Without a blur node or other basic convolution filters, conduit is worthless to me. Which is a damn shame as otherwise it's almost a killer app!

loki74
07-19-2007, 09:23 PM
I actually came close to buying Shake, but it was before the ginormous price drop, so I sprung for Combustion instead.

I've only used the trial version of Shake, but I think that Combustion is a suitable alternative. Well, at least it was for me anyway--all the stuff I wanted to do in Shake I was able to do in Combustion. That said, Combustion (strictly speaking) is still layer based, not node based, although it does provide an interactive nodal representation of the layer setup, which was helpful.

Now I haven't used any of the other big guns of compositing, but judging by the screenshots I've seen of them, I highly doubt ANY of them can hope to beat Shake in terms of ease-of-use. I mean Shake was just amazing as far as user friendliness, IMO. I hope Apple doesn't mess that up in the successor (but I doubt they will).

I haven't updated my copy of Motion yet, but it is most definitely nowhere near the power of Shake, nor do I believe it was intended to be a true compositing solution.

Nigel Baker
07-20-2007, 05:48 AM
Hi All,

Is Shake still not the best compositor for its money? Even though it is no longer supported it can still do great things and has for years (or rather people have used it to do great effects)

Yes Motion is defnitely not shake or combustion but has its own place with what it can do in a really fast and intuitive way. I think no matter what software you use and are use to working with they all allows to achieve some fantastic results.

Regards,
Nigel.

mlinde
07-20-2007, 05:29 PM
Hi All,

Is Shake still not the best compositor for its money? Even though it is no longer supported it can still do great things and has for years (or rather people have used it to do great effects)

Yes Motion is defnitely not shake or combustion but has its own place with what it can do in a really fast and intuitive way. I think no matter what software you use and are use to working with they all allows to achieve some fantastic results.

Regards,
Nigel.
Well, since Shake ($500) is often spoken of in the same sentence as Nuke ($3500), Flame ($???) and the like, I would say that it depends on your toolset and needs. If you need (or want) a high-end film compositor, and money is a significant object, but upgradeability isn't, then Shake is the way to go (assuming you run a Mac). It certainly is less expensive than any of it's counterparts now.

eblu
07-20-2007, 10:35 PM
flame is dead. they call it "inferno" now. and it also runs on the desktop(linux)... only. its funny how, 10 years ago... the people who wanted to use mass appeal software for professional work were laughed at. Now, all of the black box systems are dead or dying. SGI is in the toilet, the old hands have to scramble to try to keep up with the smaller, faster developers, and the cheaper software with the biggest market penetration is usually the clear winner. Shake has a $500 price point because Apple wants Shake's market (high end compositing). They want to sell some metal boxes. They understand market penetration better than almost any company out there, and I personally doubt that they will leave shake out to dry (ie: I don't think Motion is supposed to be Shake's successor). You see, to you shake is $500, to them shake is $500 Plus a brand new high end computer out the door, and a customer who will be more likely to upgrade sooner.

I've been impressed by a lot of compositors in my day, but none of them are as compelling as Shake. its seriously under priced... and its something to justify my next cpu purchase with :)

archiea
07-30-2007, 06:35 AM
I think the clue to motion 3 = shake is the fact that last April, it went public that Ron Brickman, the author to "the art and science of digital compositing", and I believe one of the original authors of the node based compositing that became Nuke, Shake and Sony's Imageworks comp system, has left appe to go to the foundry. brickman I think was with nothing real, was at apple for shake and now has left shake for the foundry;s nuke.

So i think Apple is out ofhte niche high end compositing market and into the high volume market of taking their aquired technologies and creating tools for the mass market. Hence Motion 3 being an editor;s friendly compositor with shake's engine in it. No more complex compositing scripts for Apple.

I believe people's attention will be on Nuke for high speed compositing. I think even Eye-on Digital fusion has shared a similar stunted growth like shake, where the industry that used it has outgrown the software.

eidetiken
08-01-2007, 04:27 PM
So there will be no Shake successor?

I wrote Motion 2, but guess it is Motion 3 that I loaded up with Final Cut Studio 2.

I don't know much about either just wondering why they keep referring to Shake in the Motion 3 manual. Soundtrack Pro works nice with Native Instruments filters though.

jeremyhardin
08-01-2007, 05:01 PM
I think there will be, personally. but this is all just speculation.

Nigel Baker
08-02-2007, 01:55 AM
Hi all,
As far as I can remember that when Apple said they would not be developing for SHAKE anymore but at the same time where/are working on the new
Apple high end compositor but it would be three years before it would be ready for launch. In the mean time there has been significant changes to Motion 3,
which is a small motion graphics package that can do a lot and has a great interface I believe that allows anyone to jump in straightaway and use unlike a lot
of other applications and for such a small application can do a lot but it still is a motion graphics app and not a compositor — the fact that it can stretch that far into
the area of a compositor I think is a good thing. With the release of FCP Studio 2 you can see how SHAKE has been sliced up and parts of it placed into Final Cut
with smooth cam – Motion 3 with tracking and now the new application call colour. So if anyone is wondering should they buy Final Cut Studio 2 — I would say yes.

On a seperate but similar topic I just saw a great on-line tutorial by Apple on SHAKE by Dion Scoppettuolo - Product Manager for Shake — you have to register to
watch this. Its part of the Apple seminars online. 24 minutes long and really fantastic — shows how one of the scenes from King Kong was composited together.


By the way I have really enjoyed this thread and everyones points, thanks.
Regards,
Nigel.

.

Largemedium
08-03-2007, 02:09 PM
So there will be no Shake successor?

Apple is working on a high-end compositor that will be the replacement to Shake. It's code named Phenomenon and, if I remember correctly, is supposed to be out within 3 years (2 now since the announcement). There is quite a bit of talk about it on the web. Google it.