What I want to know is how in the world Adobe missed this workflow need (I'll be as bold to say common sense requirement) in their roll out of CC that is only a week old. No offense intended to you as the author of this "enhancement" but the idea of shelling out another $60-$80 on something that essentially addresses poor design infuriates me. Having used the new Cineware, it's painfully obvious how effective this plugin will be in the workflow.
One of the greatest things about After Effects is that it allows third party developers to "fill in the gaps". This way you don't need to wait for Adobe to address every little need/request and everyone benefits. Also keep in mind that even though you are paying extra, you are supporting a small developer and not paying Adobe extra for something they didn't do ;-)
And glad you find the tool useful. We sure do as well!
One of the greatest things about After Effects is that it allows third party developers to "fill in the gaps". This way you don't need to wait for Adobe to address every little need/request and everyone benefits. Also keep in mind that even though you are paying extra, you are supporting a small developer and not paying Adobe extra for something they didn't do ;-)
And glad you find the tool useful. We sure do as well!
Haha, first thought was how irriated we all WOULDN'T be had Mathias not developed this tool. And to answer anyone's comment about how "obvious" any design or feature - remember the egg riddle? How do you crush an egg with one hand? **silence** Proceed to slam egg on table with one hand. The answer to that riddle is obvious AFTER you see it demonstrated to you. I doubt the Adobe team or Maxon people thought of this as a problem when they were testing it on 16 core machines with 64gb of RAM and the biggest beef Nvidia has to offer. That's being facetious, I know, and the real answer to why it's not in there is time and another CC update.
so... basically your plugin creates .tiff sequences and put them into a sub-comp, am i right? 80 bucks are quite expensive for these basic commands...
That's not what this tool does. Watch the video tutorials to familiarize yourself with what it does. It is a massive workflow improvement that will save you hours of time and let you work much faster.
Does is happen before or after the dialog appears where you can choose the proxy files? If it is after, what does the dialog look like? Some screenshots are also often helpful.
The more we know, the quicker we will be able to solve the issue.
Hi Valeri, thanks a lot for the feedback. If it worked after a reinstall of AE, this really looks like the scripting interface of AE was broken. This unfortunately happens sometimes, for example if you update your OS. Good to hear that it is working now :-)
Hi Uwe, CINEWAREproxy uses the CINEWARE plugin (developed by Maxon) for all rendering. Hence, the question is whether the CINEWARE plugin supports your plugin.
I haven't tried this myself, but in the section "Can I render any CINEMA 4D scene in After Effects?" at http://www.maxon.net/products/cineware-cinema-4d-lite/faq.html they say: "Most CINEMA 4D Studio features are supported, with the exception of post render effects, XRefs, Physical Render and Sketch and Toon. 3rd-party plugins are also not supported."
Hi Im thinking about purchasing this but Id like to know does this speed up the actual final render time or just the workflow? Because cineware final render times are hideous. It takes me 8 hours to render 4 sec animation.
Hi Ben, it does not change the time for final renders. It just speeds up your workflow, since you can better decide when to rerender instead of relying on AEs caching mechanism which might rerender things more often then you need.
yes, it also works with the Lite version that comes with Ae. To make sure it fits into your workflow, please use the free trial version before you purchase the tool.
It's surprising how a powerful software like After Effects is distributed through a separate subscription model, often requiring the purchase of expensive additional plug-ins from third parties to complete the work adequately. These plug-ins, while offering additional functionalities, sometimes may not justify their price and might not be utilized in large-scale projects like those at Marvel.
Let's also consider Cinema 4D, which provides better integration with After Effects regarding format compatibility but demands a significant investment either through an annual subscription or a total purchase cost. However, free software like Blender and more advanced solutions like 3D MAYA offer a range of superior features and performance.
It's apparent that Cinema 4D seems to be a condensed program designed to streamline processes, but its price might not align with the quality and functionalities offered.
Furthermore, adding the cost of the Cineware plug-in to facilitate communication between AE and Cinema 4D is an additional factor requiring extra investment, making the creative process more complex and costly.
I find it incomprehensible how a software primarily intended for 2D work demands similar investments compared to those required by high-quality software like Blender and 3D MAYA, which offer advanced 3D functionalities and significantly superior performance. It's like wanting to buy a camel and being offered a donkey with two false humps on its back instead! This raises doubts about the actual value of the subscription at such high costs to access complete functionalities.
I, therefore, urge developers to reconsider the pricing model, making functionalities more accessible and reducing the need for excessive investments. Combatting piracy is important, but a more reasonable price and simplified access could be the keys to encourage greater legal adoption and sincere support from users.
look at the system requirements: Cineware Proxy needs After Effects CC. It does not work with CS6.
Cheers,
Mathias
Hmm. I simple re-install script and all works fine.
Thank you Mathias. I'm big fan of your scripts.
thanks a lot for the feedback. If it worked after a reinstall of AE, this really looks like the scripting interface of AE was broken. This unfortunately happens sometimes, for example if you update your OS.
Good to hear that it is working now :-)
CINEWAREproxy uses the CINEWARE plugin (developed by Maxon) for all rendering.
Hence, the question is whether the CINEWARE plugin supports your plugin.
I haven't tried this myself, but in the section "Can I render any CINEMA 4D scene in After Effects?" at
http://www.maxon.net/products/cineware-cinema-4d-lite/faq.html
they say: "Most CINEMA 4D Studio features are supported, with the exception of post
render effects, XRefs, Physical Render and Sketch and Toon. 3rd-party
plugins are also not supported."
Cheers,
Mathias
it does not change the time for final renders. It just speeds up your workflow, since you can better decide when to rerender instead of relying on AEs caching mechanism which might rerender things more often then you need.
It's surprising how a powerful software like After Effects is distributed through a separate subscription model, often requiring the purchase of expensive additional plug-ins from third parties to complete the work adequately. These plug-ins, while offering additional functionalities, sometimes may not justify their price and might not be utilized in large-scale projects like those at Marvel.
Let's also consider Cinema 4D, which provides better integration with After Effects regarding format compatibility but demands a significant investment either through an annual subscription or a total purchase cost. However, free software like Blender and more advanced solutions like 3D MAYA offer a range of superior features and performance.
It's apparent that Cinema 4D seems to be a condensed program designed to streamline processes, but its price might not align with the quality and functionalities offered.
Furthermore, adding the cost of the Cineware plug-in to facilitate communication between AE and Cinema 4D is an additional factor requiring extra investment, making the creative process more complex and costly.
I find it incomprehensible how a software primarily intended for 2D work demands similar investments compared to those required by high-quality software like Blender and 3D MAYA, which offer advanced 3D functionalities and significantly superior performance. It's like wanting to buy a camel and being offered a donkey with two false humps on its back instead! This raises doubts about the actual value of the subscription at such high costs to access complete functionalities.
I, therefore, urge developers to reconsider the pricing model, making functionalities more accessible and reducing the need for excessive investments. Combatting piracy is important, but a more reasonable price and simplified access could be the keys to encourage greater legal adoption and sincere support from users.