Jump to: Board index » General » Fusion

AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

Learn about 3D compositing, animation, broadcast design and VFX workflows.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Carmi Weinzweig

  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 10:57 pm

AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostMon May 01, 2017 11:38 pm

I was asked to consider Fusion as an alternative to After Effects for a project. I wanted to know what alternatives to the various plug-ins are either included in Fusion Studio, or available from third parties. In particular, Trapcode Suite from Red Giant, Element 3D from Video Copilot, and Mocha AE.

Also, any general comments on using Fusion (on a Mac) vs. After Effects from people who have used both would be great.

Thanks in advance for your help.
Offline

Bob Place

  • Posts: 54
  • Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:13 pm
  • Location: Atlanta, Ga. USA

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostTue May 02, 2017 12:31 pm

I jumped to Fusion a year ago and have never looked back. Originally I used it for VFX, but as of recent I am using it for more motion graphics projects. The advantages of nodes is clear when doing VFX work. It is not so clear when doing motion graphics, but as you become more familiar you will find it is equally as capable.

You need Studio if you want to use add-ons. You also need a 3d tracker if you are going to be doing any VFX work. I use syntheyes. Fusion particle system is equally as nice as particular, and can duplicate many of the other trapcode suite's functionality (like Form). Fusions 2d tracker is more than capable for most jobs.

Element 3d is obsolete with Fusion and anything you can do with element you can do with Fusion. All the things you WISH element 3d could do can be done with fusion. Including using all the VCP models, so any money invested in those is still good. You can also "easily" rig most models.

Also, it took me about a month to feel good about nodes. Now I love them.
Bob Place
Offline

Alex Uzan

  • Posts: 86
  • Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 12:49 pm
  • Location: France

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostTue May 02, 2017 2:35 pm

I don't totaly agree with Bob about Fusion.

There is lot a of stuff easily done in After Effects, that you can't do in Fusion.
Especially with the fake 3D environment of AE, which allow to play with 2d elements easily and give some 3d depth.
In fusion, I don't like that 3d shadow can only be casted with a spot light.

After spending a lot of time on fusion, and have done a lot of prof tuts, I finally decide to stay with AE.
With Cinema4D Brodcast if you do lot of 3D, you get the best of both world.

Therefore, I still keep an eye on Fusion.
Blackmagic is good to do true magic whith their softwares, as we can see with Resolve :)
Last edited by Alex Uzan on Wed May 03, 2017 1:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

Sam Steti

  • Posts: 649
  • Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 7:29 am
  • Location: France

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostTue May 02, 2017 2:56 pm

Carmi Weinzweig wrote:I was asked to consider Fusion as an alternative to After Effects for a project...........
Thanks in advance for your help.

As a short answer beginning, imho there is no "vs" possible when comparing tracks to nodes : nodes can hardly lose... As Bob said, I don't even consider looking back either...
Using Fusion for a little VFX and lots of compositing, the 1st thing I thought was "this time, I can't avoid reading manuals", and especially the Tools manual I still read when needed, because yes, first steps are not pieces of cake. Even for the same tool you were used to in another piece of software (I've been experiencing that with Primatte keyer for instance).

Now, I cannot specifically compare with AE since I wanted to break free from Adobe years ago, my opinion is based on Apple's Motion (so not AE but tracks vs nodes still relevant). On the other hand, I'm also used to Resolve nodes.
In the beginning in Fusion, I admit I had the feeling I had to put too much nodes to reach the same goal I did with less actions elsewhere, but getting deeper into it shows it's never useless.
BTW be aware you can now have Mocha Pro Ofx inside Fusion which allows to launch Mocha GUI inside a mocha node parameters. Furthermore, you can also export shapes from Mocha standalone to Fusion

The only thing I really miss is that there is no CUDA capabilities in Fusion (and won't ever I think), so a 3000 cuda cores (or two) GPU is a lot weaker on the OpenCL side (also due to Apple's update).
To conclude, read the Tools manual right now, I think you may find answers...
Offline
User avatar

Adelson Munhoz

  • Posts: 239
  • Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 5:44 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostTue May 02, 2017 7:56 pm

My impression on switching from AE to Fusion is:

1 - Fusion complexity on a simple comp is higher than AE, but it grows at a linear pace when your comp gets bigger

2 - AE complexity on a simple comp is lower than Fusion, but it grows exponentially when your comp gets bigger

For many reasons:

- in AE you use a lot of subcomps to get the job done. So your master comp is made of two or three others, that subdivide in two or three and so on. So moving upstream and downstream is painful, because you work on a single timeline most of the time.

- in Fusion you navigate the Flow bidimensionally. You can move upstream or downstream just dragging the Flow and see the big picture all the time. And you do most of your work here. The drawback is that it occupies more space on the screen.

- in Fusion you can reuse or distribute the results of any operator or subcomp easily. Just pipe it where you want

- In AE the main comp is a pile of layers. And the subcomps are... a pile of layers. No visual clue of the relationship of the layers except the pile order.

- In Fusion, subcomps behave like funcional units. Most of time you can tell what they do just looking at them. Similar structures have similar functions.

- This functional units are easy to reuse in other parts of the comp, because they are easily identifiable. You can copy and paste them or instance them.

The main feature that I miss in Fusion in relation to AE is that, in Fusion, You cannot select a "layer" or a "loader" by just clicking over it in the viewport. That's because the "loader" and the "transform" in Fusion are different entities. And you can have several transform nodes between the loader and the viewport.

Not sure if there will ever be a solution for this.
Offline

Bob Place

  • Posts: 54
  • Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:13 pm
  • Location: Atlanta, Ga. USA

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostTue May 02, 2017 8:13 pm

Adelson Munhoz wrote:The main feature that I miss in Fusion in relation to AE is that, in Fusion, You cannot select a "layer" or a "loader" by just clicking over it in the viewport...


I will second that one!
Bob Place
Offline

Sam Steti

  • Posts: 649
  • Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 7:29 am
  • Location: France

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed May 03, 2017 9:13 am

Adelson Munhoz wrote:- in Fusion you can reuse or distribute the results of any operator or subcomp easily. Just pipe it where you want

For me, this is what the success of Fusion is made on, for those who came from layers/tracks softwares
Offline

Kays Alatrakchi

  • Posts: 513
  • Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 8:22 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed May 03, 2017 6:15 pm

For me the issue of switching from AE to Fusion is that some of us depend heavily on a handful of plugins for AE which are not available in Fusion, but also where there is no easy way to recreate them.

For instance, Video Co-Pilot's Optical Flares is IMHO unmatched in realism and ease of setup by Fusion or any other similar apps. Same could be said with the Heat Displacement plugin which can be re-created in Fusion to some degree, but not quite.

Same could be said by AE's camera tracker, it's limited when compared to specific tracking software, but incredibly useful and integrated for so many things.

So the basic question for me is, can the added flexibility of nodes make up for a handful of useful plugins/functions that I rely on in AE? Unfortunately so far the answer has been no. Despite my efforts to switch to Fusion, I keep crawling back to AE time and time again. With each new Fusion update, I keep hoping that the equation will be tilted in favor of Fusion, but for right now I'm sticking with AE.

P.S.

Ok, I do have a gripe with Fusion's way of doing things -- the ridiculous usage of tiny decimals in the values. How would anyone see the difference between 1.323404 and 1.323405? If there a preference that simplifies the way values are displayed? Even the display field isn't large enough to show the entire number. I think it just adds to the clutter.
>>Kays Alatrakchi
www.mbkproductions.com
Wearing way more f@%ing hats than I should.
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed May 03, 2017 7:02 pm

It's pretty biased to your experience, no matter what. If you're trying to recreate a project you did in AE in Fusion, you'd be as frustrated as if you tried to recreate a Fusion project in AE. That's just the nature of having completely incompatible workflows.


Kays Alatrakchi wrote:Ok, I do have a gripe with Fusion's way of doing things -- the ridiculous usage of tiny decimals in the values. How would anyone see the difference between 1.323404 and 1.323405? If there a preference that simplifies the way values are displayed? Even the display field isn't large enough to show the entire number. I think it just adds to the clutter.


In older versions of Fusion, you could re-skin the interface to give you the ability to adjust that. The new Qt interface versions, however, lost that ability. If you'd like to see skinning return, you'd have to ask for it.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Theodor Groeneboom

  • Posts: 137
  • Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:51 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed May 03, 2017 7:07 pm

Kays Alatrakchi wrote:......
Same could be said with the Heat Displacement plugin which can be re-created in Fusion to some degree, but not quite.


Lol, its a blur and a distort node.
http://groeneboom.org/
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed May 03, 2017 7:08 pm

Theodor Groeneboom wrote:
Kays Alatrakchi wrote:......
Same could be said with the Heat Displacement plugin which can be re-created in Fusion to some degree, but not quite.


Lol, its a blur and a distort node.


I thought it was a distort and a blur node. No wonder I couldn't get it quite right. :D
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Kays Alatrakchi

  • Posts: 513
  • Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 8:22 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed May 03, 2017 8:09 pm

Ok, if you think it's that simple, why don't you post the Fusion code here on how you'd do it?
>>Kays Alatrakchi
www.mbkproductions.com
Wearing way more f@%ing hats than I should.
Offline

Bob Place

  • Posts: 54
  • Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:13 pm
  • Location: Atlanta, Ga. USA

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed May 03, 2017 9:23 pm

Kays Alatrakchi wrote:Ok, if you think it's that simple, why don't you post the Fusion code here on how you'd do it?


Kind of rude, but... here is a simple example that took me almost 2 minutes to make. If you spent a little time on it you could duplicate VCP's distortion plugin. Plus doing it from scratch gives you much more control over the final outcome. So yes the plugin is easier, if you use the defaults and make it look generic like most "generators" do. Or you can spend some time with the plugin (or fusion) and make it look exactly like you need. For me, the more I use Fusion, the less I use After Effects (and that is after 15 years with After Effects). It's not that Fusion is faster, or easier for that matter. But I do like the final product better, and I like the workflow better. I have more control over the final outcome.

In the example use pollygon1 to control the shape of the hear distortion, and change the fastnoise1 to define how it looks. You can tweak the fastnoise1 with other nodes to change the appearance of the distortion too. Oh, you will have to replace the image with your own in the example.

Code: Select all
{
   Tools = ordered() {
      Loader1 = Loader {
         Clips = {
            Clip {
               ID = "Clip1",
               Filename = "D:\\Working Folder\\Compliance Mate\\ComplianceMate 3 products\\Harrys HotDog van.jpg",
               FormatID = "JpegFormat",
               StartFrame = -1,
               LengthSetManually = true,
               TrimIn = 0,
               TrimOut = 0,
               ExtendFirst = 0,
               ExtendLast = 0,
               Loop = 0,
               AspectMode = 0,
               Depth = 0,
               TimeCode = 0,
               GlobalStart = 0,
               GlobalEnd = 0
            }
         },
         Inputs = {
            ["Gamut.SLogVersion"] = Input { Value = FuID { "SLog2" }, },
         },
         ViewInfo = OperatorInfo { Pos = { 660, 181.5 } },
      },
      Resize1 = BetterResize {
         Inputs = {
            Width = Input { Value = 1920, },
            Height = Input { Value = 1080, },
            PixelAspect = Input { Value = { 1, 1 }, },
            Input = Input {
               SourceOp = "Loader1",
               Source = "Output",
            },
         },
         ViewInfo = OperatorInfo { Pos = { 770, 181.5 } },
      },
      FastNoise1 = FastNoise {
         Inputs = {
            GlobalOut = Input { Value = 250, },
            Width = Input { Value = 1920, },
            Height = Input { Value = 1080, },
            ["Gamut.SLogVersion"] = Input { Value = FuID { "SLog2" }, },
            Center = Input {
               SourceOp = "Path1",
               Source = "Position",
            },
            Detail = Input { Value = 10, },
            Contrast = Input { Value = 5, },
            Brightness = Input { Value = 0.48936170212766, },
            XScale = Input { Value = 7.65957446808511, },
            Angle = Input { Value = 90, },
            Seethe = Input { Value = 0.8412017, },
            SeetheRate = Input { Value = 0.148936170212766, },
            Gradient = Input {
               Value = Gradient {
                  Colors = {
                     [0] = { 0, 0, 0, 1 },
                     [1] = { 1, 1, 1, 1 }
                  }
               },
            },
            EffectMask = Input {
               SourceOp = "Polygon1",
               Source = "Mask",
            },
         },
         ViewInfo = OperatorInfo { Pos = { 880, 148.5 } },
      },
      Path1 = PolyPath {
         DrawMode = "InsertAndModify",
         Inputs = {
            Displacement = Input {
               SourceOp = "Path1Displacement",
               Source = "Value",
            },
            PolyLine = Input {
               Value = Polyline {
                  Points = {
                     { Linear = true, LockY = true, X = 0, Y = -0.0269360269360269, RX = 0, RY = 1.96236323947167 },
                     { Linear = true, LockY = true, X = 0, Y = 5.86015369147899, LX = 0, LY = -1.96236323947167, RX = 0, RY = -0.232087509195943 },
                     { Linear = true, LockY = true, X = 0, Y = 5.16389116389116, LX = 0, LY = 0.232087509195943 }
                  }
               },
            },
         },
      },
      Path1Displacement = BezierSpline {
         SplineColor = { Red = 255, Green = 0, Blue = 255 },
         NameSet = true,
         KeyFrames = {
            [0] = { 0, RH = { 82.6666666666667, 0.298079635745321 }, Flags = { Linear = true, LockedY = true } },
            [248] = { 0.894238907235964, LH = { 165.333333333333, 0.596159271490643 }, RH = { 497.333333333333, 0.929492604823976 }, Flags = { Linear = true, LockedY = true } },
            [996] = { 1, LH = { 746.666666666667, 0.964746302411988 }, Flags = { Linear = true, LockedY = true } }
         }
      },
      Blur1 = Blur {
         Inputs = {
            XBlurSize = Input { Value = 8.51063829787234, },
            Input = Input {
               SourceOp = "Resize1",
               Source = "Output",
            },
            EffectMask = Input {
               SourceOp = "FastNoise1",
               Source = "Output",
            }
         },
         ViewInfo = OperatorInfo { Pos = { 880, 181.5 } },
      },
      Polygon1 = PolylineMask {
         DrawMode = "ModifyOnly",
         DrawMode2 = "InsertAndModify",
         CtrlWZoom = false,
         Inputs = {
            SoftEdge = Input { Value = 0.0127659574468085, },
            MaskWidth = Input { Value = 1920, },
            MaskHeight = Input { Value = 1080, },
            PixelAspect = Input { Value = { 1, 1 }, },
            ClippingMode = Input { Value = FuID { "None" }, },
            Polyline = Input {
               SourceOp = "Polygon1Polyline",
               Source = "Value",
            },
            Polyline2 = Input {
               Value = Polyline {
               },
               Disabled = true,
            },
         },
         ViewInfo = OperatorInfo { Pos = { 880, 115.5 } },
      },
      Polygon1Polyline = BezierSpline {
         SplineColor = { Red = 173, Green = 255, Blue = 47 },
         NameSet = true,
         KeyFrames = {
            [0] = { 0, Flags = { Linear = true, LockedY = true }, Value = Polyline {
                  Closed = true,
                  Points = {
                     { Linear = true, X = -0.00208333344198763, Y = -0.238888889551163, LX = 0.026849146389092, LY = 0.00544565419356028, RX = -0.0833344926367554, RY = 0.256682053193612 },
                     { Linear = true, X = -0.252086818218231, Y = 0.531157255172729, LX = 0.0833344926367554, LY = -0.256682053193612, RX = 0.158597665059945, RY = 0.0039564836862415 },
                     { Linear = true, X = 0.223706170916557, Y = 0.543026685714722, LX = -0.158597665059945, LY = -0.0039564836862415, RX = -0.048414021357272, RY = -0.255192871499368 },
                     { Linear = true, X = 0.0784641057252884, Y = -0.222551926970482, LX = 0.048414021357272, LY = 0.255192871499368, RX = -0.026849146389092, RY = -0.00544565419356028 }
                  }
               } }
         }
      }
   }
}


The problem is not that Fusion can't duplicate these plugins you are so dependent on, but rather "you" can't easily recreate them yet. So you either have to take the time to learn Fusion, or stick with AFX. My sugestion (based on your posts) would be to stick with AFX you seem to be happier there.
Bob Place
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostThu May 04, 2017 12:20 am

Good point. In general users of AE and other layer based packages don't create effects so much as apply them as compared to users of node based compositors. It might be self selection, but you'll almost universally find that Nuke and Fusion users are more likely to build things from scratch. One result of that is that is a different level of predictable "looks" coming from the different packages.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Kays Alatrakchi

  • Posts: 513
  • Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 8:22 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostThu May 04, 2017 1:15 am

Thanks Bob, good stuff...looking forward to analyzing what you did there so that I can learn from it.

And yes, I do agree with you Chad. Coming from an audio/music background in my previous life, this whole subject reminds me a bit of synth programmers vs. musicians who want to use the tools to create music. An even tighter analogy to the node-based systems are modular synths which require users to quite literally connect via audio cables various components just like nodes.

In the end, we are all looking to get from point A (an idea) to point B (an execution of said idea), how each one of us chooses to get there is very individual and subjective to what is most important to each.
>>Kays Alatrakchi
www.mbkproductions.com
Wearing way more f@%ing hats than I should.
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostThu May 04, 2017 3:25 pm

Excellent analogy, I'm stealing that for future use. You can see the same differences in say, Avid ProTools vs. Cycling '74 Max.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Vladimir LaFortune

  • Posts: 94
  • Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 3:37 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostThu May 04, 2017 5:27 pm

Kays Alatrakchi wrote:Thanks Bob, good stuff...looking forward to analyzing what you did there so that I can learn from it.

And yes, I do agree with you Chad. Coming from an audio/music background in my previous life, this whole subject reminds me a bit of synth programmers vs. musicians who want to use the tools to create music. An even tighter analogy to the node-based systems are modular synths which require users to quite literally connect via audio cables various components just like nodes.

In the end, we are all looking to get from point A (an idea) to point B (an execution of said idea), how each one of us chooses to get there is very individual and subjective to what is most important to each.


Oh I'm so glad you asked for heat distortion because you being a proper Fusion noob I want you to go trough this madness of a video first just like I did. You will be asking yourself WTF every time you watch the video from the top but right after you comprehend what is going on in this video you will be able to understand Fusion groundwork and start using it properly.

Video is straight out insane and shows you how deep or tedious Fusion can be if you want it to be, like disparity between R channel heat distortion and G channel distortion. If that is not crazy I don't know what is.

Offline

Carmi Weinzweig

  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 10:57 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostFri May 05, 2017 12:51 am

First, thanks to everyone who has responded so far, this has been very helpful and I look forward to any future replies.
Kays Alatrakchi wrote:For me the issue of switching from AE to Fusion is that some of us depend heavily on a handful of plugins for AE which are not available in Fusion, but also where there is no easy way to recreate them.

That is one of the specific concerns.
For instance, Video Co-Pilot's Optical Flares is IMHO unmatched in realism and ease of setup by Fusion or any other similar apps.

Do you know how it compares to Sapphire's flare plug-in? I know that we use the Sapphire and Element 3d, but none of the other VCP plug-ins were on my list (I have sent off mail to see if we use them).
Same could be said with the Heat Displacement plugin which can be re-created in Fusion to some degree, but not quite.

I have passed Bob's comments to one of the artists to see what he thinks. :-)
Same could be said by AE's camera tracker, it's limited when compared to specific tracking software, but incredibly useful and integrated for so many things.

We would expect to use the Mocha Pro plug-in, so I am not sure if that would eliminate that issue.
So the basic question for me is, can the added flexibility of nodes make up for a handful of useful plugins/functions that I rely on in AE? Unfortunately so far the answer has been no. Despite my efforts to switch to Fusion, I keep crawling back to AE time and time again. With each new Fusion update, I keep hoping that the equation will be tilted in favor of Fusion, but for right now I'm sticking with AE.

Other than the VCP Flares plug-in, and the built in tracker (possibly vs. Mocha Pro as a plug-in), what other tools do you feel are lacking? Does the ability to have render nodes have any value for you? (Do others use them? If so, are they easy or hard to configure?) What would have to change to push you over the edge to make Fusion your primary platform?
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostFri May 05, 2017 4:25 pm

You can run Sapphire in Fusion, though, so you should be fine there.

As to the network rendering, it's very useful and worth setting up. There used to be a feature in Fusion called "clustering" that was removed that used render nodes to speed up interactive compositing. If that feature returns, it would be a no brainer to set up a render farm for it if you have a need for high performance work.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Kays Alatrakchi

  • Posts: 513
  • Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 8:22 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostSat May 06, 2017 8:24 am

Carmi Weinzweig wrote:Other than the VCP Flares plug-in, and the built in tracker (possibly vs. Mocha Pro as a plug-in), what other tools do you feel are lacking? Does the ability to have render nodes have any value for you? (Do others use them? If so, are they easy or hard to configure?) What would have to change to push you over the edge to make Fusion your primary platform?


Good question. Undoubtedly there is the issue of time -- i.e. there's never enough of it. So when I'm in a crunch to crank out a composite, I'm just naturally faster in AE. Fusion right now is fighting me every step of the way because it takes very little to bring me to my knees due to my lack of knowledge. Right now I'm working on a personal sci/fi project which is a good setting to push myself to use Fusion. The first hurdle for me was the VCP Optical Flares, I found the ones in Fusion not on par in quality and realism. Another hurdle is pixel motion blur, I wish Fusion had a node for this. In AE it's one of the built-in plugins which extrapolates the data from frame-by-frame analysis. In Fusion, I watched a tutorial for bringing in vector data from C4D and it seemed absurdly complex for something that should be a click-and-go type of thing.

Basically, each and every time I've tried to do something in Fusion, I get pretty far, but I reach a point where I can't get it to do a certain something, and I'm forced to either give up on that something, or crawl back to AE where I know I can do it easily. Some of it is of course due to my lack of knowledge, but some of it is that Fusion simply doesn't yet have the type of functionality that I have come to rely on in AE.

Saying "oh, you could buy this OFX plug in, or that version of Mocha or Syntheyes" is a bit of a non-starter. I've already spent a great deal of cash for a bunch of plugins, and to have to buy some more just so that I can do something in Fusion that I can already do in AE isn't a very convincing argument.

So right off the bat, if I had a personal wish list for Fusion 9, it would be (not necessarily in this order):

- Built in frame-analysis pixel blur node.

- Better, more realistic flares.

- Either having a version of Mocha built it, or a similar Fusion planar tracker.

- A camera tracker/solver.

I think that's basically what I reach for 99% of the time I use AE. I know that Fusion has everything else (Curves, Glow, Noise generators, particles, blurs, etc).
>>Kays Alatrakchi
www.mbkproductions.com
Wearing way more f@%ing hats than I should.
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostSat May 06, 2017 11:18 am

Are you using Fusion Studio?
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Bob Place

  • Posts: 54
  • Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:13 pm
  • Location: Atlanta, Ga. USA

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostSat May 06, 2017 11:50 am

I think your only issue with Fusion is your lack of knowledge. For example I hated making items for a heads up display in Fusion. In AFX it is pretty simple with shape layers. Add something like Motion 2 and it is a piece of cake.

Then I took a weekend and did nothing but trying to duplicate my heads up in Fusion. The result is I am now so much faster making the heads up in Fusion. I actually have built an entire library of heads up pieces that I can now just drop into a new project. What was a pain in the rear has evolved into my go to tool. I simply learned what button to press. With AFX you instinctively know that button. Not so much for Fusion. I would stay on the path your on. Use AFX when you need to and keep playing with Fusion. Eventually it will click.

As for your wish list, I agree. I purchased syntheyes for use with fusion and have found it is so much better than what is offered with AFX and Mocha that I use it with AFX too.

Good luck!
Bob Place
Offline

Kays Alatrakchi

  • Posts: 513
  • Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 8:22 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostSat May 06, 2017 6:50 pm

Bob Place wrote:I think your only issue with Fusion is your lack of knowledge.



Undoubtedly, and I don't want to belabor the point. However, I would encourage all of you to consider the following -- how does Fusion's intuition-factor fare against other apps? What I mean is that when I first started using AE, I didn't know anything about it -- but it was intuitive enough that it didn't scare me away and it made me want to learn more. At this time, I am not sure I can say the same about Fusion.

I offer another example: Blender vs. Cinema 4D. When I first got into CGI, I poured hours and hours into Blender trying to wrap my head around it. It was one of the most frustrating experiences I can recall (I assure you that when it comes to learning new software I'm not the type to scare easily). Then I picked up C4D and it felt so much more intuitive that sticking with it and getting results (rudimentary at first, but progressively more complex) was a pleasure.

I am not disputing that a certain type of individual can wrap their head around Blender or Fusion much more easily than I can -- and yet I maintain that the intuition-factor of Fusion is simply not up to something like AE.

At this point, you may congratulate yourself on having mastered Fusion, and you may look at me as a simpleton who probably isn't smart enough to be using Fusion in the first place, but you'd be missing a greater point -- Fusion needs to appeal to guys like me, as well as guys like you, if it is to continue to grow and evolve.

A good strategy for Fusion (IMHO of course) would be for Blackmagic to focus on the creation of what I would term "creative nodes" which simplify effects and functions that are already possible in Fusion, but are far too complex (see the YouTube video above if you want an example of what I'm talking about).

This would provide users like me a compelling in, while allowing users like you to continue using Fusion as you prefer.

My guess is that Grant Petty is well aware of this and has engineers working on a solution as we speak. Judging by some of the latest additions to Resolve (an app that I find extremely intuitive), I can't imagine that Blackmagic isn't thinking in similar terms for Fusion.

Only time will tell, and I will be looking very closely at Fusion 9 to see what direction Blackmagic takes with it.
>>Kays Alatrakchi
www.mbkproductions.com
Wearing way more f@%ing hats than I should.
Offline
User avatar

michael vorberg

  • Posts: 728
  • Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 8:47 pm
  • Location: stuttgart, germany

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostSat May 06, 2017 8:04 pm

fusion studio has a node "optical flow" which creates motion vectors from the footage which can then be used with the "vector motion blur" node. this will give you pixel motion blur

Optical flares isnt matched in ease of use by any other flare creating software, but you can do great in fusion. this is fusion free with some free availible fuses


There is also a great Fuse for generating GUI patterns:

Offline

Sander de Regt

  • Posts: 581
  • Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostSat May 06, 2017 9:39 pm

Undoubtedly, and I don't want to belabor the point. However, I would encourage all of you to consider the following -- how does Fusion's intuition-factor fare against other apps? What I mean is that when I first started using AE, I didn't know anything about it -- but it was intuitive enough that it didn't scare me away and it made me want to learn more. At this time, I am not sure I can say the same about Fusion.

I guess this is a very personal situation. I started out with Fusion back in 1998 when the pipes and tiles were literal pipes and tiles. One pipe would actually cross over another one with shading and everything.
It looked like an Amiga game to be honest, but the *concept* of the workflow was very intuitive to me.

I am not much of a planner when doing VFX work (eventually yes, but I take a slightly more freeform approach) so the concept of: First I get a piece of footage (loader) and then what am I going to do with it? I know I'll adjust the brightness/contrast and then I'll do x and then I'll do y, very much corresponds with the concept of doing something in a node and then doing another thing with another node and then merging stuff with... a Merge node.

To me *personally* that made (and makes) much more sense than 'this small bar works on this bar and on this bar, but not on this bar' even though visually they are all stacked on top of each other.
To me AE is very unintuitive. I believe great work can be created with both, but for me as a user it's Fusion (and by extension node based) all the way.

I have even transitioned on a consumer level from 3DMax to Blender, because after the initial learning hump, I found Blender to be well thought out. Pressing 'g' will always grab/move stuff no matter what mode you're in. If you're in vertex editing mode, it will move a vertex, in object mode it will move objects, but when you're editing pressing 'g' will move a clip. I like that approach. And to me it makes more sense than Autodesk's previous modus operandi of just adding stuff to their software without integrating, but I digress.

Bottom line: how intuitive something is for someone will be very personal. But if you really want to learn Fusion, you will find people here who will want to help you.
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostSun May 07, 2017 5:12 pm

Kays Alatrakchi wrote:
A good strategy for Fusion (IMHO of course) would be for Blackmagic to focus on the creation of what I would term "creative nodes" which simplify effects and functions that are already possible in Fusion, but are far too complex (see the YouTube video above if you want an example of what I'm talking about).

This would provide users like me a compelling in, while allowing users like you to continue using Fusion as you prefer.

My guess is that Grant Petty is well aware of this and has engineers working on a solution as we speak. Judging by some of the latest additions to Resolve (an app that I find extremely intuitive), I can't imagine that Blackmagic isn't thinking in similar terms for Fusion.

Only time will tell, and I will be looking very closely at Fusion 9 to see what direction Blackmagic takes with it.


Unless they're being forced to dog food, I wouldn't want any of the developer time to be spent on making tools that repackage existing functions. BDP should just hire more product evangelists to do that. If you want new tools, support 3rd party developers.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Kays Alatrakchi

  • Posts: 513
  • Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 8:22 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostSun May 07, 2017 5:58 pm

Chad Capeland wrote:I wouldn't want any of the developer time to be spent on making tools that repackage existing functions. BDP should just hire more product evangelists to do that. If you want new tools, support 3rd party developers.


Why not? As a 3rd party developer, you should champion Blackmagic bringing more customers into the fold (including lowering the price for the Studio version, which means more potential clientele for you). It a win-win for everyone -- not sure I understand your position.
>>Kays Alatrakchi
www.mbkproductions.com
Wearing way more f@%ing hats than I should.
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostSun May 07, 2017 7:47 pm

Kays Alatrakchi wrote:
Chad Capeland wrote:I wouldn't want any of the developer time to be spent on making tools that repackage existing functions. BDP should just hire more product evangelists to do that. If you want new tools, support 3rd party developers.


Why not? As a 3rd party developer, you should champion Blackmagic bringing more customers into the fold (including lowering the price for the Studio version, which means more potential clientele for you). It a win-win for everyone -- not sure I understand your position.


Why not? Because it's a waste of time. BDP is resource constrained. Fusion 8 has less features than Fusion 7, which lost features from Fusion 6 because of a lack of developer support.

BDP isn't helping 3rd party developers by adding features to a version of Fusion that specifically excludes 3rd party developers.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Kays Alatrakchi

  • Posts: 513
  • Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 8:22 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostMon May 08, 2017 12:39 am

Chad Capeland wrote:Why not? Because it's a waste of time. BDP is resource constrained.


There you go again telling Blackmagic what to do and thinking you know better than they do. This whole conversation is moot of course since neither one of us is named Grant Petty, only time will tell what's next for Fusion.
>>Kays Alatrakchi
www.mbkproductions.com
Wearing way more f@%ing hats than I should.
Offline

Theodor Groeneboom

  • Posts: 137
  • Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:51 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostMon May 08, 2017 9:31 am

Kays Alatrakchi wrote:A good strategy for Fusion (IMHO of course) would be for Blackmagic to focus on the creation of what I would term "creative nodes" which simplify effects and functions that are already possible in Fusion, but are far too complex (see the YouTube video above if you want an example of what I'm talking about).


As Chad have hinted at, this is a terrible idea. It would be better if Fusion and its architecture kept focusing lower-level-ish nodes and tools and upgrade existing tech. And let the community/3rd parties build higher-level tools like lens-flares etc. (there is of course a gray area in here too)

Since you're fond of sound analogies, look at NI Reaktor and see how incredible the User Library is! Everything from the simplest FM synths to the most complex granular beasts, well over 3000 free tools! This is what you get when you have a) a strong architecture built from well documented ,optimized low level components and b) a very inspired community. This is the reason I bought Reaktor (and Fusion) in the first place!

I suggest you invest a little bit more time getting to know Fusion before asking for things it already does. (heathaze, automatic moblur etc)

It's going to pay off, I promise.
http://groeneboom.org/
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostMon May 08, 2017 6:05 pm

Kays Alatrakchi wrote:There you go again telling Blackmagic what to do and thinking you know better than they do. This whole conversation is moot of course since neither one of us is named Grant Petty, only time will tell what's next for Fusion.

Kays Alatrakchi wrote:A good strategy for Fusion (IMHO of course) would be for Blackmagic to focus on the creation of what I would term "creative nodes" which simplify effects and functions that are already possible in Fusion, but are far too complex (see the YouTube video above if you want an example of what I'm talking about).

This would provide users like me a compelling in, while allowing users like you to continue using Fusion as you prefer.

My guess is that Grant Petty is well aware of this and has engineers working on a solution as we speak. Judging by some of the latest additions to Resolve (an app that I find extremely intuitive), I can't imagine that Blackmagic isn't thinking in similar terms for Fusion.


Um... Okay...

Kays Alatrakchi wrote:So right off the bat, if I had a personal wish list for Fusion 9, it would be (not necessarily in this order):

- Built in frame-analysis pixel blur node.

- Better, more realistic flares.

- Either having a version of Mocha built it, or a similar Fusion planar tracker.

- A camera tracker/solver.



So the first one is already there. You didn't respond when I asked if you had a Studio license. The second, third, and fourth ones are all addressable with existing 3rd party plugins or scripts. That's a perfectly reasonable solution in the context of this thread, which has the name of a 3rd party AE plugin developer in the subject. We're not comparing to what Adobe gives you for your $30/mo. It might be painful for someone with $5K sunk into AE plugins to replace them with $5K of Fusion plugins, but it's a sunk cost, like saying your current car is much better than a car at the dealership because it doesn't cost anything. It's a reasonable response for you in your specific situation, but the dealership isn't going to be able to give you a free car just to compete with the one you already paid for. It doesn't matter whether the new car is better or worse than your existing car, it's never going to be able to compete on cost and features in such a setup.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Kays Alatrakchi

  • Posts: 513
  • Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 8:22 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostMon May 08, 2017 6:33 pm

Hey man, I didn't even start this thread. :D

I was asked what it would take to get me to switch to Fusion, and I answered. I watched a tutorial a while back about how to get motion blur in Fusion from a vector pass and I thought it was absurdly convoluted (especially since it required scripting to get Fusion to interpret the C4D vector data correctly). Maybe something changed since then? I don't have Studio, does Studio have a simple motion blur node that the free version doesn't have?

As I said, this whole exchange is moot since neither one of us has the slightest inkling at what Blackmagic is focusing on internally. I expressed some wishes which you have shot down -- fair enough, it is the internets after all.

For the time being, and for my needs, I am able to do 100% of what I need to do in AE. When I reach a point where AE is no longer a viable option, or when Fusion presents a compelling reason to switch, I will be happy to give it another try.
>>Kays Alatrakchi
www.mbkproductions.com
Wearing way more f@%ing hats than I should.
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostMon May 08, 2017 6:58 pm

Yes, the tool for motion blur is only in the Studio version.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Sander de Regt

  • Posts: 581
  • Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostMon May 08, 2017 7:25 pm

I am sorry, but you say

As I said, this whole exchange is moot since neither one of us has the slightest inkling at what Blackmagic is focusing on internally.


after you said

My guess is that Grant Petty is well aware of this and has engineers working on a solution as we speak.


so either you have an inkling or you don't and please don't consider Chad's very insightful and well explained positions as 'shooting you down'. He is an actual software developer with direct insight into how plug-in sales are affected by the amount of users and what type of users they are.
He's been nothing but helpful and thus a far cry from 'the internets' as you put it.

Believe it or not, we're all here to help.
Offline
User avatar

michael vorberg

  • Posts: 728
  • Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 8:47 pm
  • Location: stuttgart, germany

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostMon May 08, 2017 8:14 pm

Kays Alatrakchi wrote:Hey man, I didn't even start this thread. :D

I was asked what it would take to get me to switch to Fusion, and I answered. I watched a tutorial a while back about how to get motion blur in Fusion from a vector pass and I thought it was absurdly convoluted (especially since it required scripting to get Fusion to interpret the C4D vector data correctly). Maybe something changed since then? I don't have Studio, does Studio have a simple motion blur node that the free version doesn't have?

you dont need to script anything to get the motion blur working in fusion. you may need to "massage" the vector data into the format fusion expects, but this is done with regular nodes. and this needs to be done in each software. (and i guess there is atleast a dozen formats of motion vectors out there: 0 - 1; -1 - 1; - pixel motion to + pixelmotion; ...; which one should fusion support???)

many motionblur renders depend on the "old times" when you only had 8/16bit interger in the image formats. to not lose any data they normalized the vectors. fusion expects vectors with data that represents the actual pixel motion.
either you render them the vectors in that format or you convert them into that format.

the studio version has the nodes to generate motion vectors from already existing footage to be used with the vector motion blur node.

the free version has the vector motion blur node and can be used with rendered vectors from any 3d software.
if you converted the vectors from your software to a format the fusion expects then you can save these nodes as a macro or into the Bin and reuse them everytime you need them. easier and fast!
you can even share and publish your macros to help other users!
Offline
User avatar

Bryan Ray

  • Posts: 201
  • Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:32 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostTue May 09, 2017 5:02 am

It's possible that the motion vectors in the referenced tutorial were three-dimensional, and the scripting was necessary to convert the world- or camera-space vectors to screen space for VectorMotionBlur to handle.

I don't suppose you have a link to that tutorial so we can look at it and see if it makes sense?

I doubt that's usually the case, though, as ReelSmart only uses screen-space vectors, and that's the most common way to get post blur in After Effects (and rather nice in Fusion as well, of course). I'm sure C4D's typical motion vectors are compatible with VectorMotionBlur.
Bryan Ray
http://www.bryanray.name
http://www.musevfx.com
Offline

Julian Baum

  • Posts: 39
  • Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:52 pm
  • Location: Chester, England

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostTue Jul 11, 2017 8:17 am

Out of interest, I notice Chad mentioning about the loss of tools between 6 and 7, and then 7 and 8. I am using the free version at the moment. Despite my investment in learning AE, and financial investment in plugins, I am finding Fusion much more efficient and usable, for my needs.

Obviously we all just have to wait and see what directions BMD take Fusion in, but I am curious if the tools that were lost appeared to be because of redundancy, or because they were not efficient, or maybe they don't fit with a forthcoming architecture.

Just curious.
i7 4930 3.40Ghz 64Gb DDR3
Titan Black 6Gb - Driver 384.76
Win 10 Pro 64bit
Resolve 14.5 beta 5
Offline
User avatar

Miltos Pilalitos

  • Posts: 90
  • Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 12:42 am
  • Location: Athens, Greece

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostTue Jul 11, 2017 11:08 am

Many good answers so far in this thread. No need to add a detailed analysis as most subjects were covered. Just felt like sharing a very recent personal experience.

I visited a motion graphics studio 2 days ago where they were trying to finish a TV commercial with some relatively simple graphics/vfx. What i will say is not a joke... the two hours i stayed there they were struggling to find where a key-frame offset was that was ruining a multiple layer animation.

I am not AEX expert but watching them opening layer upon layer trying to find where the monkey wrench was thrown into was hilarious and depressing at the same time. There is no way an artist would have a similar situation in Fusion. Actually, i felt i could have remade the whole shot in Fusion during those two hours without the animation problem.

So, i guess that unless you are an After Effects Ninja, working with many layers and multiple animated elements on that software can be really problematic after a certain point.

I think that for people that were lucky enough to learn Fusion as their first compositing software it is next to impossible to transition to a layer based software like AEX. They will end up with mental problems.

EDIT: I was reading both this thread and the "AEX vs Fusion" one so this post was somehow replying to both in my mind :)
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostTue Jul 11, 2017 5:25 pm

Julian Baum wrote:Out of interest, I notice Chad mentioning about the loss of tools between 6 and 7, and then 7 and 8. I am using the free version at the moment. Despite my investment in learning AE, and financial investment in plugins, I am finding Fusion much more efficient and usable, for my needs.

Obviously we all just have to wait and see what directions BMD take Fusion in, but I am curious if the tools that were lost appeared to be because of redundancy, or because they were not efficient, or maybe they don't fit with a forthcoming architecture.

Just curious.


Part of it was support and demand. One feature in particular I remember finding out was lost several months after the new version was released. The developers said something to the effect of "yeah, that hasn't been there for a while, but no one noticed, so we didn't think it was important to fix since it's obviously not being used". I can completely understand that. Fusion used to have deck control and could do tar tape backups. Some features get lost because they just aren't relevant and are hard to support. I still think the standard install includes some macros that are basically obsolete but they're easy to support.

But some features got lost because the support was too hard even if there was demand. Like the customizable UI is gone, particle Fuses are gone, etc.. Some of that you understand, like the UI and particles got massively refactored and they didn't want to hold up a release for some features that were more complex and less popular.

There's also sometimes IP issues. Like Fusion used to have marking menus, but they were dropped because there was a patent on them. The patent is expired now, however, so maybe they'll come back some day?

In the end, users need to have the flexibility to run multiple versions of the software so they can accommodate feature loss. And it helps to keep petitioning for features to return if they are important to you. Like when the "grey UI" was dropped, a lot of people complained and we got that back. If you want to see clustering or a customizable UI return, you have to make that known.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Julian Baum

  • Posts: 39
  • Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:52 pm
  • Location: Chester, England

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostTue Jul 11, 2017 8:16 pm

Interesting. Thanks Chad.
i7 4930 3.40Ghz 64Gb DDR3
Titan Black 6Gb - Driver 384.76
Win 10 Pro 64bit
Resolve 14.5 beta 5
Offline

JP Docherty

  • Posts: 44
  • Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:37 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed Jul 12, 2017 8:42 am

. . . and to further add to Chads' point - I've just noticed that Fu8 has lost the ability to cascade/float multiple comp file windows in the same instance of Fusion, something that's been around as far back as I can remember (Fu5 at least) and which I use a lot in day to day work.

see

https://www.steakunderwater.com/wesuckl ... =16&t=1356

No clue why this functionality was lost - Chad might have some idea. And not the end of the world (you can open another instance of fusion and get nearly the same functionality, but it's a bit of a hit on resources) - just one that made me wonder why it happened.
Offline

Sander de Regt

  • Posts: 581
  • Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed Jul 12, 2017 12:07 pm

Did you see my reply in that Wesuckless thread? You can get this to work - sort of - without opening a new instance of Fusion. It's not as automatic as it was before, but it is more flexible.
Offline
User avatar

Bryan Ray

  • Posts: 201
  • Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:32 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed Jul 12, 2017 3:23 pm

I imagine it has something to do with the new tabbed interface. Each comp no longer lives in a window, but as a tab of a shared window. It would be nice to be able to tear those tabs off into individual windows, restoring the lost functionality, and maybe that's something that could happen if we ask for it.
Bryan Ray
http://www.bryanray.name
http://www.musevfx.com
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed Jul 12, 2017 3:44 pm

Sander de Regt wrote:Did you see my reply in that Wesuckless thread? You can get this to work - sort of - without opening a new instance of Fusion. It's not as automatic as it was before, but it is more flexible.


Did you manage to get the full interface rebuilt? Like I couldn't get the transport controls working, but maybe that's just me. If this works, I wonder if you can make a comp script that builds this for you.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1481
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed Jul 12, 2017 3:46 pm

Bryan Ray wrote:I imagine it has something to do with the new tabbed interface.


More like MDI is a MFC thing, and maybe QT didn't have anything to replace it?

It is a bit strange as monitors are getting larger and higher resolution and cheaper, our software is less able to use all the real estate.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Sander de Regt

  • Posts: 581
  • Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostWed Jul 12, 2017 6:51 pm

Did you manage to get the full interface rebuilt? Like I couldn't get the transport controls working, but maybe that's just me. If this works, I wonder if you can make a comp script that builds this for you.


I didn't try to rebuild the whole thing, since I was just checking whether or not the principal worked.
I did manage to get transport controls working - more or less - I don't think Fusion 8 supports viewing sequences in the transport controls any longer. It did work with an AVI though.

I have a feeling there's a way to come really close to rebuilding a working, floating, resizable composition.
Offline

Carmi Weinzweig

  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 10:57 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostThu Aug 10, 2017 3:44 pm

We have given one of our artists Fusion 9 Studio to evaluate, so I will post his response when he finishes. In the meantime, I am curious if the new response eliminates the need for third party trackers (PFtrack/SynthEyes/MochaPro), and if there are other changes that would improve its use as an After Effects replacement?
Offline
User avatar

Bryan Ray

  • Posts: 201
  • Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:32 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostThu Aug 10, 2017 6:37 pm

I wouldn't say its a replacement for a dedicated tracking program. The 3D tracker feels pretty solid to me, and I'd say it's easily as good as the last time I used the ones in AE and Nuke. But that's been five years or so; they may have improved. The planar tracker doesn't work as well as Nuke's did five years ago, but the user experience is way better.

The additional features and power of a dedicated program definitely make it worthwhile to keep a seat of Syntheyes and Mocha around. I doubt Fusion's going to be doing mesh tracking or solves with a witness camera any time soon. And Mocha's still just magical sometimes.

As for "other changes..." Well, it depends on how you use After Effects. 90% of my need for AE was eliminated by Fusion's new ability to open mxf wrappers.
Bryan Ray
http://www.bryanray.name
http://www.musevfx.com
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 1874
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostFri Aug 11, 2017 2:30 am

Yes, Mocha can still surprise at times, like "what the heck did it hold on for track?".
But with decent detail, contrast and technical quality, the planar tracker in Fusion 9 is doing the job just as well.

Plus, as already mentioned here, you can have Mocha as a plug-in now, which can simplify things a bit.
I didn't always find that one to be stable in Fusion 8, need to try if it improved in 9.

There are two areas where'd I'd want to keep a seat of AE around:

– Text and graphics
(well, that's where Adobe is strong)
– Cinema4D integration
(I always struggle with bringing C4D scenes into Fusion, with AE it's a breeze)

But how much I hate their hostage taking of your old projects! We'll move a lot of our training to Fusion.
Offline

Carmi Weinzweig

  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 10:57 pm

Re: AfterEffects Tool Replacements (Red Giant, etc.)

PostFri Aug 11, 2017 4:18 pm

Uli Plank wrote:There are two areas where'd I'd want to keep a seat of AE around:

– Text and graphics
(well, that's where Adobe is strong)

Are there any plug-ins or tools one could use with Fusion to improve this?
– Cinema4D integration
(I always struggle with bringing C4D scenes into Fusion, with AE it's a breeze)

Is this something that gets easier as one does it more, is is it just a problem with integration? AE has the C4D plug in, is there any tool or plug-in that can improve the process? Is this something that BlackMagic can fix, or does Maxon have to do it?
But how much I hate their hostage taking of your old projects! We'll move a lot of our training to Fusion.

Yes, that is one of the biggest concerns. Renting software is not our favorite model for that reason.

Thanks again for your feedback.
Next

Return to Fusion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests