Return-Path: Received: from mail-qa0-f48.google.com ([209.85.216.48] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 4914973 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Tue, 04 Dec 2012 05:04:16 +0100 Received: by mail-qa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id l8so380620qaq.7 for ; Mon, 03 Dec 2012 20:08:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=1hTTjM9UlL6Bv+LbsGQUnY5A0uqIEvqQ5TcaZih6Rmc=; b=e6Qgf96qnpBEt5XfNJeyZbjZKUGP4d/fo2p17JoppxWHFNTBwwmiAtKqv9L7tUnzCb yKxWelPVGpiJNq8iWbz+cLOuIW2WMxKOQ8uFv0rkBSFuXFCTf5R4Yzq2KMZSbNtoNzaI hbI+M0dli5fe75cdS/Q1VkvdK3zvizTNZ2quGjjNYaEHX/1mbQzXFdNhnCaSqP3A4iLb z3phUDH+kIvoDhHd4KB9PKz40LHvoNboE9FPi8C9o1C/yMi5vxcwakV4tgLHtaWu3Vud 7YzAdsVXCKBO6fy5JTeawceljCQV+++vdhx5CFiEiuJymZKYJtfT+mRg7MFmtXGdC6u/ cSYA== Received: by 10.49.127.238 with SMTP id nj14mr23403061qeb.9.1354594089319; Mon, 03 Dec 2012 20:08:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.49.60.131 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 20:07:28 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Teddy Gage Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 23:07:28 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [AE] top feature requests for After Effects in 2012 To: After Effects Mail List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5da2a5823b5e04cfff031e --047d7b5da2a5823b5e04cfff031e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 To what? Motion? On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 6:02 PM, rendernyc wrote: > Theres also the commercial market, episodic, broadcast etc to name a few. > i have seen several of these companies that were using AE for comping > slowly switching completely away from AE on many projects > > > On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Chris Zwar wrote: > >> From: Tim Sassoon [mailto:tsassoon@aol.com] >> AE?s main competition now being Nuke, be mindful that AE?s continuing >> advantage will be in CREATIVE and design tasks. >> >> >> Actually I totally disagree with the first part. Granted I live and work >> in a different market on the other side of the world, and everyone's >> experiences are different, so I won't be offended by anyone who disagrees >> with me. But I see that After Effects serves (and dominates) two markets- >> motion graphics design and corporate video compositing. >> >> Nuke is a different product that serves (and dominates) a different >> market - feature film post production. No feature film company that uses >> Nuke will switch to After Effects no matter what features are added. No >> corporate video production company will switch to Nuke and lose their >> established workflows, project histories, pool of freelancers, and profit >> margins. And no-one will ever do motion graphics design in Nuke... >> >> If you think about how much resistance you see on this forum to switching >> from one OS to another (ie from Mac to Windows) even though you can run >> After Effects on both, then the resistance to switching to a whole new >> application, and workflow, will be much higher. Considering the huge cost >> and effort to change to a totally new workflow using a different >> application, I don't see the dominance of After Effects or Nuke changing in >> the markets they currently serve. The industry standards are there - Nuke >> for feature films, After Effects for corporates and motion graphics. >> >> There are small areas of overlap but I don't see the overlap to be big >> enough for them to be classed as competitors. >> >> Adobe's resources are therefore split between the needs of two markets - >> motion graphics designers and corporate video producers. If they added a >> nodal compositing feature, or if they did something really stupid like >> adding Linux support, then they're simply diverting resources from the >> markets they serve really well into areas that have no potential except to >> alienate and frustrate existing users by reducing the features and >> improvements to areas that matter. >> >> >> >> -Chris >> >> >> >> +---End of message---+ >> To unsubscribe send any message to >> > > > > -- > danny princz > > exposedideas.com > -- Animator & Editor www.teddygage.com Brooklyn --047d7b5da2a5823b5e04cfff031e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To what? Motion?

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 6= :02 PM, rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com> wrote:
Theres also the commercial=A0market,=A0episodic, broadcast etc to name a fe= w.
i have seen several of these companies that were using AE for compin= g slowly switching completely away from AE on many projects


On Mon, Dec 3, 20= 12 at 5:36 PM, Chris Zwar <chris@chriszwar.com> wrote:
=
From: Tim Sassoon [mailto:tsassoon@aol.com]
AE?s main competition now being Nuke, be mindful that AE?s continuing advan= tage will be in CREATIVE and design tasks.


Actually I totally disagree with the first part. =A0Granted I live and work= in a different market on the other side of the world, and everyone's e= xperiences are different, so I won't be offended by anyone who disagree= s with me. =A0But I see that After Effects serves (and dominates) two marke= ts- motion graphics design and corporate video compositing.

Nuke is a different product that serves (and dominates) a different market = - feature film post production. =A0No feature film company that uses Nuke w= ill switch to After Effects no matter what features are added. =A0No corpor= ate video production company will switch to Nuke and lose their established= workflows, project histories, pool of freelancers, and profit margins. =A0= And no-one will ever do motion graphics design in Nuke...

If you think about how much resistance you see on this forum to switching f= rom one OS to another (ie from Mac to Windows) even though you can run Afte= r Effects on both, then the resistance to switching to a whole new applicat= ion, and workflow, will be much higher. =A0Considering the huge cost and ef= fort to change to a totally new workflow using a different application, I d= on't see the dominance of After Effects or Nuke changing in the markets= they currently serve. =A0The industry standards are there - Nuke for featu= re films, After Effects for corporates and motion graphics.

There are small areas of overlap but I don't see the overlap to be big = enough for them to be classed as competitors.

Adobe's resources are therefore split between the needs of two markets = - motion graphics designers and corporate video producers. =A0If they added= a nodal compositing feature, or if they did something really stupid like a= dding Linux support, then they're simply diverting resources from the m= arkets they serve really well into areas that have no potential except to a= lienate and frustrate existing users by reducing the features and improveme= nts to areas that matter.



-Chris



+---End of message---+
To unsubscribe send any message to <ae-list-off@media-motion.tv>



--
danny princz

exposedideas.com



--
Animator & Editor
www.teddygage.com
Brooklyn

--047d7b5da2a5823b5e04cfff031e--