- This topic has 10 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 12 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
i’ve been using flame for broadcast design work for the last 5 years and have been more than happy with the speed and toolset. sadly, there is now talk of going ‘mac’. i’m about to download the shake demo to have a play, meanwhile, i was wondering if anyone has any experience with the two products, and can advise on what I will be losing or gaining in making the shift.
ps. i have posted this question in the shake forum as well, apologies for the cross postings.
Shake is great for compositing, but I wouldn’t really consider it a design tool.
Shake is an exceptional compositing tool, but most people use After Effects for design work on the Mac.
Not only is AE good for design but it has a great plugin community
Mike
For design work — posters here are correct regarding After Effects. I use it for a ton of motion graphics design work….it also has some nice compositing tools. While as a longtime flame user I really miss the speed and functionality of a lot of things, the integration with Photoshop and Illustrator is fantastic. As a sidebar, in many ways compositing 3D graphics with various passes (including depth mattes) is quite good in AE compared with flame.
I’d have a look at Apple’s Motion as well. You can’t beat the price of the product. I used it for a pretty major design job this summer and grew quite used to the real time interaction with it versus After Effects. I actually loved using Motion once I got used to how it worked. Do take a look at it — its work the money just to buy a copy and play around with it. They’re doing some very interesting things with hardware accelleration and plugins….I think we’ll see more and more fxPlug enabled plugins in the future.
richard_grant wrote:i’ve been using flame for broadcast design work for the last 5 years and have been more than happy with the speed and toolset. sadly, there is now talk of going ‘mac’. i’m about to download the shake demo to have a play, meanwhile, i was wondering if anyone has any experience with the two products, and can advise on what I will be losing or gaining in making the shift.ps. i have posted this question in the shake forum as well, apologies for the cross postings.
mseymour7 wrote:Shake is an exceptional compositing tool, but most people use After Effects for design work on the Mac.Not only is AE good for design but it has a great plugin community
Mike
Hey now, don’t wanna start a flame war, but there are plenty of us that are doing design work on PCs with combustion and AE.
All I think Mike meant was in response to the poster’s original comment about moving to the Macintosh and apps on the Mac. Though you were spot on……he hates PCs with a passion.
I’m so kidding about that…REALLY! 😆 😆 😆 I think anyone who really works in this biz would have a really hard time legitimately taking part in the ages-old PC vs. Mac flame war. There’s just too many good reasons to use both platforms.
Combustion and AE on the PC most certainly rock for doing design work. That being said, I’ll use Motion and AE on the Mac. I simply like working on Macintosh systems much better for most of my tasks…and while I’ve got a dual proc Xeon which I use for many thinngs I don’t own a license for the PC versions of the Adobe apps. Obviously the PC version of combustion is way faster and way more solid than its Mac counterpart (not to mention it is released as version 4). There are also some graphics card processing speed ups for AE on the PC which aren’t available on the Mac platform.
patdawg wrote:mseymour7 wrote:Shake is an exceptional compositing tool, but most people use After Effects for design work on the Mac.Not only is AE good for design but it has a great plugin community
Mike
Hey now, don’t wanna start a flame war, but there are plenty of us that are doing design work on PCs with combustion and AE.
Until now…
it will be interesting so see some specs of Shake, Motion and After Effects running on Quad G5 with the FX4500. I saw some informal test with Modo (the 3d App) and apparently the Quad g5 is indeed twice as fast as the old Dual G5.
And about the Mac, everybody knows that once you go Mac it becomes almost a religion and the PC’s start to look like the devil (actually is not PC’s per se but rather that annoying company from Redmond WA)
Anyway, even though Flame does thins differently that Apps on the Mac, you can achieve the same results just in a different way, being the biggest change in my opinion the fact that you start working with Quicktime…
eltopo wrote:Until now…I imagine you were referring to my point about GPU speedups in After Effects on the PC. I wasn’t clear what I was speaking of…I meant to equate this AE GPU use with fxPlug. The PC AE app uses the GPUs to do to certain operations in the card…similar to fxPlug in Motion. This is not available in AE for OSX.
That being said, you’re correct about the newer gfx cards coming out on OSX — finally its gonna be on par with the PC platform — I think we both commented on this on another thread. I’m quite pleased about finally getting pro-quality cards on the Mac platform. I didn’t go with the fx4500 on the order of my new quad….but the 7800GT finally became available and I upgraded to that one.
I did not know that about AE for Windows. Although I am not surprised.
Is stupid that love-hate relationship between Adobe and Apple, when clearly both should be lovers… specially now that Microsoft decided to follow Apple and make their own pro-graphics Apps.And about the card, I would do the same thing. At least on paper the 7800GT and the FX4500 don’t seem to be very far apart…
eltopo wrote:Until now…it will be interesting so see some specs of Shake, Motion and After Effects running on Quad G5 with the FX4500. I saw some informal test with Modo (the 3d App) and apparently the Quad g5 is indeed twice as fast as the old Dual G5.
The major difference between geforce and quadro boards is the driver support. So as long as this has not improved (macs geforce performance is a joke) I don’t see why things should have changed. Granted you can spend lots of cash on the quadro now but if it still does not come anywhere close to the performance of their PC counterparts, because of bad drivers…
eltopo wrote:And about the Mac, everybody knows that once you go Mac it becomes almost a religion and the PC’s start to look like the devil (actually is not PC’s per se but rather that annoying company from Redmond WA)After using macs for 6 years I switched to pc when I started doing 3d. I never looked back. IRIX, Linux, Windows, OS X. If you can handle the complexity of a 3d or compositing app, you should be able to handle any OS. Some of them do certain things better or have better support for certain things…
-k
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.