Motion Graphics & Animation Software Buyer's Guide

Motion graphics aren't limited to lizards selling car insurance. Be it an energetic logo where text flies across a screen to a complex title sequence replete with 2D and 3D elements, viewers have come to expect the visual smorgasbord provided by today's leading graphics packages.

Fortunately, the power to produce visually stunning video sequences has never been more accessible. Just as non-linear editors and affordable cameras brought the dream of small studios to the desktop, applications like Adobe After Effects and AutoDesk Maya provide access to the power of a full visual effects studio in a box. All that's required from the average videographer is some time, some patience and some practice. (Okay, lots and lots of practice.) After that, the sky is literally the limit.

We Play Both Kinds Here

There are two basic types of motion graphics software. The first consists of video manipulation packages like Adobe After Effects or AutoDesk's Combustion. These applications are used for many things, including sweetening existing videos, creating compelling title sequences and compositing different elements into (and, if necessary, out of) a shot.

3D modeling and animation applications like Newtek's LightWave or AutoDesk's Maya make up the second kind of software. These packages are more specialized, but no less powerful. Animators use them to model, texture, animate and finally render out elements for a shot. Whether it's a virtual set, a rampaging dinosaur or even a rather gassy squirrel, these tools can create anything a producer wants.

Though 3D packages can create wonderful results by themselves, you can greatly enhance their work with additional tweaking in a motion graphics application. Conversely, even the best 2D motion graphics package lacks the ability to create a dramatic CNN-style flying logo. Each package enhances the other, so we recommend that you use them together in any studio.

Bodies in Motion

Though After Effects hasn't achieved the verb cred of its Photoshop sibling, its place as one of the most recognized motion graphics applications in the field is still solid. With a history dating back to 1993, artists have used After Effects in everything from television productions to the recent Watchmen motion comics.

For Premiere, Photoshop and other users who understand the tao of Adobe, the After Effects interface is nothing to fear. Effects are layered onto a video element to produce the desired result. If After Effects has a weakness, it's that its layer system can become messy and cumbersome in more complex shots. Following the flow of logic to create or tweak an effect can be a daunting task indeed. Fortunately, the layer system isn't the only way to go.

Right on the Nodes

Eyeon's Fusion software, while similar to Adobe After Effects in function, eschews the layer system for a node-based effects layout. Users can see the flow of effects used in the scene in a completely graphical format. No more guessing where a layer really fits in: it's right up there on the screen. Add in a feature set that has been used in Hollywood for years on films as varied as Mr. and Mrs. Smith and Master and Commander, and there is almost nothing that Fusion can't do.

Unfortunately, Fusion's professional pedigree comes at a price. With a price more than five times that of After Effects, it's one of the more expensive graphics packages currently on the market. Additionally, though there are Windows and Linux versions available, no OS X version exists. That leaves Mac users who don't care to use Boot Camp out in the cold.

Of course, After Effects, Fusion and many other packages assume that the person working with the software is a fully-trained artist. What about the videographer who doesn't have much time and just wants to throw together something quickly and inexpensively?

Fortunately, there is a solution for that, too.

Rate This Article

Rating: 1 (Poor) - 5 (Excellent)

1 2 3 4 5
How would you rate the author of this article?
How Would you rate the overall value of this article?
How would you rate the graphics?
How would you rate this article's method (i.e interview, tutorial, narrative) for explaining this topic?
How would you rate the depth and length of the article

Related Content

Sponsors