Studying unemployment, LOL.

:) Keep an eye out at GroundControl.film

@@CaseyFaris Thanks Casey!

Same thing here

Well, I'm not Casey obviously but yes, they are doing the same thing 👍 However I can really recommend splitting them up in nodes like Casey did so that your flow is more readable and you don't have to worry about ticking the box in every single color correction node you use.

@@thejokeman7819 makes sense, thanks for the reply mate!

@@kimsargenius4112 You're welcome, glad it helped! Cheers :)

Also, if I remember correctly, I think someone in the audience asked the exact same question (1:02:25), and Casey said that doing it in nodes just once vs several times through the check boxes can minimize quality degradation. Also, it has the readability benefits that come from doing the node based system.

Yes, but if you have multiples stacked, you don’t want to that multiple times.

Well according to KZfaqrs, who do tutorials, Fusion can do 95% of what After Effects can. But I don't know what it's based on. The thing with these guys (and people who do AE guides), is, that they are self taught DIY'ers. I've never actually seen a pro doing tutorials in either. 95% of all tutorials are about 2D stuff, like lower thirds text etc. AE is strong here, because that was the purpose of AE, in the first place. It's also why AE is a 2.5D compositor, while professional software like Fusion and Nuke, are true 3D compositors. Fusion is actually the oldest, going back to 1987, while AE & Nuke are from the early 90s. If you go back 15-20 years, Fusion was as big, as Nuke, and was used for VFX in Hollywood blockbusters. Movies, like "Avatar" and "2012" used Fusion, as the main compositor, but really any movie uses a number of compositors. This is because there's often many VFX companies involved in one movie, and they all use different software, and often in house software, that can't be bought. To answer your question, I'm sure Fusion can do 100% of what AE can, regarding 2D work, but some things may be more complicated to do. And for 3D work, Fusion is way more powerful, but you probably could achieve similar results, but with much more convoluted work, in AE. I'm pretty sure, that Blackmagic at some point will pick up the pace on Fusion development. They spend the time of implementing the software, from a stand-alone, and into DaVinci Resolve. Now it's time to justify the transaction, by making it an up to date compositor.

AE is 2.5D and Fusion is full 3D. Fusion has been used in thousands of movies to do VFX where AE is mostly professionally used for motion graphics only. There you go.

To be fair there is thorough documentation by Black Magic even though I personally prefer tutorials like these.

You break down the effect you wanna do 1 by 1 and then use basic nodes and daisy chain them to make complex effects.

We are freezing the frame at frame 58 basically

@@CaseyFaris hi Casey thanks! I couldn’t have hoped for anything better than the actual guy in the video to respond to my comment hahahah thanks I appreciate it! I’ve been watching a lot of your videos recently as I will be switching from FCPX to DaVinci Resolve Studio. Your videos have been so helpful! Btw, I couldn’t find a clear answer to this: If one buys Resolve Studio 18, do you also get Fusion Studio 18 or does that have to be purchased separately?

​@@PhilipZilfo The same license applies for both.

@@akyhne thank you for your reply!

@@3D_TUTS It has more advanced nodes for high end VFX for movies, if you wanna work in VFX studios to work on movies then learn Nuke. Fusion does most of what Nuke does while being a fraction of the price and it also has more motion graphics features than Nuke.

Sometimes that 404 error has to do with your VPN settings. Try turning those off.

Well, basically if you can find the tools, in the drop down menu (Shift+Space), then yes. It's basically the more complex tools, that are in the paid only version. So test, if you have the planar tracker and a few of the others available, or check them all. But I think they are.

Very basic compositing, doesn't get any easier than this.

I guess it's more for beginners. But then maybe don't call it "next-level" you know

For beginners it is next level ..

@@FBI-bj9kr then it should be like first level vfx. It's very basic basic stuff that he showed

Ok ok calm down kids.

You right tho. It's def basic, but even this is more complex than a LOT of people are used to. It's aimed at beginners, so maybe a misnomer.

😂

cool but noone does in professional vfx industry

Hmm, no it's not broken. This is how image processing works. I do agree it should probably do it by default tho, as that's what you want most of the time.

Saying that you think that step is broken really says that you know nothing about CGI yet acts like a proficient one. Instead of ranting like that, it will be much better for you to study comprehensively and don't be lazy.