View Full Version : anybody use shake????

01 January 2003, 04:11 PM
anybody use shake????
hi i 'm from china.
i use shake AE premiere.
want make frands with all of u.!!!!!

Peter Reynolds
02 February 2003, 05:00 PM
I use Shake - my favourite for comp work

06 June 2004, 11:24 PM
I use shake also. I take it over any compositing program hands down. Except maybe motiongraphics

06 June 2004, 07:57 AM
I'm on Shake here - although doing more R&D than actual compositing...

06 June 2004, 08:41 AM
Shake here too :buttrock:

06 June 2004, 09:35 AM
Shake here too, but still a lot of stuff done in AE... My job isnt hardcore compositing, it is more like making intros for TV stuff

Ross Forster
06 June 2004, 12:48 PM
Using Shake here too, but anything more than "true compositing" tasks ie. motion graphics, I would look Motion.

06 June 2004, 04:00 PM
shake here too......creating 3d-FX and compositing.......

roto baggins
06 June 2004, 05:28 PM
i use shake for comping, combustion for paint and roto. plus a little flame/inferno

06 June 2004, 08:55 PM
Forgive me for being out of the loop, but can someone explain the primary differences between Shake and Motion. I realize Shake is for 2D compositing, color correction, effects, so does Shake replace Motion and then some, or do the two bring different things to the table? I always looked at Shake as head-to-head with Digital Fusion and After Effects. Motion compares too....?

roto baggins
06 June 2004, 09:55 PM
i don't see shake running against after effects and digital fusion. to me, they just don't come close.

motion is kinda like a trimmed down version of shake that is linear but its only good for motion graphics (video res stuff).

this is only my opinion...

Ross Forster
06 June 2004, 10:31 PM

Motion (

Shake (

It would be more comparible to compare Motion with After Effects (or similar package) than anything else, mainly for its ability for being pretty decent at motion graphics. Its a realtime motion graphics design application.

What you would use Motion for is not what you would use Shake for, Shake concentrates on those 'true' compositing tasks rather than the heavy motion graphics work one would usually associate with commercial could, but the workflow is orientainted elsewhere.

06 June 2004, 12:58 AM
Ross - Thanks for clearing that up.

Roto - Not sure if we're on the same page, but when you say 'they aren't close' do you mean in terms of features? I wasn't try to compare features but rather that Apple, Adobe, Eyeon, and I suppose Discreet are targeting all the same user base to use their products for motion grahpics and/or compositing work. Whether one app is preferred over another is is up to the user to figure out, but in the end all of those companies will state their product is superior. Am I making sense? :banghead:

roto baggins
06 June 2004, 01:26 AM
i follow... it's just that when i started in this industry back in 1997 i was using cineon and matador (sgi's). then i stated going to school fulltime and working parttime. at school, they were pushing after effects down my throat (for motion graphics) and i used to cineon and matador and also the look flame/inferno. then combustion came out and i liked more then afx. i do agree with that all these apps can finish shoots, but some are
ps. i never used digital fus. but i've seen the layout and the way a comp is setup. i didn't like it.

sorry if i rambled too much

06 June 2004, 08:06 AM
A lot of people seem to think of After Effects as a compositing tool - I have ever seen it used as one in the industry - I've only seen it as a motion graphics tools

Digital Fusion is certainly comparable to Shake, although people are certainly allowed to debate whether it is as good as Shake...

06 June 2004, 06:05 PM
My buddy is running Shake in his studio. I think he is the only Shake guy in my city. I've known him for years so I hang out at his studio trying to learn as much about Shake (and compositing) as possible.

The "compositing" industry seems slightly esoteric to me. Not sure if it's totally my gig as I'm more into the CG stuff that's cranked out for TV, usually done on Discreet gear, but maybe I don't have a clear picture of what Motion Graphics vs. Compositing is.

When I think of compositing I think of wire removal, color correction, fixing things, blending CG characters with real footage. Motion Graphics I think of MTV style edits (well, the stuff that appeals to me anyway) using After Effects and I suppose Apple Motion soon.

What appeals to me the most is the showcase on Discreet website for studios making commercial spots. Companies like A52 (Nissan, BMW, Nike) do some awesome edits. I suppose that falls within the scope of both motion graphcis and compositing? But it's the style of compositing that has a certain creative edge to it that's visually stunning and energetic. Not sure how one defines
what category this falls under. Of course being a Discreet artist is really niche, but I totally feel like it's my thing to aim for work at a boutique and work towards creative art director. Quick, catchy, visually stunning shorts. That seems like my sweet spot. If not Discreet, I guess After Effects, Combustion, Motion, maybe even Shake, those apps will turn out the same results but damn I don't think desktops running these apps can compete against the turn around time of Discreet shops.

To see what I'm referring to, check out the cool Real/Windows Media/Quicktime reel of A52.. here is the link. (scroll to bottom)

CGTalk Moderation
01 January 2006, 05:02 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.