FCPS2 with Shake or After Effects?

sfoster

sfoster

Well-known member
I have Final Cut Pro Studio 2 and I can't decide whether I should get Shake, or After Effects. I've always heard about AE and have seen some of it in action, but I've been told that if I have FCPS2 and Shake, I can do everything I can do in After effects! Is this true? I'm trying to decide which to buy, any suggestions?
 
Are you looking to be an independent person or are you looking to learn for eventually going into the workforce? Do you have previous experience in compositing at all with any program?

I don't know a lot of editing facilities that own/use Shake (largely because of its $$$ before it was ruled end of life by Apple and then had the huge price drop). But then there are some that certainly do. So if you're looking to learn to work in specific places, do your research and learn what will best help you.

If this is all about you being an independent setup, then I would decide it based upon past experiences with compositing. The less experience you have the more I would lean towards After Effects. It has a simpler learning curve, loads of tutorials out there, and loads of plug-ins/add-ons. There is a significant user base out there for it on the open web. Also, it is still in full production and being updated.

If you've comfortable in Shake's nodal environment, and are willing to deal with the learning curve, its a solid compositor in its own right. I prefer the nodal environment of Shake to the layers of AE myself (though haven't seen the CS3 AE, not sure if it now offers a nodal view or not). The main issue with it though is that its now no longer being developed. Apple is said to be replacing it with something "better," but what and when is unknown. And will they continue on with the nodal interface or go layered like After Effects? I don't think it plays vastly better with FCP (versus AE) that I'd recommend it just because you have FCP. Apple simply bought Shake, they never developed it in the first place, so its not designed to integrate like say FCP-Motion or Premiere Pro-After Effects.

Cheers.
 
As Varicam said, it depends on what you are looking to do. If all you are interested in is compositing type stuff then both would pretty much work equally well, AFAIk. But if you wanted to do motion gfx type stuff as well then AE would be a better route to go. Also, are you okay w/spending a good chunk of time learning a dead program? As far as which would make your more marketable professionally? I think AE is the answer to that question.

-A
 
They are two pretty different programs.

High end compositing work used to be done on Shake. It has since been...killed if you will. Still used.

However, you might want to look into Nuke by the Foundry for High End work. For motion graphics, use AE. Since that has the ability to create motion graphics. Whereas Nuke and Shake are primarily compositing only.

So if you want to build effects. Use AE. If you want to composite professional stuff, go with Nuke rather than Shake. It will pay off in the long run.
 
I'll throw another into the mix.

Motion 3 is far closer to AfterEffects than most people want to admit.

AND you won't be tied to re-learning a method. Learn Motion. Buy Shake. Leave the expensive AE until you get a job.

CaptM
 
Well after reading all those posts, I'm still not at a deciding point. Motion 3 does a lot of the stuff AE does and that is why I was considering buying shake. Nuke might be better suited for me just because it is being developed, but shake is much cheaper. I don't mind a learning curve, but there are tones of tutorials for AE, not to mention the stuff I just read in Stu Maschwitz's book DV Rebel, really make me want AE just to make things easier. By the way, I'm an indy filmmaker looking to have theatrical screenings of my work, so I need something that will hold up in a theater. I'm basically learning as much as I can myself. When it comes down to it, I probably will be having others do it for me because I don't expect to become professional over night, but I want to have a basic understanding of it all so I can better plan my shoots. After all, I'm primarily a Cinematographer, but a jack of all trades as most indy film makers!
 
Ok... well then, since it seems you came clean on this last post so will I.

I own studio but ONLY use FCP and DVDSP. I also have, and use quite a bit, After Effects. I love it. I can't stand Motion!!! Any type of effect I go to AE first to build.

I'm more of a manual/book learner and the documentation in print form isn't what it is with Motion and even Shake!! But yes, tons of effects and motion graphic tutorials out there. Plus, if you understand Photoshop you are that much closer to understanding AE. If you understand life on Pluto then you are that much closer to understanding Motion. If you get me.

I still use Shake quite a bit. There are things in there that can also be done in AE, but I just like doing them with the control and mental agility in Shake. Shake won't build you a motion graphic very smoothly. AE will. AE will key the heck out of a greenscreen but Shake will key it better, especially if there are some rough spots or roto-ing needs to be done.

So - throw out Motion
Buy AE and enjoy making some really cool things for your own self-enjoyment
Once your film makes it to Des Moines film festival enjoy the moment and buy Shake. You want to see how Shake users live? Lock yourself in a closet for 14 hours a day and try to roto out sky from behind a leafy tree and grass.

DO IT!! AE RULES, MOTION DROOLS!

CaptM
 
I would just like to put in a good word for Shake. It's a totally high-end package, and the nodal interface is really the ideal way to do compositing. Check out,
for example, this fantastic textbook on compositing:
http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Compositing-Film-Video-Second/dp/024080760X
All the examples are given in nodal form. It just makes a lot of sense.

That said, if you want to get a job doing motion graphics and compositing,
then a solid knowledge of AE is essential.

Actually, for this type of question, I would go to a more specialized discussion,
like www.fxshare.com or www.cgsociety.org, to see what compositors are
up to.

Les
 
CaptainMench said:
AE RULES, MOTION DROOLS!
Click to expand...


I'll second that. I like Motion for TV series stuff, to build a template that I can rapidly change for episodes, but that's about it. Overall I prefer Shake, but then as mentioned, its not a motion gfx application (not my thing).

As for like Shake vs Nuke, I'd go with Shake for the home user. Unless you're looking to work for a company that owns Nuke, you don't need to spend the cash on it really. Shake's development might be done, but its usefulness is far from over.

Cheers.
 
As a Shake compositor for the last 9 years, can I throw my hat in the Shake corner too.
When Apple dropped the price, and discontinued development (I bought it at the original Mac price of £5000 several years ago, and participated in several of the beta's),
people asked me "what are you going to do now, are you pissed off?"

"Carry on comping with it"

It has every tool I could wish for in a comping package, I can comp anything with it, and it still works. If it's good enough for feature film work, then what more can you ask?

Learn to fly with it, and you'll be rewarded with top quality results.


But I wouldn't use it for graphics...
 
Last edited:
I'll chime in, too

Shake is dangerous and evil. A bit like drugs. While Motion is like fish-liver-oil:
Motion will make you look healthy, but it is a pain to swallow - even with its sugary taste. But it's really a bit like The Hoff...
Shake tastes more like drugs - like hell - but it makes you do unexpected stuff.

Shake will eat your life, kill your marriage and most probably change the way you're thinking. It will also dramatically slow down your throughput of material from maybe hours a week to hopefully a second or two.

Shake will give you bad health, weak arms and an aching head

Shake will make you interested in mathematics (and you thought you were doing art)

Shake will make you smile insanly over details when you watch films or make you laugh brutally at great art because of some f***-up in a comp.

Shake is highly addictive, and you can make good money from it.

Motion is plain stupid - but nice for making backgrounds.

AE apparently has the superiour rendering engine. I know quite a few who Autimatic Duck their FCP projects to AE for CC and final render, to get the best out of their material - just to avoid buying a da-vinci or whatnot. I haven't touched it, as I'm affraid it may have some of the same addictiveness as Shake has.

Nuke is the new Shake. I just don't want to change dope right now, if I'm not forced to.

Gunleik
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top