I’m all up for paying for software. These things take masses of time to develop and I’m sure that the money that Adobe makes allows them to up the pace of development. That’s good.
My main problem is that there’s a tendency to be constantly developing more features and nick-nacks without really addressing the core issues. After Effects desperately wants to be taken seriously as a compositing application, but next to Fusion and Nuke (which despite their much bigger price tag certainly bring in much less total revenue) After Effects pretty much sucks as a compositor.
Even this new stabilizer is a tool that Shake had in it more than 5 years ago in a more or less similar form. Rotobrush…. bingo! But AE doesn’t even have basic rotoscoping tools in it. How about attaching mask points to tracker points or masks feathered by vertex? These things are the very basics of a compositing app.
The edit-this-look-at-that needs to be taken to a whole new level, there needs to be a point tracker that can compete with Nuke’s, ideally there’d be a node base access to get under the hood and actually access the operations that AE is performing, Primatte will be bundled, there will be proper control over pre-division / multiplication and tools that have remained untouched for far too long will be upgraded… Corner Pin, Curves, Set Matte. And as far as I’m concerned, there are still RAM usage issues. I still have AE bring my entire system to a grinding halt all too regularly.
Don’t get me wrong: AE is a versatile and brilliant tool – it needs to define itself as something different to pro tools like Nuke / Fusion, rather than a cheap cousin. But I think a lot of users are beginning to realise that with paid mini-upgrades coming in every 10 months or so, After Effects is actually a lot more expensive than it appears to be on the face of it.
Think about it… the price to buy, then to bring it up to scratch, you already need a match mover, primatte, particular, Key Correct or similar. That’s brought the price up to around $2500 already.
I think that the update program needs to be much more targeted or we’re just going to end up with another piece of pointless bloatware.
Pointless (it being paid) and should be a free upgrade. Seems like they are money hungry…
+1 and good points felt … if they just add new features and charge hundreds of dollars every 6 months or whatever then that means you’d be spending many thousands over just a few years to have it, which isn’t necessary. I like to ask myself “do I Really need this new feature? or is it just an add on money grab by the software company?”.
I’m still using CS4 and it works fine for me. maybe if cs6 adds rotoscoping and a bunch of new significant features like felt says, it would be worth upgrading… but like upgrading from winxp, vista was unneccesary, win7 was a big change since 64 bit so I upgraded to that, skipped vista altogether and didn’t miss it a bit.
I use AE for what’s necessary to get the job done, not just to add bells and whistles if the software company wants to sell them… unless they’re really important and vital to workflow. cs4’s fine
In terms of what’s important….here’s an example.
I swear by CS5 because it’s so much quicker than CS4 . But I haven’t used Rotobrush once and I probably never will.
I guess it’s easier to market features, nick-nacks, add-ons etc. but ultimately, I think professional and amateur users alike would thank Adobe the most for making a program that is fast and usable in its core functionality.
Guess what? You can save a CS5 .5 project and open it in CS5 . I know it’s not like everything is solved but i like the direction they are heading.