|
Topics: 0 Posts: 0
|
 Created about 1 year ago
Precise, shot-based work: Nuke, hands down (stop using Shake!)
Time-tweaking, non-shot work (motion graphics: AE
|
|
Topics: 0 Posts: 1
|
Created about 1 year ago
My favorite is still AE but I rarely do 3D compositing . . can't speak either way about Nuke since I don't have much experience with it but I'm not a big fan of Shake.
I still like Elastic Reality for creative morphing . . call me old-fashioned but I still haven't found anything as flexible as that old dog . . crossing points notwithstanding . .
|
|
Topics: 26 Posts: 113
|
Created about 1 year ago
If you are starting up a company it depends on a number of factors.
1: To start off with lets think of "THE MAGIC THREE": "TIME", "QUALITY" and "BUDGET". The old adage applies that in MOST instances you can have only two even though we always want all three. This applies to your clients; the ones you have now and how applicable they will be in the future, and those you hope to go after... For instance if you are thinking of getting a FLAME/SMOKE etc..because you have ONE client that warrants it, but you have other clients that have less money (BUDGET), but allow you more TIME to create the work, while the QUALITY is still expected to be good, you have to weigh the options of what is best long term... Odds are it will be a poor use of time and financial drain to be cranking out and tying up the FLAME artist with work that could be done more efficiently considering the parameters in A.E..
3. For the next topic, think in terms of the "'stability' of the software, and, if possible, that of the company behind it". ---There was a time when people would build a shop around a product only to have it go "belly up" (---anyone remember "Illusion"?), although i think those days are (hopefully?!) over.
4. YOU as an owner MUST think in terms of the comfort level of the artist(s) that will be using the software, both staff and those readily available freelance wise based on the marketplace. You might get a great deal with a company on "the latest and greatest BRAND NEW software" but if nobody knows how to use it, the learning curve is too great, or it isn't as intuitive to everyone else as you thought it was, you are going to have problems.
Taking all of these additionally into account with what everyone else is using, current business operating structures (--why re-invent the wheel when you don't have to...?), steers you to which package to go with.....
|
|
Topics: 26 Posts: 113
|
Created about 1 year ago
Ummm yeah..
I copied and pasted the previous note and although i had it set up as bullet points it turned into a long and rambling paragrah.
Sorry.
--I also numbered the topics wrong missing "2".
Never type something up too early in the morning... !
|
|
Topics: 0 Posts: 0
|
Created about 1 year ago
I'd say Nuke for sure if your budget allows it. Shake is still solid and the price is unbeatable....but it is aging. :( Nuke's 3D workflow is unbeatable, the speed is great and it's cross platform across the board. For motion graphics I'd say AE for sure. We use Motion for previz and storyboards sometimes because of the great interactivity, not to mention being bundled in the FCP studio suite. I'd HIGHLY recommend looking into Imagineer....main Mocha. The tracking is a god-send. I can't tell you how many times it's either saved my day or cut the time needed to do a shot drastically. They have a few other apps, but I'd say Mocha will get you all the tracking data you need which can then be passed off to a good comper who can take care of the rest. PF Track is another one I cannot live without (if you need 3D matchmoving apps). Very stable on the mac side. So Nuke, Shake, AE, Mocha and PF Track should give you some very solid ground to stand on.
-Sean
|
|
Topics: 0 Posts: 3
|
Created about 1 year ago
The answer I would have to give you is absolutely Fusion.
Here's why. Sure it has a price tag associated with it and like any other program when you come from the Lightwave world of free render (practically unlimited with LW) nodes with a single seat, I find that charging for network rendering is stupid and punishing, however it still beats out nuke, (practically the same price, when you add in all the stuff its missing to match Fusion) and shake on functionality, speed and ease of deployment. It's also in my opinion the fastest comp-ap (coining a new phrase) to switch into from anything else. I have personally introduced fusion to several AE artists who were absolute diehards and with in a week or two they were punishing themselves over not trying fusion earlier or for going to a school at 50,000 a pop to learn VFX and not having been told about fusion at all while being pressed into learning shake.
Let's face it. Shake is dead. Also Mac's are not, REPEAT NOT, a viable solution for VFX work in a lot of studios and frankly I don't want to work on a mac, same goes for a lot of other people. The price tag attached is outragous. I would rather put that money into additional seats Fusion or more network rendering or bigger and better monitors for my artists and I have done this.
Combustion is not an option to me and hasn't been for years. It's a horrible interface (same thing with nuke, I don't care what foundry did or is promising to do beyond 4.6 now to adjust things, its horrible, clunky and feels like a bad linux freeware app for doing paint work, its NOT MATURE enough).
Fusion is also fully 64bit for those of us who have been running in 64bit land since 2005. When working in an environment with 64bit apps you want to make sure you have everything on the same page. Really, only fusion provides that at this time.
It's a great companion to Lightwave and vice versa. If you're serious about comping, and have a concern about your artists needs and want the best bang for the buck, from hardware to software surrounding your compositing pipeline. don't be suckered, get fusion.
I am not trying to be a fanboy here about it as I have my own issues with eyeon about how much fusion is in the first place plus the network rendering cost I mentioned above, but still it is the best solution out there and I am looking very much forward to Generation which I think will blow toxik out of the water completely from what I have seen.
Oh, and another thing about shake. I have a few mac people I know who work in VFX and they always talk about how they will pick up a copy of shake and learn it to help out, but when it comes time for them to do it, even those people freak out with the interface. It's brutal!
|
|
Topics: 0 Posts: 0
|
Created about 1 year ago
i'm very very close to having tryed em all, i got after effects, nuke, shake, fusion, combustion, and at work we have also toxic, but i work on an Inferno... definitely, when it comes to interface, inferno... i'd say toxic is close to be bs, Nuke is very robust i like it, but still think they've fucked some parts of it since version 4.7... fusion is very femenine, it's like u have to treat it with care... very sensitive, and doesn't suppor openEXR, it does support a whole bunch more of format than Nuke, wich is nice, but at least they should think ahead and get into the pro formats... although what is great about fusion, you just put in it the after effects plugins just like that, and for the most part thy work beautiful...
Shake... shake is pretty good, it's still industry standard for compositing, but as i've seen all companies that used to work with shake, are slowly transitioning to nuke, haven't seem many using combustion, nor fusion, not even toxic...
After effects is an all use swiss knife, wich i love, couldn't live without it by my side, fast to learn interface, slow to work with though, plus after effects renders blow, they are way slower than any other sofware, and rotoscoping in after effects really sucks... 9th version they still haven't done decent masks...
well over all, my favourites are
Inferno
Shake
Nuke
After
(in that order)
|
|
Topics: 0 Posts: 0
|
Created about 1 year ago
Nuke is awesome, still new at it but I am quickly learning to love it. I gotta be honest though and say that I love working on Flame. From a purely workflow point of view, nothing I have used comes close to it.
|
|
Topics: 0 Posts: 3
|
Created about 1 year ago
After having used Digital Fusion for compositing and now recently learning to use Nuke I would have to say Nuke is my new favorite. I also agree that for motion graphics AE is great.
|
|
Topics: 1 Posts: 14
|
Created about 1 year ago
You'd have to be a brave man to go with Fusion. You'll probably find it VERY hard to find enough good artists who know it. Unless you have a big retraining budget, then it's either Nuke (some retraining might be required, but it's getting there fast in terms of artist availability) or, if you really need to hit the ground running, Shake (cheap, stable, proven, good). I'm talking about high-end fim work here.
|
