I'm somewhat new to Motion and have not ever used AE. I've seen several times, in many different threads, people mention that they use AE because Motion won't do what they need. So far, I haven't run into anything I can't do in motion; so my question is: what are all you trying to do that can't be done in Motion???

Thanks in advance,

Mark

The biggest thing I notice is when working in 2.5d (or 3d layers as both programs would call it), in motion layers don't through shadows so it doesn't look like a completed interactive scene the way it would in AE.

Also complex green screen compositing is better in After Effects or really in Shake than in Motion.

Noah

Motion does some things really well and easier than AE. The presets in Motion are great and some people can take off from these and create some amazing new effects. I happen not to be one of these people. Something about Motion puts up a mental roadblock where AE doesn't.

AE is a very well thought out program that's been around for a long time for a good reason. It provide you with many of the tools to create effects from scratch in a coherent manner. While AE has a steep learning curve, once you get past that it's a robust program. Photoshop really integrates nicely with AE.

It all depends on the sort of effect work you are doing. If you are doing graphics for shows, Motion might be the better program. I know people who do a lot of local commercial work with Motion. If you are doing matte work with motion tracking, AE probably is the better program.

Thanks all for the comments.

Jeremy, If I understand correctly, AE will project a shadow of a layer onto the layers underneath in 3d mode but Motion won't???

Noah, I would agree greenscreen in motion is laking... without a plugin that is. However, dvmatte is reported to be very much up to the task. I haven't tried it myself, but I've seen it's results and it looks very good. So AE can handle greenscreen well without a plug in???

Reason I'm asking is that I'm wondering if it's worth the effort to get and learn for an amature like myself.

In my opinion, Motion is way better for generating stuff, creating BGs and such, while AE is leaps and bounds more controllable and better for intricate mograph and compositing.

They are slightly different beasts.

In my opinion, Motion is way better for generating stuff, creating BGs and such, while AE is leaps and bounds more controllable and better for intricate mograph and compositing..

My feelings, exactly. Motion, After Effects -- and I'll through Shake in there too -- are all geared towards different tasks. They do cover some common ground, but the way they work and what they excel at doing are still very different.

My feelings, exactly. Motion, After Effects -- and I'll through Shake in there too -- are all geared towards different tasks. They do cover some common ground, but the way they work and what they excel at doing are still very different.

Mike, Jiri, Do you use both apps then??? I think you're right, but it seems to me that there is a significant overlap in what they can do and most just use one or the other for all their (completcated) effects.

Mike, Jiri, Do you use both apps then??? I think you're right, but it seems to me that there is a significant overlap in what they can do and most just use one or the other for all their (completcated) effects.

I have experimented with Shake and Motion, but have worked with After Effects more than the others. I don't use either all that much, to tell you the truth; I'm an editor, not a motion graphics or VFX artist. I'll use AE for a few transitions or relatively simple effects, that's about it so far. I am starting to take a closer look at Motion 3 (which appears to be a large improvement from v1, which was the last time I touched it) for things like chapter titles, DVD menus, etc.

If Motion is serving all your needs, and you're comfortable with Motion's methodology, then there isn't really any compelling reason to look elsewhere, IMHO.

Thanks for the comments Mike. I'm mainly just trying to learn... to paraphrase what I originally asked "what are you trying to do in Motion that is easier, better, faster in AE???". I can't count the number of post where I've seen people comment on this, and I'm just wondering what I'm missing.

I find AE to give me more control, as the behaviors in Motion seem to give things a mind of their own. However if I dont' know exactly what I want Motion is great because all the content is a great starting point. AE allows the use of expressions which is a great way to control animations and link things together to make complex animations easier.

Thanks all for the comments.

Jeremy, If I understand correctly, AE will project a shadow of a layer onto the layers underneath in 3d mode but Motion won't???


Yes. That is exactly what I am saying.