This content has been marked as final. Show 10 replies
They're supposed to use the same engine now, so the results should be pertty much the same.
No way. After Effects is much better. There is the "Pixel Motion" frame blending option which Premiere does not have. You can also utiize effects like "CC Wide Time" to exaggerate motion blur.
Also, I find the keyframing in After Effects much easier to use than Premiere's, but that's just my opinion.
>No way. After Effects is much better. There is the "Pixel Motion" frame blending option which Premiere does not have.
Not true. Premiere does have Pixel Motion through the time warp plug in.
Dan, I assume you haven't tried the time remapping feature in CS3 then? The whole intent of the design is that it's much easier to keyframe. You set points of interest, and the keyframes lock to that point in media time, and correctly shift as you adjust speed values between different segments. It's a much simpler paradigm than what exists in AE.
Oh, right on. I hadn't played with Time Warp in Premiere. Yes, I have tried the PPro Time Reampping, but I still find the keyframing really cumbersome. I guess I've been working with After Effects too long for this sort of thing. Can't teach an old dog, eh? I suppose I'll delve into it more deeply when the need arises.
I've been having another issue with Premiere that precludes me from using Time Remapping, Time Warp, Speed, etc: Since I upgraded to CS3, whenever I apply speed changes (of any kind) the clip are automatically deinterlaced -- whether I've checked "deinterlace" or not. Sometimes this problem goes away when I deselect Frame Blending, but more often not. Can anyone shed any light on this for me?
Will; Most people I encounter agree that the keyframing of PPRO's time remapping is much more intuitive than the AE version.
Generally the folks who like the AE version better are folks who took the time to figure it out in AE and use it there. For them, the ppro version is confusing.
I love not having to pop open AE any longer to get good quality slo mo. It took a long time to get it; but Im sure glad its there now.
After Effects is way better. Premiere doesn't have a clue how to handle interlacing, AE can handle them and create better slowmotion because of it.
They use the same engine mikko. They should produce the same results. It's only the user interface that differs.
Has anyone tried a 50 fps PAL project in Premiere, and then selecting the Field Option "interlace consecutive frames" for the slomo clips for export to 25 fps PAL video?
That seems that it should do the same thing that AE does when AE is set to separate fields.
BTW, Jim is correct. The basic slomo engine in both apps is the same (as is TimeWarp). How you set your project, interpret your footage and handle the footage on the timeline are the only variables.
Use the Time Warp effect if you want really clean slow-mo. Longer render times, but superior output.