The Big Ol’ Compositing Application Rundown

    When it comes to the world of post production, there are a lot of choices for the tools of the trade. Some are relatively cheap to purchase, and some you might never touch in your professional career. One thing is for sure though, it’s not the app that makes the spot, its the artist who finishes. it. Although, having a super fast machine and a toolset to take on the project’s massiveness helps too. I have compiled a list of 14 of the leading software options in the post production realm to bring some insight to those of you who think that After Effects is the only option available, or if you are interested in branching out away from our favorite app of choice into the world of nodal compositing.

      Note on the Rating System:

      “Motion Graphics” and “VFX/Compositing” are based upon how often the application is used for that task, not necessarily how well it handles that specific area of work

    • Adobe After Effects

      If you are reading this then you probably know all about After Effects, or at least know enough to know what you are getting yourself into. AE is the main compositing and motion graphics application from Adobe Systems. Part of the Adobe Production Premium Suite, it has proven to be an essential tool of freelancers and big studios alike. After Effects is a layers-based application, where it doesn’t use nodes, like a lot of other high-end compositing applications (like the ones we will look at a bit further down the list). This program is made to interact very well with the other Adobe production apps like Premiere Pro, Soundbooth, Photoshop and others. Although After Effects can’t do true 3d modeling and animation, the rest of the 3d world has made it a bit easier for you to bring your renders into AE via exporting profiles which embed camera movement, lights and different passes for compositing further down the line. With the abundance of After Effects tutorials on the web, as well as the lower price point, this has become the #1 beginner’s app of choice when it comes to starting in the mograph and VFX world.

      Motion Graphics: 10

      VFX/Compositing: 10

      Price Range: $350 (educational) $1,000 (professional)

      Learning Curve: 4 (Moderate, easy to jump in, but very extensive)

      Training Available: 10

    • The Foundry’s Nuke

      Nuke has become one of the hot tools the last couple of years, with some huge studios like Industrial Light and Magic, Weta Digital Image Engine and Framestore making the program a part of their post production pipeline. Nuke, now in version 6 and X (X has more features like the new roto paint tools, new tracker and some others), is a complete node-based post production tool. It provides a fast user experience, efficient multi-channel scanline rendering engine, and a ton of awesome tools to make things like keying, roto, and overall working with 3d compositing and imagery a much easier experience. There is also an optional plugin for Nuke called Ocula from The Foundry that aids in Stereoscopic workflow. Now, if you work with After Effects a lot and haven’t touched a node-based program this might be a little foreign to you. No fear, The Foundry has a ton of tutorials online, as well as some older DVDs from Gnomon Workshop, and classes offered at fxPHD.

      Motion Graphics: 1

      VFX/Compositing: 10

      Price Range: $3,500 – $6,000 (Nuke 6.0 or NukeX)

      Learning Curve: 6

      Training Available: 5

    • Autodesk Combustion

      Combustion hasn’t been updated since 2008, and doesn’t look like anything is planned anytime soon. It is a professional application, with a sub-professional price of, that integrates well between Maya, 3ds Max and the rest of the Autodesk line. This program is also node-based (which is the way a lot of compositing applications are), and provides a feature-rich interface with tons of tools to get the job done. Sadly, since this has been seemingly discontinued, it never really caught the attention of the tutorial boom, and there really isn’t too much training for it. You can find some on The Area at Autodesk, and some other places littered around the net, but that is about it.

      Motion Graphics: 3

      VFX/Compositing: 7

      Price Range: $995

      Learning Curve: 4

      Training Available: 2

    • Flame, Flint, Inferno

      These systems are where you are going to shell out some serious money. I say “systems” because these aren’t just software solutions that you can buy and install on any fast computer. They are built proprietary around running either Flame, Flint or Inferno. The purpose of this, is to have a super fast system that you can work on with a client right over your should asking for edits, tweaks, changes, and for you being able to perform those changes in realtime with realtime playback. No rendering, no RAM previews… you are literally able to work in realtime with feature film material. Now, as for the serious money part of it… Flame systems can be priced around $250,000, but to justify that price point, one hour sessions with a Flame artist can start at $600 an hour. Not too shabby. Of course, Flint is a little less ($85,000) and Inferno prices are more ($500,000), and the higher/lower the technology you go, the more expensive/cheaper it is going to be. Training for these systems are scarce, but they all pretty much work the same way. fxPHD has a couple of Flame courses you can take and Autodesk’s Area has a lot of tutorials there as well.

      Motion Graphics: 2

      VFX/Compositing: 10

      Price Range: $85,000 – $500,000

      Learning Curve: 7 (steep)

      Training Available: 3

    • Autodesk Smoke

      Smoke has been a buzz the last few months with it port over to Mac OS coining the name “Smack” (Smoke on Mac), but a lot of us After Effects people haven’t had the chance to mess with the program. Smoke is more editing and compositing based, and a software solution rather than the pricey options previously mentioned from Autodesk. There are actually two versions of Smoke available, the new Smoke for Mac is only $15,000, but it lacks some things like the batch tool that is included in its big brother, Smoke Advanced, which is around $40,000. The big difference between the two though is Smoke for Mac is Mac only, and Smoke Advanced is Linux based only. There isn’t any in between. Since they are only Software that brings the price down to between $15k and $40k, and more affordable for mid to larger scale studios. Now, don’t get me wrong, you still have to have a screaming system to run the software, but these applications provide a solution to compositing that you can spend a lot of time in like Nuke or Toxik to composite shots together. There is another title called Fire that is very similar to Smoke, but deals mostly in film editing and visual effects, and also is no longer shipping. Again, there isn’t much training for Smoke, but you can find some random videos littered around the net and personal blogs and such. As with all high end popular compositing solutions, fxPHD has some Smoke courses available.

      Motion Graphics: 3

      VFX/Compositing: 9

      Price Range: around $15,000 – $40,000

      Learning Curve: 5

      Training Available: 3

    • Apple Motion

      Motion has been kind of the secondary option for Apple users who have Final Cut Studio, but haven’t taken the leap to buy After Effects. It is a great peice of software with a bunch of training online and DVDs available for purchase, but it isn’t used in the post production world as widely as After Effects or Shake is. This is a piece of software that is for the consumer/prosumer market where you need to do some motion graphics, basic keying, and basic compositing… nothing really high end. You won’t see this used in any higher post houses, but it stays on top of the game as one of the top motion graphics applications among small companies and Mac enthusiasts. Like I said there is loads of training at places like AppleMotion.net and Zak Peric’s Website as well as DVD training you can purchase at stores online. Sadly, there is no way to purchase Motion on it’s own, you have to buy Final Cut Studio to get it.

      Motion Graphics: 9

      VFX/Compositing: 3

      Price Range: $999

      Learning Curve: 2

      Training Available: 7

    • Apple Shake

      A discontinued product, Apple Shake is still a favorite application among those VFX artists and compositors that like to work on the cheap, and on their Macs. Users that started with Shake still use it today, and swear by it as the best compositor they have ever used. Although it doesn’t let you have all the crazy new attributes that a compositor like Nuke or Toxik provide it still holds it’s own in the market. I mean, King Kong was composited in part with this software. It is a nodal compositor, but allows you to work in 3d space for compositing multiple different pieces of imagery together. The sad part is though, that it IS discontinued, and therefore will have no more updates, and other software will eventually (and have) overtaken it as a leader in the compositing market. It’s no doubt that in it’s day it was a powerhouse of a program, but there are more options out there. Some studios actually purchased the source code and created their own 64 bit versions so that they could keep using it in their workflow, but these won’t ever be available to the public. You can find copies of the legit version online throughout stores on the internet or Ebay, and it is relatively cheap if you really want a nodal compositor for Mac.

      Motion Graphics: 2

      VFX/Compositing: 9

      Price Range: Used from $245 (Amazon)

      Learning Curve: 4

      Training Available: 4 (Books and DVDs)

    • Autodesk Toxik (Maya Composite)

      There are a lot of mixed feelings about Toxik, but it is still one of the better pieces of compositing software out there. Some say that it is outdated and unpopular so they decided to stick it as a package with Maya called Maya Composite. Some say that Autodesk is still working on it under the hood making it a powerhouse, but one thing is for sure it is a difficult program to learn. Again, node-based like all high end compositing apps, Toxik takes advantage of being able to work in a 3d environment, camera projection, 3d integration and interoperability, and being able to work in a pipeline of 2k, 4k, and virtually any format you could think of. Toxik is not available as standalone product, but is actually only included with Maya 2010, and renamed Maya Composite, so you are going to have to get the 3d app with it unless you want to buy Toxik 2009 used instead.

      Motion Graphics: 1

      VFX/Compositing: 10

      Price Range: Around $500 for used Toxik 2009 or $3500 for Maya 2010

      Learning Curve: 8

      Training Available: 3

    • Eyeon Fusion

      Fusion, now in version 6 is another one of the more heavy hitting compositing applications on the cheaper end of the realm. When I mean cheaper, I mean it is still around $4,500, but at least were not dealing with a $60,000 price tag, right? Eyeon Software has been around for about 21 years now, and that 21 years of development has created a pretty killer product. Fusion lets you take 3D geometry into its interface, and using a nodal system, allows you to relight, texture and shade for compositing. Mix that with video, camera projections, particle generation and much more make this an amazing product in the sub-$5,000 range. Another plus is that the tutorial scene is moderate for this program, being one of the industry/prosumer tools that a lot of people use… places like CGSutra.com have a lot of tutorials, and even sites like Class on Demand have training videos available for purchase.

      Motion Graphics: 2

      VFX/Compositing: 9

      Price Range: Less than $5,000

      Learning Curve: 5

      Training Available: 4

    • fxHome

      Now, a lot of people say its the skill of the visual effects artist that makes a great film. That being said, this company’s promo for their products looks pretty good, but this is a line of applications geared toward hobbyists more than actual visual effects artists. If that’s all you are then this is probably going to be a great toolset for you to use. FxHome has 3 layers-based products: The first, CompositeLab Pro is a is the compositing application where they allow you to key, color grade, light wrap, basic roto, and animate the position of different elements. The second, EffectsLab Pro allows you to add special effects like lens flares, lasers, muzzle flashes, and particle effects. The third, VisionLab Studio combines the functions of both the previous products into one, allowing you to composite and add effects all in one application. If you are requiring more from an application, like moving in 3d space, creating motion graphics, and overall more flexibility to use elements other than images, video and the included effects, you will probably want something a little more. But like I said, if you are a hobbyist or just want to dink around with this concept, this is a great set of programs to start with for very little money.

      Motion Graphics: 1

      VFX/Compositing: 10

      Price Range: $150-$500

      Learning Curve: 1

      Traning Available: 2 (included tutorials with software)

    • If you enjoyed this post, please give it a vote on Digg or a stumble to say thanks!


Topher Welsh is TopherWelsh on Videohive
  • http://www.aetraining.weebly.com David_97

    Pretty nice… After Effects is most versatile, it seems, though.
    -David

  • http://www.tripodbg.com Stefoto

    Nice article! Some useful information here.

  • Fred70

    As one was teaching a compositing class, I find this article insightful and I thank you for it.

  • http://www.youtube.com.br/ianhpiratao IANH – BR

    Great stuff!

    After Effects Reigns!

  • Nick

    I’ve been interested with Nuke and Combustion for quite some time. I guess one day I’ll start training with those. Now I’m also interested with Smoke. Too bad I have PC.

    The article is done very well though. Gives some idea of all this software. One question, Topher: Which software do you prefer? And also: I’ve heard that they don’t use AE in movie industry. What is the reason for that? All this gives me impression that AE is merely for beginners and pros prefer something else. Is that true?

  • Peter

    What?! AE 10 for VFX/compositing? Sorry, but as soon as things get reasonably complex, you really want to be working node-based and AE’s layer-based approach, while great for motion graphics, is just not going to cut it. And the tools are by no means as advanced as those in most node-based applications, which have a lot more and better features for edge control (much better than Matte Choker etc.), spill suppression tools, keying, color matching, masking (most allow variable edge feathering nowadays) and so on.

    And flame has really some of the best motion graphics tools you can possibly get (the Action schematic kicks AE’s ass when it comes to parenting/instancing, you have real 3D objects including text, reflections, integrated 3D particles (in AE you can hardly get around buying Particular), Autopaint, source nodes, texturing, extended bicubics, and what not). So I really don’t understand that 2 rating. Also, smoke’s motion graphics toolset is a subset of flame’s toolset, so giving it more points in that area than flame really doesn’t make any sense to me at all.

    Also, I’d say flame is much easier to learn than smoke since the whole timeline-centric concept requires a lot more conceptual understanding than flame’s simple Desktop approach (i.e. take one or more clips , and then do something to them).

    And claiming that Toxik is twice as hard to learn as Shake is simply not right. Toxik is a bit more complex in some areas due to the collaboration features, but once you get some basic concepts, it becomes really intuitive, whereas Shake reveals more and more quirks the more you get into it (ever tried 3D in Shake)?

    Also, you didn’t include a usability rating once you know the application. Flame/Smoke absolutely shine in that category, allowing you to get work done quickly and having a gestural interface optimized for use with a Wacom tabled (no right-clicks required, pop-up calculator for sliders, swipe bars at the screen edges etc.). Nuke/Shake/Combustion/Toxik/Fusion are unfortunately miles behind it (but also have a different focus), and AE, while being an amazing application with great motion graphics capabilities, makes it really hard to work efficiently due to its seriously cluttered interface and lack of tools for organizing the timeline (no folders, the only option is precomposing). In flame, very few features are more than two or three clicks away, whereas in AE you already need three clicks to scroll and resize your windows to make room for the feature you are trying to access. Don’t get me wrong, I love AE and I think it’s great, I’m just saying that in terms of efficiency of use, it is unfortunately not among the best.

    • Przemion

      Fully agree, AE is not as good at composting, maybe U R able to do a lot in AE, no doubt there but, there is a trade off. How much time this will take, and how many plugins will U have to buy/use.
      About Smoke – fully agree – interface, usability, speed, makes this program just amazing.

      • http://www.vimeo.com/burningchariot Ben Morgan

        I second / third that – When your in a studio environment, especially with heavy CGi / real film compositing I’ve rarely used AfterEffects. Nuke and Fusion are up there with my top 2 by a pretty epic mile.

        I’ll allways love After Effects though.

      • http://www.visualfxtuts.com Topher Welsh
        Author

        @Peter Thanks for you insight, as for my 10 for AE’s VFX/ Compositing, I am talking about how often it is used, not how awesome it is at doing the task. I agree node-based compositing is the way to go, but you can’t dissagree that the majority of people have used, or do use AE for this task, at least to start. Especially if you can’t afford other software.

        As for Flame, I did not know about the Motion graphics tools, I am sorry, but I think of flame as a compositing/finishing station, although you may composite lots of elements together to create amazing motion graphics, you are still compositing.

        As for the Toxik/Shake claim, well I only know of what I have heard from others, like my comment below, I have had not had the luxury of trying out every program, so I took what I heard from the majority of those who do use the programs.

        I didn’t think that a Usability would be accurate, since I have never used the programs… although I DEFINITELY wish I could provide that :)

        @Przemion and @Ben Morgan, I have heard of AE being used in post studios, not always as full compositing tools, but they ARE used… a lot. Even if you don’t hear about them as much as Nuke and Smoke or the others.

    • Max Scheijen

      Totaly agree

      • http://www.visualfxtuts.com Topher Welsh
        Author

        I do admit, I haven’t had the luxury of being able to work on a Flame station, or composite with all of these programs, because, well… I don’t have a couple hundred thousand dollars to throw around.

        I researched these to the best of my ability, consulted with industry professionals and this is what I came up with. I am sorry if it doesn’t match up with your opinions.

        As for my rankings, I stand by them, in the sense of what they are used most for, not at how well they tackle the task. You can’t argue that a Flame station isn’t used LOTS more for VFX work… than motion graphics. You don’t build tons of motion graphics WITHIN Flame, you can modify them afterwards, but Flame is mainly for compositing and finishing, rather than spending hours and hours creating.

        Again, I stand by my claims, and I have done a lot of research. I welcome combatting views, but please don’t call me ignorant or tell me I don’t know what I am talking about.

        I might be an AE lover at heart, but there is room for other apps in my world.

      • http://www.visualfxtuts.com Topher Welsh
        Author

        just to be clear, the ignorant/not knowing what I am talking about is directed at the rest of the commenters, not you Peter… :)

      • Richard

        Take it from someone who has been creating and specialising in motion graphics on Flame for over 10 years that is deserves a lot more than a 2! And to give Smoke a 3 when it has virtually the same toolset is a bit odd to say the least. The main difference between Flame/Smoke and the other packages is that it doesn’t come with a bunch of presets so that you have to build things yourself which you can do very easily WITHIN flame, in other words it requires you be a designer and an operator.

  • Wizard

    look to me like a fanboy listing, and ignorant’s result

    • Anonymous Bystander

      Hey Wizard,

      You do a list with rankings. We’ll get a few thousand people reading it every week and see how many of them agree with it or disagree with it.

      You’re always going to have people who disagree, that’s what having an “opinion” is all about; otherwise it’s called “fact”. And since this list was written by one guy (Topher a.k.a. “Ignorant”) it is obviously going to be biased towards what he has perceived as more deserving of a higher rank.

      Don’t go around getting carpal tunnel by calling him ignorant, have the brains to actually say “I didn’t agree with …, and I didn’t agree with it because …”.

  • Trino

    …^ Seconded.

    I typically agree with most of your articles Topher (now there’s a loaded intro), but it seems like you don’t really use / haven’t really used enough of these to be making such claims.

    Forex, OK, Nuke’s not the best at motion graphics. Granted. I take it you’ve seen Iron Man? That HUD was created within… yep, Nuke. I’d say that’s one hell of a motion graphic right there.

    Flame as well; though dwindling in popularity, look at any good Flame artist’s reel and you’re bound to see quite a few examples of stunning motion work.

    Understanding these two above are direct examples, should just go to show that you can’t really rank something on how good the software is for specific tasks — given the right person behind the tech, you can accomplish anything on any piece of software out there. Take AE; sure, you can produce some pretty cool effects in it, but by god it gets convoluted pretty quickly. There’s a reason node-based compositors are the industry standard at this point.

    • NY

      ^same here,
      I personally doubt that you have ever used anything else apart from AE’s basic functions.
      Try working on some of the other apps before offering an opinion, Toe-Fur.
      (I am still irritated about the misleading info you gave about apps like Houdini, a couple of articles ago)

      • Anonymous Bystander

        Toe-Fur? Seriously, are we all back in grade 4 now?

        Grow up, please. Honestly. He’s providing his opinion. You probably like to express your opinion through your work, and here he is expressing it through his writing.

        “B-b-but my program is better than his!”

        We don’t care. Now go sit in the naughty corner.

    • http://www.visualfxtuts.com Topher Welsh
      Author

      @Trino I agree, its the artist that makes the art, not the program, but when I think motion graphics, I think just that… just motion graphics. While the Iron Man HUD might be a motion graphic in itself, it is just an element for a composited visual effect.

      I explained the same thing above with Flame, although you may composite and finish a lot of great motion graphics pieces in Flame, they are still composited, and more than likely the elements are created in other applications like 3d apps or whatnot.

      • NY

        After growing up a year and re-reading my idiotic post,
        i must say i was a bit harsh to you
        and i do apologize for that.

  • Carlos

    this post is incredibly biased and it forgot some other software, notably, Avid DS.

  • LRM

    Believe it or not, Blender actually has a surprisingly robust internal compositor.

    • http://www.gutsblow.com/ Satya Meka

      Except that you dont have Masks, Splines and other tools which essentially define a compositing Application. That’s what I don’t like about Blender, it has robust foundation and great capabilities, but no toolset is complete. I am not starting a flame war here, just my observation.

  • Daniel Grid

    Nice collection, AE in VFX, humm have you ever heard that AE has been used in production, I dont think so. so why 10

    • LD

      “humm have you ever heard that AE has been used in production, I dont think so.”

      Tell that to The Orphanage. Definitely the minority, but it has been in the production pipeline several big films.

    • LD

      “humm have you ever heard that AE has been used in production, I dont think so.”

      Tell that to The Orphanage. Definitely the minority, but it has been in the production pipeline of several big films.

      • LD

        Whoops. Sorry for the double post.

  • Kevin Letchford

    its unfortunate that these articals are allways written in a way that feels like theyve been wikipeidad and google with very little actual first hand experience. I think giving software rattings and scores really didnt help your course either.

    Producing content like this that will be read by high end users just feels like a mistake. I know its become fashionable for pretenders and people who dont know what theyre talking about to slag off the content for the sake off, but i think the website might be going in the wrong direction it just feels like aetuts might be running out of content. Maybe producing some tutorials that create an actual pipeline from 3d content to a compositor.

    in short the list just seems flacid, and shows very little actual knowledge, and rather just second hand opinions regurgitated and warped in the proccess.

  • Scott

    Thanks Topher,

    I appreciate the effort you put into this article. It’s great to get my mind going again thinking about the software I want to learn. If anything your article is informative and I think all the neigh sayers are just upset because they aren’t (insert personal defeceit here). Anyone who understands completely all the differences in the software and can use them all perfectly, is busy actually making movies. Those who sit around and invoke intelectual debates over minute details on aetuts have nothing better to do with their time. If an article is incorrect (let’s face it we’re all human), I believe that constructive criticism wins out over catty remarks any day. And although I am clearly participating in the latter, I think that you do good work and deserve a message of gratitude as well as someone defending the integrity of your work. Any decision in choosing software NEEDS to be researched personally, however this article is a great jumping off point.

    Thanks

  • cookie

    How do you rate an application when you don’t have experience with it.
    You were better off just not rating them.

    Smoke better than FFI for mograph?????

  • cookie

    How do you rate an application when you don’t have experience with it.
    You were better off just not rating them.
    Smoke better than FFI for mograph?????

  • cookie

    How do you rate an application when you don’t have experience with it.
    I know you meant well but you were better off just not rating them.

    Smoke better than FFI for mograph?????

  • Jan V

    How the hell could anyone give AE a 10/10 in compositing?

    And I’m sorry Topher but, 10 years of experience in compositing? I mean really compositing, not keylighting greenscreen or screening layers on top of each other.

    • Ashish

      Hey jst curious bt thn wt is ur pref for a compositing tool…i m jst a startr nd it might help

    • Ashish

      Hey jst curious bt thn wt is ur pref for a compositing tool…i m jst a startr nd it might help….

    • http://www.visualfxtuts.com Topher Welsh
      Author

      Please see how the rating system for Mograph and VFX/Compositing were judged… its not based upon how great it is at the task, but how often it is used for that.

  • Hernan

    10/10 for AE … damn dude that’s is just biased …. for motion graphics AE is good … but VFX pure compositing Flame or Nuke have a lot better tools and better workflow …

  • http://www.filmmaking.com.br Guilherme Rambo

    For general and simpler tasks I prefer After Effects. But, for “feature level” VFX compositing Nuke is the best for me, I had a lot of trouble getting used to the node compositing stuff, but now I see how It can be much better than the layer-based workflow.

  • abhay sharma

    biased to After Effects. sorry for that.
    I think your rating is based on your own imagination not on any statistical analysis.
    sorry again but I think it’s time to look beyond the boundaries.

  • http://sharpenfx.blogspot.com Alessandro Schiassi

    Seriously, Combustion is the most underrated tool ever.
    For compositing is really awesome, you can track masks (as whole object or any singular point), you can use selections, and everything else on After Effects BUT with an AWESOME timeline (the best I’ve ever see).
    For motion graphics is great too, besides external plug-ins, you can do almost everything you can do in AE.

    My ranks:

    Motion graphics: 8

    Vfx/Compositing: 9 (if AE is 10 as you said, but I’d say that your rank is a bit over…)

    Cheers!

  • http://www.thejuniorcompositor.squarespace.com Matt F

    Perhpas another variable would be:

    “Percent used in the XX industry”

    AFAIK, the only real stuff I have seen done in AE for film work is done by the Orphanage and a couple of boutique houses.

    AE is great for mo-graph and animation based stuff, but doing heavy vfx/film comps in it is like stabbing yourself in the eye with a brick

  • krish

    Excelent . I follow these ratings to learn.

  • http://www.baidu.com baidu

    Greets,

  • Tristan

    Nice write-up, but not sure how you arrived at your numerical rating system.

    As a point of comparison, the VFX Talk forums (which deal almost exclusively in compositing, no MoGraph) Break down to about 4,000 posts on Nuke, 1,000 on Fusion, and 700 on AE, which would roughly reflect my personal experience as a compositor (they’re the programs I know and use). A trawl through the Job boards shows a lot more ads posted for Nuke/Fusion/Shake Compositors than AE ones.

    AE is awesome and it definitely deserves a bigger slice of the compositing pie, but a score of 10/10/10 sounds a bit like wishful thinking. I guess, on an AE tuts website there’s going to be a bit of bias ;)

    I’d also say Nuke deserves more than a 5 for training material – it’s very extensive and mostly free. AE training actually suffers from a bit of over-exposure in that there are a lot of very poor quality “tutorials” on youtube that can sometimes make finding a good one a little tricky.

    Still, good job. You we’re always going to get flamed with this post – it is the internet, after all.

  • Vinnie K

    Ok, just read the article and comments…. This is typicle forum chit chat. For… Against… For… Against…

    I use AE, even have the guts to say pretty experienced too. AE has great tools, third party or not, amazing userfriendly interface, amazing integration with Mocha, Photoshop etc and offers high quality outputs where 90% of all TV networkstations would be happy with.

    Now, instead of some members here, let’s say you DON’T have the privilige of working for a company, like Digital Domain, and have acces to $40.000 + software. Then AE beats the shit out off every motion graphic/vfx software program. Compared to any program within the same budget.

    But, i am NOT saying all these expensive programs are worse. They are great. Which is TOTALLY logical.

    Why would anyone suggest a BMW 330i gives the same experience as a Ferrari 430?

    The only point I am making is that, if your not working on a Blockbusterfilm like Transformers or Pirates of the Caribean, AE is going to get you so extremely far in such a short time with amazing high quality video’s.

    I respect everybody’s opinion and understand Nuke, Flame, Smoke etc is more detailed. Just feel like AE is not getting the credits it should get in the Pro VFX world.

    Good luck to all of you.

    Vinnie K

  • Geffen

    I know this post is super old, but is there a new one? The new hitfilm from fxhome is hundreds of times better than visionlab. What about Blender? You focus on super expensive apps but blender 2.63 is free, a bit more difficult to use but it has hundreds of tutorials. Check out Andrew Price, he’s top dog. Blender is node based, and has 3d modeling and animation as well as professional compositing with 3d motion tracking much much more and also video editing.

  • shibata

    “I think your rating is based on your own imagination not on any statistical analysis” [2]