Apple's Motion Now Shipping 59
gz76 writes "Apple's high-performance motion graphic design and production application lets you explore new creative territory using self-propelled behavior animation, character-by-character title animation and a powerful new interface. Motion integrates seamlessly with Final Cut Pro HD and DVD Studio Pro 3, making it quicker and easier than ever to create motion graphics for film, video and DVDs. About time!"
Motion is awesome (Score:5, Interesting)
Interestingly Apple are experimenting with the interface, everything can be controlled by gestures, which should please those die-hard fans of this control-method.
There are some things it won't do, I'm not a video-guy so I can't fully remember and I won't attempt to
Might be worth the piffling $299 just to play with the thing even if you're not in video PP
Re:Motion is awesome (Score:2)
Re:Motion is awesome (Score:1)
Motion vs. AfterEffects (Score:5, Interesting)
It will be interesting to see what Adobe does with AfterEffects 7.0 and if they include Tiger's upcoming Core image functionality.
Featuritis? I want OPTIMIZATION. (Score:5, Interesting)
That said, I use AE 6 and it's solid for a lot of things, but it's FREAKING SLOW on a 2x2ghz g5 with 2g ram. And it's time control / scrubbing functionality sucks ass. A BIG, SWEATY ass.
I don't want more features, I want a more tightly optimized app that handles as fluidly as Final Cut Pro.
And it doesn't look like I'll be getting that from Adobe.
Re:Featuritis? I want OPTIMIZATION. (Score:1)
Re:How ever.... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:How ever.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Look, Apple is doing quite well in the motion picture and video fields. I don't know where you're looking, but Apple is actually starting to give Avid a run for their money. They definitely haven't overtaken Avid, but trailer houses are ditching their Avid rigs in favor of far cheaper FCP rigs like crazy. Motion will help with this adoption, but it won't be a replacement for AfterEffects by a long shot.
Keep the "People are moving away from Apple" rhetoric to yourself or move to another section of this site where such blather is more welcomed.
Re:How ever.... (Score:2)
Re:How ever.... (Score:1)
These are totally different products with a different end result.
Macs have their place in compositing and effects, but I'd wager a good deal more people are using discreet Infernos, Flames, and Smoke machines to do these "movie effects" than you'd see a Shake.
I can't tell you how many features and commercials I see that have been made on a discreet machine over an Apple. Apple's tend to get more press
Re:Press release whores (Score:1, Offtopic)
successor? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:successor? (Score:5, Informative)
All that said, Apple's going to have a hard time with Motion because AfterEffects has such a strong hold in the pro motion graphics market. Motion looks like a good app, but it's going to take a while for it to catch up with AfterEffects in terms of power and and robustness. I think it will catch on with mid level DVD authors before it really catches on with hard core, professional motion graphics artists. Apple won't push AfterEffect sout of the Mac market like they did with Premiere.... which is a horrible, stinky piece of non-linear crap.
Despite Motion's shortcoming in comparison to AfterEffects, Combusitons and Commotion, I'll still buy a copy using my Apple educational discount.
AEs hold is the price. (Score:2)
AE is a lot like Final Cut Pro. People use it because it's powerful enough for the price. They'll drop it the second something better comes along.
I can't wait to get Motion at work. If it proves out, then the only Adobe app I'll need on my system is Photoshop, which I run in Classic anyway (since type handling in PS6 and higher makes said versions
whoops! veil fell off... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:NAB Demo Video (Score:2, Funny)
Except then we would have to call it Slow Motion.
Re:NAB Demo Video (Score:5, Funny)
The correct conclusion to this sentence is... so I'd better go buy a DP 2.5 Ghz G5 as soon as possible.
Re:NAB Demo Video (Score:1)
You are a filmmaker and you wonder why audio is salted?
On a streaming web software demo? Yeah, I wonder why... why bother. It's not like the additions added anything to the experience, other than distracting me with their obvious phoniness.
And to those who thought I was offering flamebait - huh? :-)
Skev
A Motion owner speaks (Score:5, Informative)
Motion is an amazing program. To start with, the user interface is almsot entirely intuitive. Whenever I had a question, nine times out of ten I could just look around the screen and find the answer. The overall feel of everything is very smooth and fluid.
Motion creates superior performance by using the computing power of your graphics card. For the first time in my life, the power of my graphics card is actually important. (I don't care for games, so that's never been an issue). It also creates a very odd pheonmenon: A machine where 25% of CPU is being used, but multitasking is sluggish. This, of course, is because the graphics processor is being used at full speed!
With my graphics card, the standard one on the G5, Motion can do simple animations at full speed, and more complex ones half-speed. (After Effects, even with a fairly small image, would do its preview at about quarter speed). I found I could figure out a lot of things successfully at half speed and only occasionally had to render the RAM preview to view them at full speed.
You can build an animation in pieces. Comps in After Effects are like layers in Motion. You can save a layer in motion (which can have nested layers forever) as a Favorite. Then you can pull it out of Favorites to another project. This is one of the few things in Motion that's not fairly obvious, so it's good to note it here. For example, I was able to make my crab's legs move in a short animation. Then I saved that as a layer called "Crab Walk". When I want my crab to walk, I just drag that animation from favorites into the canvas, and start moving the crab around; the legs will keep moving automatically.
Motion has several innovative features, which as far as I know exist in no other program today. For example, instead of keyframing a motion path (which you can also do, if you want), you can use behaviours. For instance, the Throw behaviour simulates pushing something until another force stops it. The gravity behaviour creates simulated gravity, and so the item that you Throw will drift down towards the bottom of the screen. You can adjust the speed of the throw and the amount of gravity you want. You can then use the Edge simulation to cause the object to bounce when it hits the bottom, top or sides of the screen. This is amazingly fun to work with and makes it very easy to do realistic animations which would take hours of tedium in After Effects.
I've only had the program for a few days, so obviously I've only scratched the surface. But this program is one of the few I've seen that's truly worth the hype. After Effects is in grave danger of becoming a deposed king; this program is easier to learn and use, faster and saves hours of effort. For everything it can do, it blows away AE.
Hope that helps.
D
(For a more detailed discussion of Motion, see Creative Cow's Motion Forum [creativecow.net], and the Peter Wiggins' Review [creativecow.net] of Motion.
Re:A Motion owner speaks (Score:4, Interesting)
although don't get me wrong it's really nice to see an app with less of a learning curve for motion graphics out and i'm really glad it works well for you. Adobe will have a run for it's money versus Motion when Motion can match the functionality and versatility of AE - not just the ease of use - the fuctions between premiere/after effects/illustrator/photoshop in creating elements to manipulate within compositions is still unmatched. Motion will be great for users seeking various basic effects and text manipulation but for commercial applications After Effects and related apps still take the cake in that the expanse of variables is painstakingly detailed at times.
for teams that tackle things like commercial graphics and film graphic design it is important to tweak everything by hand just to maintain a unique visual style and the more advanced features apply in those uses. I'm not really saying that Motion can't be used in that aspect but to video professionals it may become something akin to seeing an emboss/pixelate photoshop effect on an image for a graphic designer. Point: effects and preset only go so far, for a lot of uses it comes down to detailing (which After Effects still has plenty more of) - well that is just judging from the previews of Motion - inform me if i'm incorrect in this matter.
Re:A Motion owner speaks (Score:3, Informative)
There are features that I have not explored that look suspiciously like the velocity graphs of After Effects, which I assume is what you're referring to. It certainly looks like there is a lot of scope for precise teaking, and some of the behaviours can be keyframed for greater precision.
However,
Re:A Motion owner speaks (Score:4, Informative)
I think the key difference here is the focus Apple is putting on Motion's behaviors for beginners, the easy access to the functions, and the amount of included behaviors. While it would certainly be easy for someone like myself to create a 'Throw' function in Shake, the same can't necessarily be said for a novice... and a 'Throw' function isn't already included in Shake. Though, in fact, some of Shake's nodes are essentially 'Behaviors'... such as the Shake node. It shakes your image and doesn't need to be keyframed.
Given the amount of freely downloadable macros for Shake, it wouldn't surprise me if someone duplicated all of Motion's behaviors for Shake. None the less, it's nice to see Apple including such a large library of behaviors for people to utilize in Motion.
As far as speed is concerned, a dual 2.5ghz with a faster video card can do RIDICULOUS things at full speed. Apple is actually utilizing their Core Image and Core Video APIs for Motion, which will be available for anyone to use come 10.4.
Re:A Motion owner speaks (Score:3, Interesting)
So it's cool that I can do all those things in Shake, but as long as animation is more a hobby than a business for me, Motion will have to do.
D
Re:A Motion owner speaks (Score:2)
It also creates a very odd pheonmenon: A machine where 25% of CPU is being used, but multitasking is sluggish.
Seems like there's a need for dual processor graphics cards :-)
Re:A Motion owner speaks (Score:3, Interesting)
So we'll see how it does then.
After Effects actually stops displaying previews when you switch to another application. Motion keeps on running. It will indeed be interesting to see how the higher-end graphics card affects multitasking, but bear in mind that this was just an exercise done out
I can't wait for the PO to go through... (Score:2)
Re:A Motion owner speaks (Score:1)
Can Motion be run on this, or are the cpu and graphics too wimpy?
Thanks
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:5, Insightful)
if a mac lets you finish 10 jobs instead of 7 jobs in the same amount of time, that's a large some of money you otherwise wouldn't make. a tool to professionals is a rather cheap one time cost to production, so to foregoe the correct tool for a "$500" savings, is a bit rediculous.
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:1)
the mac party-line or "increased productivity" has been lost no many of
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:2, Interesting)
any specific reason as to why you believe that statement to be true? people that do video for a living should know their hardware inside and out. for example i need to know details on everything from the cameras available on a project to the type of audio capture device (be it reel or MD or other) and I have to know the specific workflow that the project needs for completion and therefore customize hardware for the task. for example if a client has an
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:2, Interesting)
and i see what you mean
the "surface customizable" line was a metaphor not an actual gripe. sorry if you took that that way
again, sorry about the WETA reference, it was mentioned earlier in this thread and I should have RTFA'ed again to refresh my memory on the subject instead of just using it.
funny that you say that though many of my friends LOVE to hack hardware and software to do things..for example one of my friends took courses and such so that he coul
Re: (Score:2)
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:1)
actually just so you know - most of the stuff i do 'professionally' (in the sense which is generally accepted) has been bland jobs that i just get done. the reason i myself screw around is to further what i'm doing myself, for me commercial purposes take a passenger seat to just having fun with it. it's a skewed perspective i know but what's the fun in sticking to what everyone else is doing?
even if it's more efficient or has
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:2)
Ease of use isn't just the OS, but the fact you don't need to fuck with the hardware. Certain geeks don't get this because they like working with the hardware and don't think that taking a work machine down for a few hours just to throw something new into it isn't a bad thing. I have friends that do the same thing to their cars...I helped a guy change out a perfectly good carb the other day for one that worked slightly better (he wanted one that didn't deal with having to calibrate dual webers ever few wee
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:2)
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:1)
2. it's not about the environment in which the tools exist, the tools rely on perfomance yes but artists/editors who function first outside of the operating environment (such as sketchbooking, storyboarding and timeline structuring) are those that become truly innovative and 'creative', if you're relying on creativity from the environment in which
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:5, Interesting)
If you're going to tout the Wintel party line in terms of video post-production, please at least mention the Avid options. Avid is both Win & Mac and they offer a range of products that far surpass Premiere in terms of quality and power.
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:1)
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:1)
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:1)
i'm not saying that Final Cut Pro/Motion are bad, hell i've used them countless times it's just that that suite has some catching up to do to equal the functions provided by the (now) more advanced adobe suite (for motion graphics!)
and yes i've used FCP and i know i
Re:the myth of apple for video and print (Score:2)
Not being sarcastic, I'm honestly curious.
Careful, I think you're troll feeding. (Score:2)
Consequently, we've been looking to drop Adobe software where feasable, and Premiere was the first thing to go. Why we even had it,
BorisFX? (Score:3, Interesting)
Seems BorisFX [borisfx.com] has had all this nailed for quite some time, and at a variety of price points- ranging from the OEM bundles all the way up to stuff like Boris Red. A lot of their stuff is OpenGL accelerated, so it should be just as fast, and it works on both Mac and PC NLE platforms...almost two dozen of them? Nevermind that BorisFX gives away the Keyframer authoring program so you can diddle and learn the interface or even work on projects on laptops, home systems, workstations other than your production rig, etc.
So I have to ask- what's the big deal here? It's been a couple of years since I looked at any of this, so someone please lay it out for me.
Re:BorisFX? (Score:2)
No Keyframes (Score:5, Informative)
That doesn't sound too different from keyframes. But take the "throw" behaviour and add a "drag" and it will slowly glide to a stop, the speed depending on how much drag you add. Then add "gravity" of a certain amount and the crab will drift down to the bottom of the screen. Add the Edge and it will bounce off the edges, repeatedly, with the parameters you select.
This makes it really simple to do a lot of things that would take massive time and effort with keyframes.
Of course Motion still has keyframes for when you need them, and many of Motion's behaviours can be keyframed, too.
Hope that piqued your interest. It really is one amazing application.
D
damn reqs (Score:2)
I'd like to see what this program requires in Panther that isn't available in Jaguar.