Double post

When was your last experience with mFlare? There's loads of customization, as well as the ability to load your own custom image elements into the flare.

I find it terribly capable (especially at it's price). I'd like to see a side by side on features to see what it's advantages are.

Again, you can lock mFlare to Motion's lights in 3D space.

I'm not looking to win an argument here, just curious about how the two products compare.

We used both plugins two weeks, mFlare is at 1.3.7.
You have the ability to load your own created images and animations (like scratch or dirty lens surfaces) as elements in mFlare? I wasn't aware of this. Where can these be done?
You are right you can look them in 3D Space but does it also automatically use the information (size and intensity )from the 3D lights.

No argument here unless you have experience with Optical Flares, right?

Don't get me wrong I am not saying mFlare is bad product it is just Optical Flares is ahead. Which could also be of the nature of After Effects.

Like I said check out Optical Flares.

Scrubelicious wrote:
I don't think that just because we haven't seen it yet necessarily means more full-featured 3D integration won't be coming. Motion5 was a redesigned UI, recoded for 64bit, and all the hooks for rigging and tighter integration with FCPX. That's a lot of work. So if anything, Motion6 will be the real sign of where Apple sees the program going functionally.

Scrubelicious wrote:
I checked on both these points and yes, you can import custom images in mFlare to ALL the different elements. And when parented to an object or a light, the light does dim and brighten as it gets closer to the camera- a function I hadn't used yet.
Scrubelicious wrote:
True enough- but it a moot point anyway until one of the two of them is available on both platforms.


I've decided to go the Creative Cloud route and upgrade to CS6. I have no intention of ditching FCPX for Premier, but it's worth the 1 year subscription commitment to try out the new features in AE, PS.

Disproportionate Pictures wrote: This is true, but they did have allot of time.

Disproportionate Pictures wrote: Really, can you point out where I can load my custom images into mFlare (Application itself or in Motion), ether I am blind or...
Disproportionate Pictures wrote:
No this is not a bad route, as much people and myself rant about Adobe and there CS politics and workflow. It has something that not other company offering. A all in one Suite. What you can do with After Effects... just kicks ass.

Since we are on the topic there is one more plus with After Effects that one of my coworkers mentioned. The biggest benefit choosing After Effects is the FREE QUALITY Tutorials and community support you get. After thinking about he is right.

Hey All. I thought I'd post an update. I joined Adobe's Creative Cloud, then in a rash of fiscal irresponsibility, immediately downloaded Element3D and the Pro Shaders bundle.

So far, I'm very impressed with the rendering engine, and the responsiveness I'm getting on my 2011 iMac. Actually, part of the reason I was so quick to download Element3D was because the first thing I did after installing the new AE was to try out the extruded text. I typed a simple word- "TEXT" and extruded it with a slight bevel. The real time performance was atrocious. Without any texture, the extruded text would take about 5-7 seconds to refresh after a simple perspective change. I've used the faux 3D text in Motion by using a replicator along Z-space- and I can't ever remember it rendering that slowly.

Element3D on the other hand, renders blocks of text with complex textures almost instantly. Even with depth of field turned on, I was able to rotate the text with a live preview in a 1080 comp with little lag or down-rezing.

The texture and stock objects really look just as good as in the previews. I spent an hour on Turbosquid downloading some free obj and C4D files to try importing them into Element3D with varying levels of success. In many cases the models came in properly, but it seems UV maps are finicky, and not one object I downloaded came came through as pictured on Turbosquid. So I'm going to have to do some research on what Element3D requires from UV maps, to make sure that any models I might buy for jobs down the road will work.

All this said, it's an amazing plug-in, and could quite probably replace my need to keep Lightwave3D on my system. I never build objects anymore, just buy them.

One interesting point of fact about the way Element3D works though. The object that you bring in through Element3D are affected by an AE comps lights, camera movements, depth of field... HOWEVER, if you try to switch from the camera view to any other view (top, left, right, bottom, custom perspective) the object does not exist. So they aren't true 3D object IN the scene. In many ways it's a thin distinction, though it may make it difficult to place 3D objects properly in comps with other 3D elements.

So really Element3D is really generating a perfectly lifelike hologram of a 3D object in your scene. Whether it will cast/recieve shadows or reflections from other objects is therefore doubtful. This isn't to put down the plug-in. It's really remarkable and I'm thrilled to add it to by toolbox, but people should know it's limits...

When I realized that it wasn't a true 3D object in the comp, it made me think of Boris Continuum for Motion, which was able to generate 3D text in a scene (though it's in every way inferior to Element3D)



However, that plug-in COULD show the text from all view angles, not just the camera.

This just leads me to believe that a plugin like Element3D is eminently possible in Motion.

It wont, it's not a complete render engine, this is why it can operate in realtime while fully functioning 3d apps can't. This and the lack of dynamics is what made me realise it's best to stay working inside C4D.

But as you say, if your not building 3d objects anymore or for someone who doesn't do any 3d modelling its a great compromise and I'm sure we'll see some great work from it showing up in due course.

Element 3D is not designed to be a full 3D function in After Effects. the idea is to use 3D texture objects for your composite after receiving the 3D elements from the 3D department.

Disproportionate Pictures wrote:
Where can you import the custom images? After frantically not finding it I contacted motionVFX and they replied with "This is not possible at the moment but they are working on it".

Yes, I was in error on that point. You can chose between geometry and images for each element, but for now you're limited to the images that come bundled with the application. I also contacted them about it when I couldn't find it and got the same response.

Good news is they just did an update and added 50 more presets. So there are tones of elements to mix and match for now.

Okay good cause I was going crazy trying to find it... but you can do this in Optical Flare!

Ok, you've got me on that one. But it seems like it will be a short-lived advantage. The guys at MotionVFX update frequently.

I Hope we ca see a M-3d plug inn for motion
from motion VFX

I'm not sure if it's in their wheelhouse to make something like this. I don't see it coming from Video CoPilot either though, since they've shown little interest in Motion as a platform.

GilN wrote:
As far as I know not possible in this nature... but not going say more.

Optimistic I am i have to be i work with it every day .
Motion started with a big boom it went from 2d to 3d with all the basics (reflections and lights Dof) its been like that for a long time and now I'm waiting for all the creative spirit from apple to really lift it up.
its nice to do your effects and send them to your NLE (fcpx)but its also nice to pay for them and do creative staff and not deal with engineering.

Heck when motion first came out, you could import your AE projects into motion and finish them up in motion. I did this all the time before I had Particular. Basically CC Particle world has always been kind of weak. And motions particle system is pretty great. (Still lacking behind Particular 2)

Right now the ability to rig parameters is way better than the link behavior, and publishing is way better than what we had with master templates. Motion 4 and 5 is an evolution of previous versions. I hope we will see some ground breaking features like, we saw in motion 3.

The Rigging is cool but I would not go that far it is better. Don't forget there many technics that will not Rig across to FCPX.