Plugin Combination

i am upgrading fcp studio so that i can get more out my editing. i know a lot of you guys use a lot of different plug ins and 3rd party programs so i want to know if you could only spend 400 bucks what combination of plug-ins/programs would ya get in order to have a nice multi use range?

i like the lighting effect like volume matrix.
i need better transitions.
i would like to up my graphics.

thanks

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

For the money, you can't beat Shake 4.1 for $499.00. It has the best Keying, Motion Tracking and Motion Reduction plus all those other wonderful compositing features.

Hard to match those for $500.

The others are in the $900 to $1500 range, like Boris Continuum or FX or RED.

The Volumetrics plugin for $49.00 is still to be tested but looks sweet for light spills.

nattress.com film effects are superb for $100

be carefull with transition packages - most are just chock full of really cheesey, hobbyist crap. if you use a 3d cube or a particle explosion more than twice a year, a profesional editor will be sent to your office to beat you with a shovel!

the CHV collections are reasonably lean on "cheese"

look for collections of well designed gradients for use with the built in gradient wipe. video spicerack has some tasty stuff that you can back-engineer...

these are fun and super cheap:
[www.riverrockstudios.com]

are you after effects friendly? there are MANY more options at both the budget and pricey ends... and after effects is really the best way to "up" your graphics...

i could go up in budget if it would give me better functionality.
i am not AE friendly cause i have to know photo shop to use it. currently debating on classes. wish i could just use after effects but thats a hole nouther thread.

so far i am sure on the volume matrix (49.) and editors tool kit 10 (129.). still looking for some transitions, text effects and filters for style.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

i think you should sit on your money until you get all after effects ready - the VAST majority of the REALLY tasty stuff isnt a simple matter of plugins... its a combo of stuff like illustrator, photoshop and cinema4d all rolled up in after effects then dumped into fcp.

most of the "FCP only" is really really cheesey...

maybe it is cheezy but i need to upgrade/add some things so i can do more. to learn illustrator,photoshop, then AE is about 6months off. i want to start having new elements incoparated by mid feb.
you know i am not that smart. i will learm AE soon but i have 2 other programs to learn on the way there. until then ill take some very mild chedar with a few fresh veggies.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

ha ha - well put then i guess. google "final cut plugins" pretty much all the biggies are there. just a matter of which you like/can afford

for a big list of FCP plugins look here:

[www.digitalzoo.com.au]

Some very good ones in the lafcpug store

[www.lafcpug.org]

Michael Horton
-------------------

[www.riverrockstudios.com]

River Rocok Studios has a nice little $50 bundle of some stylish looks. I really like Russian Kamera and Cinemagix.

travis ballstadt
www.thrillcateditorial.com

G5DP2.5ghz, 4.5gbRAM, 2TB external SATA, Panasonic AJ-D455, G4PB1ghz, 15", 1gbRAM

i have seen a lot of them. the river rock is nice. clean looks.

i am asking your tips based on experience you have had with particular programs / plug-ins. i have purchased at least 3 programs in 1yr that after using them i felt it best that they stay on the shelf.

3 useless programs 600 dollars
4 cd rom tutorials 175 dollars
asking people who have made these same mistakes years before ...... Priceless

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

> I am asking your tips based on experience you have had with particular programs / plug-ins. i
> have purchased at least 3 programs in 1yr that after using them i felt it best that they stay
> on the shelf.
> 3 useless programs 600 dollars
> 4 cd rom tutorials 175 dollars

I could be completely off here, Jeff, but are you sure the "useless programs" aren't useless because you lacked the training to use them?

For example, I have AfterEffects. I'm a complete doofus when it comes to AE and never could pick it up. Doesn't make it useless; it just means I haven't had the time and money to invest in the training I need to use it, and I somehow can't teach myself to use it as I did Final Cut Pro, Photoshop, DVD Studio Pro, Soundtrack, and a host of other applications.

The Nattress package is something I use all the time, and even then, there are parameters in the filters I don't understand and don't have the know-how to change around. My boss wants to get Twixtor to get good slow-mo on a commercial. Would I be able to learn how to use it properly? Maybe, no idea, but I'd think it's a little reckless to just pay the $330 without testing it extensively to make sure we have the human skills to make it work at its best. And the tight deadlines for a commercial would not be conducive to that approach.

So before you spend your money, I think it's something to think about. Will these be simple "plug and play" effects, or would they require some toil to learn? If so, should you really pay hundreds of dollars to put so many of them on your computer in one go? Or just spend the $100 and buy the Nattress package (for example) and learn it well enough for it to really do its work for you? I know that one Lyric Media plugin (Shadow-Highlight) and one Digital Heaven filter I got (combined cost: $20), both of which I took time to study and learn to use, have proven invaluable to me. The Digital Heaven DH_Box plugin paid for itself after about 20 minutes of editing on one project where it featured prominently.


www.derekmok.com

Regarding the training issues, there are a lot of good training tutorials on this site, I've noticed that many of the plug-in developers have good tutorials for their products and you could try one of the many subscription training services like Lynda.com.

The nice thing about FCP's plug-in architecture is that the interface for many [if not most] plug-ins is the same so after you've had the chance to learn a couple of them its fairly straight forward learning new one. People often criticize the use of filters, but if you really get to know them you can modify and combine them to create a look that isn't instantly recognizable as a filter very efficiently. Sure if a client wants to pay the additional expense of creating a "custom" look cool, but often that isn't the case.

Also, choose your plug-ins wisely, plug-ins that will help you do your job more efficiently. For example, I do a considerable amount of green screen extraction, the filter in FCP is OK but generally unacceptable for my client so I found a filter [Conduit $149] which is like a mini Shake that opens up in FCP [or Motion] which enables me to pull great mattes quickly. Time remapping plug-ins are almost always a good investment. There's a shot that has one element that's a couple of seconds short, sure fit-to-fill might solve the problem but if there's a camera move or fast motion it might not yield the results your looking for. Having a tool that can make the footage work with the quality you need efficiently can really save your butt.

So I look for plug-ins that I can use as utilities to make my editing job easier, if they can do something to add to an effect great.

hey jeff, just out of curiosity - what are the three "useless programs"?

wayne,
carrera, memorex dvd label systems, vegas also the paul crisp plugins i only use the mattes the rest doesnt fit my stlye.

Ae will do nothing for me cause i dont know the program. however it is the program at the top of my list of things that i must learn. i plan to take some classes within a few weeks like 3week to be more accurate. i guess i am interesting in the graphics side the most. filters are good but i dont think i need to have a bunch of looks and quite unsure of when to use them. with photoshop and ae i need to get the basics. i have photo shop for 2 years or so on my cpu and i have used it less that 8 times and 4 of those i gave up. i need interface definitions and effect for photoshop b4 it will be useful. most of the video tutorial i see are for those who already know what the tools and menus are.

i can read a book but i am read dum to a certain extent. i learn better in a class/workshop environment. the dvd tutorials are great for me.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Like I said Lynda.com has great tutorials for beginners that teach the lpcation and what each feature does.

Just out of curiosity why don't you start with Motion. It is much easier to learn and get up to speed quickly.

AE is a very good program but it is a great program when you add Photoshop and Illustrator CS2, that's a lot to learn.

i do use motion but some of the overlays are a bit obvious maybe a tutorial on blending technic would help this a bit. over the last few day i have started trying wilder things with motion and doing a little reading up on blending so motion is great for right now.

this PS, AE, AI thing has arose because i have seen some things and been told some things that tell me that i am gonna have to know this program soon. its better now than later.

things like etk 10 i am getting is to get myself better adjusted to using these type elements. the dh plugins are pretty nice looking. i figure if i start using these things more it will help me in my over all understanding of editing. i am in production on different shows all the time so i need to learn under fire and a few quick plugins may give me the ability to see thier uses while learning technics to bake them from scratch.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

> i figure if i start using these things more it will help me in my over all understanding of
> editing.

Jeff, did you do the graphics work on the "Sex Sells" piece you posted? If so, I'd probably suggest using less graphics. I'm no expert on graphical design, but I saw too many elements going on in that piece, and not all of them seemed congruous, at least to me. A graphics guru like Joe would be able to tell you more definitively, but to me, the graphics seemed chaotic, as if you were trying to fit too many design elements in there. I might look into getting some more fonts as well; the ones I saw didn't seem to fit.

Just a suggestion.


www.derekmok.com

yes i did those graphics. i was trying to come up with a stock bumper/opening for that news brief that i could use in every news story we do.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Fundamentally you need to know the same sorts of things for both Motion and AE, not just the blend modes but also how to use image mattes, adjustment layers etc.

The big difference between the two is that Motion is very well suited to design motion graphics that often don't require a great deal of precision - animations are created using behaviors and simulations, not keyframes. After Effects uses keyframes for greater more precise control, they both have behaviors and both can use keyframes but Motion is easier to learn.

Once you learn the fundamentals of compositing in Motion, I think it would make learning AE easier. Neither application will make you a good designer however.

as a side note, i really dont see what it is about after effects that people are finding so darned complicated.

the compostion settings couldnt be more straightforward (they are WAY more convoluted in FCP!) and at the fundamental level [where you can achieve a TON without even getting into behaviors or cameras] is a very simple process of - 1. enable keyframes 2. move playhead 3. change value 4. render = DONE

i dont see where the confusion is...???

the confusion come spcific to me. i hardly ever use any adobe anything but reader. however i will tell you that the photoshop class i am taking is making thing a lot better. i figure i will get this in use PS for about 2 months then jump on the after effects train.

i will say this tho i dont see how i could have learned ps or ae with out a class.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Hi Wayne,

I don't understand it either, especially with AE7 and the new Adobe production suite. You learn one product you pretty much learn them all. I really like the way they have integrated there applications together, the ease at which you can share data and the consistancy between allications.

I'm having a heck of a time trying to sort through all of the steps to do the simpelist things in FCP - I find it very convoluted. But everyone keeps telling me how great FCP is so I figure its just my biases getting in the way.

Don't get me wrong, I like FCP but Apple does somethings in a very strange way and it appears that some times they do things just to be different, not better...