PDA

View Full Version : Sell me on Shake


joshstanley
05-03-2005, 06:19 PM
Ok, could someone give me a diffinative answer on the advantages of Shake for compositing over After Effects. I have been compositiong in AE for a few years and I know Shake is the industry standard, but Im wondering what exactly is beeter about Shake? Is it the nodal interface, usability? Or are the actual images outputed by Shake better than AE? I have been told not to compare the two because Shake is not for animation, but exclusively for compositing, I got that. So my question is exusively about compositing. Shake (as Im sure you all know) is much more expensive than AE, but if it makes my life easier, or my projects better, Ill learn it. Any advice?

Josh

flangust
05-03-2005, 08:27 PM
I have a quite question just to add to this: Is Shake still the industry standard?? I heard for a professor of mine that Shake used to be but that Nuke is the new industry standard.

In this case I think I should be trying to learn that instead of teaching myself Shake.

rakmaya
05-03-2005, 08:56 PM
It depends on certain things you do. I am not a professional in composition. But being programmed for shake, I can tell you that the difference comes when you deal with many elements in the project. Think about this; How will you handle 20+ elements in a projects with numerous controls for each lying hidden in AE. Of course it can be done, but it becomes harder and harder. That is why large scale projects use Shake, Fusion etc... which has node based compositing.

In terms how you feel the difference in actual compositing process and difference tools each offer, I can't help you there. Someone who experience in this area will be soon here to flame you:) (just joking).

Hope it helps

Aneks
05-04-2005, 08:26 AM
and I know Shake is the industry standard,

I heard for a professor of mine that Shake used to be but that Nuke is the new industry standard.


There is no industry standar anyhting !! It really depends what sector of the industry you are talking about.

shake is very big in film compositing right now. After effects is huge in motion graphics and is also being used for a lot of film compositing too ! Although it is an awesome peice of software ...tell me the name of one another company except for DD that uses NUKE ? If you lecturer said that I would start asking him a lot more questions before making any decisions !

Learn to composite well and forget this stuff about packages. If you want a reason to learn shake its the same reason you learn maya ... there are more jobs out there that specify it as a requirement !

Shake and other node based packages makes it easier to see what is going on in complex comps especially when passing data between 'layers' or elements.

I use both shake and AE for compositing and have strong affection for both packages. I recommend keeping up with both !

joshstanley
05-04-2005, 03:09 PM
Thanks for the reply all. Aneks, to my original question, do you feel the quality of the compositing you get from shake is better than AE?

boboroshi
05-04-2005, 09:34 PM
Node based in general is a critical work flow to learn.

AE and Shake are two tools that are suited for certain things. Neither is a truly good roto package (try CuriousGFX from the Matador guys for that). But at the end of the day, they're tools in an aresenal.

I wouldn't want to do complex text animation in Shake and I wouldn't want to do massively complex layers in AEFX.

I personally enjoy the open underpinnings of Shake (ease of writing macros) as opposed to AEFX and the node view just makes more sense to me for large scale composites than the AEFX stack.

Again, they're two tools in an increasingly large aresenal. Would you dig a trench with a spoon or eat soup with a shovel? No. Find out what a tool is good for (to you) and use it. If it's not helping you get your job done, it's not worth the money.

Aneks
05-05-2005, 12:01 AM
Or are the actual images outputed by Shake better than AE?

do you feel the quality of the compositing you get from shake is better than AE?

By these question I assume you mean is there some kind of image loss or degradation in the actual compositing process that is better or worse in AE or shake !?!?

neither program should degrade your images in anyway unless you apply a filter, transform of effect. Therefore there is no difference whatever package you use ! Its not like comparing renderers from a 3d package !

Voldron
05-05-2005, 02:26 AM
Who here hopes apple with finaly decide to make a Windows based version of Shake, I know they are working on it but it is pending right now.

mummey
05-05-2005, 03:46 AM
"Why use a pistol when a cruise missile will due?" :shrug:

mummey
05-05-2005, 03:46 AM
Who here hopes apple with finaly decide to make a Windows based version of Shake, I know they are working on it but it is pending right now.

There used to be one.

Spacelord
05-05-2005, 04:54 AM
heres a good review of Shake, its by Alex Lindsay, hes a big After Effects user.
But he really likes shake, not for motion graphics but for compositing.

Only thing is you have to sign up.

http://www.dv.com/reviews/reviews_item.jhtml;jsessionid=FKLMDZ3AUJJFUQSNDBCSKHSCJUMEKJVN?category=Software&articleId=47102026&_requestid=1465

Nerra
05-05-2005, 09:27 AM
I'm also thinking of getting into shake and I to am an AE user. What is shake like for pulling mattes? I've got quite a big greenscreen project coming up and normally I would use keylight in AE but if Shake is any better for this particular job i might give it a try.

beaker
05-05-2005, 11:10 AM
Who here hopes apple with finaly decide to make a Windows based version of Shake, I know they are working on it but it is pending right now.Shake was on windows up till version 2.5. It was canned after that. There is no chance of it ever being on windows again.

beaker
05-05-2005, 11:12 AM
I'm also thinking of getting into shake and I to am an AE user. What is shake like for pulling mattes? I've got quite a big greenscreen project coming up and normally I would use keylight in AE but if Shake is any better for this particular job i might give it a try.Shake is fine for pulling mattes. I have used it for greenscreens on many films. Shake comes with both Keylight and Primatte. Both are very good keyers, just depends which one you prefer.

beaker
05-05-2005, 11:16 AM
Thanks for the reply all. Aneks, to my original question, do you feel the quality of the compositing you get from shake is better than AE?I have used both professionally. Pretty much, I can do 90% of the same work in AE as I can do in Shake. It will just take me 3x longer with AE unless I have another 1-2k worth of plugins and then it might only take me 1.5-2x as long. :)

The only difference in quality is that Shake allows you to work in float and AE only does 16 bit. So there is a possiblity of loosing quality when working with 10 bit log images because you end up having to clip some of that data in AE where Shake allows you to work in float which has zero loss of data.

DEATHHHHHHHHH
05-07-2005, 11:59 AM
worked on a disney's 3d animated series.. more than 22 episodes, 22 minutes each... had shake not been there, we would have screwed. each composite containing more than 125 layers & containing atleast 5-6 effects.its awsome..
i have also worked on aftereffects.
it would had taken 3 times more time to complete on afx.
and boss ur output quality depends on u & not on the software.
b bye.

akaiten
05-11-2005, 09:12 AM
I'm also considering to learn shake. As a mac-user, I've been working with AE and Combustion for the past couple years and it just seems logical to use compositing software that's specifically designed for the mac. It could be AE's out-dated interface or Combustion's uneven performance, but shake seems like the way to go...for now.

Are there any recommended tutorials online or books that some of you may have come across?

JoshKirk
10-08-2005, 07:54 PM
If not for any other reason use shake because it has some funny button icons

real
10-17-2005, 11:53 PM
Shake is something you want to learn, Even if you continue to AE. It what Beaker said.


You can do everything in AE that you can do in shake but shake makes it that much easier.


I really can't stand AE anymore, I really just love the way the flowgraph works it just makes sense to me.



it will take a while to get used to shake but once you do , there no stopping you.


real

el_diablo
10-18-2005, 03:05 PM
On the Shake vs. Nuke argument. I use both and find Nuke better thought out (not to mention more expandable), however its lack of user base makes Shake more usable right now. Just to elaborate on openenss of Nuke, I'm currently in the process of customizing Nuke as RIB generator/loader. This means you can render from Nuke node to a renderman compliant renderer. This is supposed to be used as a prop/pack pipeline.

Aruna
10-20-2005, 04:53 PM
On the Shake vs. Nuke argument. I use both and find Nuke better thought out (not to mention more expandable), however its lack of user base makes Shake more usable right now. Just to elaborate on openenss of Nuke, I'm currently in the process of customizing Nuke as RIB generator/loader. This means you can render from Nuke node to a renderman compliant renderer. This is supposed to be used as a prop/pack pipeline.

I think you'll find that not a lot of large houses use Nuke, primarily because it feeds their vfx competition, namely DD. Why buy a competitors software to keep them in business when we need the work just as much as they do? I haven't heard from any friends at other facilities using Nuke, except DD.

beaker
10-20-2005, 07:16 PM
I think you'll find that not a lot of large houses use Nuke, primarily because it feeds their vfx competition, namely DD.I doubt that has much to do with it. Pixar, Silhouette, and countless plugins are all made by people in the vfx biz. Nuke was just too late to the game and they are really bad at marketing themselves. Also they are only targeted at film where once Apple gobbled up Shake, they started adding more video tools to it appealing to that crowd.

Aruna
10-20-2005, 07:42 PM
Pixar makes Renderman, but we're not in direct competition with Pixar for visual effects. By buying Nuke, you're supporting Digital Domain, a company that competes for bids with Tippett, ILM, Imageworks, Orphanage, Dreamworks, and other large vfx companies. Someone from D2 Software pipe in and tell us that this isn't the case.

I'm not commenting on other software or plugins made by people, they're independent and don't bid on the same types of projects that the big vfx houses do.

beaker
10-20-2005, 08:20 PM
It's definitely the case, but I really don't see why this makes a difference if you compete with them and purchase their software. Pixar may not for you directly, but they do for Disney, PDI/Dreamworks and many other companies that use Prman on full cgi movies. Half the team on Silhouette Roto worked for Digital Film Works who was a small vfx botique up till a week ago. The Orphanage(elin and many others), Frantic Films(Deadline), ILM(OpenExr), Hammerhead(RasTrak), Weta (Massive, I know it is separate but still very related.). I could name many more. Many places don't care, I don't get why you would.

jeremybirn
10-20-2005, 10:12 PM
By buying Nuke, you're supporting Digital Domain, a company that competes for bids with Tippett, ILM, Imageworks, Orphanage, Dreamworks, and other large vfx companies.

I don't think that's really a factor. If anything, better connections to DD and file format compatibility for comp jobs might lead competing VFX firms to think they'd be more likely to get a lucrative 911 job subcontracted to them. But I see no evidence of a bias for or against D2 software.

Most film studios were already on Shake when Nuke was released. It seems as if DD released Nuke thinking Apple might stop upgrading Shake for Linux and studios might start shopping for a new Linux-based compositing tool. That hasn't happened, and most studios are still using Shake.

-jeremy

Aneks
10-21-2005, 12:16 AM
I have never heard of a facility referring to Nuke being owned by DD as a negative. Infact one of the places I have worked was keen to evaluate it just because it had obviously been production tested and proven. This is actually part of its marketing.

On the topic of large production companies going to nuke, WETA just bought a bunch of seats and where I work now is about to do an evaluation. We where gonna wait for a stable mac release but we are keen to try it in our pipline.

Aruna
10-21-2005, 06:49 AM
I would be all for giving Nuke a try.. Unfortunately the reason I put this out is the reason I was given. I guess we're in the position that we'd rather rely on a software package that isn't tied to a competing vfx company. On that topic, I don't think owning a particular package would make getting work subcontracted out easier or harder. Ultimately they're looking for the finished product, and could care less about what it's done on. So, no, personally I don't think that having Nuke would put us in bed with DD to get lucrative 911 work. If there was, that'd definitely be a bias!

I don't know about any of the rest of you, but we never share 2d comp work (in script or build form) with other studios. So cross studio collaboration (on the comp end) is non-existant. If we get plates, it's in cineon. For work on Mask2, we shared finished files with ILM, but that was it. For Sharkboy, we received lots of reference comps from other studios to match to, but nothing in a shake script. For 3D, once in a while we'll get models, but they'd have to get redone for our pipeline. For Matrix, we received data from Sony to do our sequences, but we rebuilt them to fit our pipeline. I guess another different point is that most of us would like to not be a subcontractor, and rather contract work out, than take stuff that other facilities have to hand off in order to finish their work.

Deke, all the software that you've mentioned, we don't use. We 'grow our own', so to speak. OpenEXR is on the horizon, but as well, it's open-source and free. There is nothing off the shelve here, except for Shake and Maya and Renderman, which I'm sure is the common staple at other large VFX houses. I'm guessing that the smaller houses without a dedicated programming department will find it easier to use all the plugins and software that you listed, and it's more cost effective for them to do that, so it that sense, I can see where you're coming from. But for us, we don't need a small tool that can do 'that thing' when we've already built one from scratch!

I should add here that I'm not in charge of getting software for my current employer, and all opinions expressed are my own. ;)

boboroshi
11-10-2005, 11:15 PM
Nuke is still $1000 more than SHake on linux and $3000 more than Shake on mac. I haven't played with shake on the new macs, but it's not exactly speedy on some of our older desktops (I really need to budget hardware for our next project).

If you're on windows, it's a mute point. Use nuke.

I personally would say "del *.*" and put linux on that and get Shake, but that's a personal opinion from someone who has yet to use nuke past a demo.

At the end of the day, regardless of platform, price, and fanboydom, the question persists: Will this tool help you meet your deadline and get paid?

Aneks
11-10-2005, 11:32 PM
Have been using shake on a dual g5 2.7ghz mainly on HD (1080p) for about 2months now. Pretty happy with performance. Wish we had RAIDs but appart from that is ok. SD is very nice. Linux version on the right box is faster no question !

We will be getting Nuke eval very soon. But apparently the osX relese is still a bit flakey so we will be getting a Dual Opteron demo Boxx.

But similar to Aruna I am not in a position to make purchasing decisions !

whalerider
12-01-2005, 12:46 AM
I heard recently that Apple does encourage people to move from the Linux to the OSX version of Shake: not just price-wise, but also by not adding/upgrading features in the Linux version. So DD might be correct..

It seems as if DD released Nuke thinking Apple might stop upgrading Shake for Linux and studios might start shopping for a new Linux-based compositing tool. That hasn't happened, and most studios are still using Shake.

-jeremy

beaker
12-01-2005, 01:18 AM
Inot just price-wise, but also by not adding/upgrading features in the Linux version.The only features that linux doesn't have is
1. Playing sound
2. free render nodes
3. Quicktime support (which was never supported in the linux version before Apple owned them)
4. Qmaster support (render management software for FCP/Dvd Studio/Compressor/Shake, etc... that comes with the osx version)

Other than that, everything else is exactly the same.

Hugh
12-01-2005, 09:31 AM
If you're on windows, it's a mute point. Use nuke.

Just to chuck another spanner in the works here.... Nobody's mentioned Fusion.....

If I were asked to choose comp software for a studio and they were running Windows, I'd go with Fusion. Linux or Mac, it'd be Shake. (It'll be interesting to see how Fusion performs when they release it on Linux - apparently soon....)

As for Nuke, over this side of the pond (well, in the UK anyway), I know nobody who's actually using it... Would be interesting to hear from anyone who knows differently....

SirRender
12-01-2005, 07:28 PM
I'm glad you brought up eyeon's Fusion. I'm going to start learning a node-based compositor app next year, but I can not seem to decide between Fusion 5 or Shake. I'm currenly on a PC, but I don't have any problems getting a Mac for Shake. Money is not the big issue here.

Any of you industry professionals have a preference between Fusion5 and Shake 4?

Yes, I'm looking for some advice.

Thanks!

Aneks
12-01-2005, 10:15 PM
Nuke for osX is looking sweet. Fusion for Linux and hopefuly (please, please, Please ! ) Mac. The landscape is changing again !

As for Nuke, over this side of the pond (well, in the UK anyway), I know nobody who's actually using it... Would be interesting to hear from anyone who knows differently....

cinesite

Any of you industry professionals have a preference between Fusion5 and Shake 4?

I like both, but there seem to be lots more shake jobs over here (Australia). Very few fusion. But there are 15 fusion jobs going at CORE dp in toronto right now ! and it seems to be popular at some of the californian studios.


Money is not the big issue here.

wish I lived in that world !

If it was just a choice over the best software I think I would go fusion as version 5 is the most refined and advanced comp app on the desktop right now. But I need to use these apps to pay my rent, so I am a shake compositor. Plus its awful nice to be off windows, especially since appe will soon be as fast PC !

beaker
12-01-2005, 10:37 PM
I'm doing a review of the Nuke dvd's for highend3d. I'm getting a windows box to review it on. Ill see if I can also get a copy of Nuke on mac and do a review of that too.

SalaTar
12-02-2005, 12:59 AM
Slap Fu5.01 in that windows box Deke

dax3d
01-17-2006, 12:07 AM
Currently, I use Fusion at work..but I was wondering about the future of Shake on Linux? I tried finding information about Shake on Linux on the site, but it seems that has actually been dropped. Are there no plans for future versions of Shake on Linux?

Also curious to hear from the crowd, which version of Shake is used more in production. Is it the Mac version or Linux version? I wasn't sure if a lot of FX houses were buying a lot of Macs specifically for Shake or not.

Have to try Nuke, it looks interesting.

Aneks
01-17-2006, 01:05 AM
I tried finding information about Shake on Linux on the site, but it seems that has actually been dropped. Are there no plans for future versions of Shake on Linux?

To the best of my knowledge shake will continue to be available for Linix for some time to come.

Also curious to hear from the crowd, which version of Shake is used more in production. Is it the Mac version or Linux version? I wasn't sure if a lot of FX houses were buying a lot of Macs specifically for Shake or not.

shake is being used a lot in production on macs. yes plenty of places are buying macs to run shake, given price difference the mac almost pays for itself. If like us you have the same artist doing broadcast design on the same box ( using photoshop and after effects as well as shake it becomes a 'no-brainer' ).

Basically performance is better on linux but there are advantages to a mac. Like they used to say about flame on sgi. it comes with the worlds most expsensive dongle... an Onyx !

beaker
01-17-2006, 08:15 AM
I tried finding information about Shake on Linux on the site, but it seems that has actually been dropped. Are there no plans for future versions of Shake on Linux?http://www.apple.com/shake/
http://www.apple.com/shake/specs.html

pixel mixer
01-17-2006, 10:44 AM
we're in the process of evaluating nuke. we already have shake on osx but i'm not happy at all. v4.0 it's just full of bugs and not quite stable. we had plenty of problems with transforms and motion blurs with paint and infinite workspace and so on. we haven't even user 3d space in shake simply because it does not look good and hardware renderer through the 9600xt (that was on my dual g5 2.7 certified with shake v4 on osx) is quite buggy, i just don't trust it.

now, nuke is more expensive but it's output looks nicer. any opinions from people that did production with it abdout stability and performance?

thank you

dax3d
01-17-2006, 05:51 PM
Thanks Aneks for the info. Wasn't aware that Macs were becoming so popular in production now...interesting to see what's ahead with the new Intel powered Macs. I could see where the price difference between Mac version and Linux version you would just buy the hardware.

Thanks Beaker for the link, I asked the wrong question. I meant to say that I couldn't find info on future versions of Shake on Linux. But thanks for the links, useful reference to have.

beaker
01-17-2006, 06:48 PM
we haven't even user 3d space in shake simply because it does not look good and hardware renderer through the 9600xt (that was on my dual g5 2.7 certified with shake v4 on osx) is quite buggy, i just don't trust it.I never use ati cards if I can help it. They are extremely buggy at opengl apps on windows and linux so I see no reason why they wouldn't be the same on osx. There are a bunch of problems with ati cards and Motion. I just say stay away from all Ati cards in professional settings. Anyways a 9600 is a really crappy card in the first place even for non opengl use.

mustique
01-22-2006, 11:20 AM
Hi guys, got a newbie Q about mixing footage.

Is Shake the only app that lets you mix 32bit - 8 bit - 24 bit footage in one composition?

Or does Fusion support that too?

chris.scherer
01-22-2006, 03:26 PM
Just adding my thoughts to the original thread:

I use shake instead of a self-coded environment to develop filters, image processes and stuff. In AFX and other apps, including shakes "over" nodes, you are handling black-boxes, but if you really need full transparency on how each pixel calculates, shake-scripting is the answer. I tried RealBasic or other coding-apps, but there the memory-management and such is often tire- or troublesome.

Lorecanth
02-01-2006, 02:04 AM
thought I'd put in a few ideas. We're running shake on a couple quad macs that are hooked into our xsan system. As far as speed is concerned shake uses all 4 cores (390%) try building out that same box with opterons and you'll quickly exceed the price of a quad mac.

One note about quality between AE and shake... shake is very clear about its concatenation abilities. AE doesn't even include the term in the manual for fear that it'll scare people.

Take a look at this story.
http://www.fxguide.com/article315.html&mode=nested

I shudder everytime I hear the word precomp.

CGTalk Moderation
02-01-2006, 02:04 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.