Anyone recommend a good SFX program?

I'm looking into doing some CGI effects... you know, greenscreen shots, digital blood splatter, etc etc. Any recommendations?

Someone told me about Visionlab over at FXhome.com. Looks pretty good and a low price.

Any others that people know of and have tried?
 
You may be right, Robert. I just think of sound effects, so I wanted to be sure I wasn't going down the wrong road.

The only software I've used on Windows for developing visual elements is Blender3D and Lightwave3D. Blender3D is powerful, but the learning curve is long and steep. Lightwave is expensive if you're not planning on spending a few hundred hours doing visual effects. Those FXhome products look cool. I might have a look at their demo, sometime, myself. Really good visual effects are never easy. You need to plan the shot carefully, learn how to use your software tools, then tweak all of the details to get a realistic look.

I'm probably not much help, recommending tools. I've found the easy ones (like Vue5 Infinite), are always limiting, and leave you just short of the finish line. The robust ones take forever to learn, but I prefer the flexibility. If I had more time, I'd give the FXhome demo a run, right now. Maybe over the weekend.
 
SFX used to mean special effects, and I suppose in some cases it still does. Though most people (as oakstreet illustrates) take it to mean SOUND effects.

With the advent and outrageous growth in popularity of computer generated special effects, the VFX abbreviation is more common these days. SFX could however still refer to special effects, as in the type done mechanically, on set. But in post it's all special optical effects and special visual effects (hence the VFX abbreviation noted above).

the abbreviation that bugs me is CGI.. it makes me think of web servers and web programming, CGI = Common Gateway Interface, which is a method of handling dynamic data to and from the web server. I personally refer to all computer generated images (or the film version of CGI) as CG, so it makes sense in my head. In that sense, CG can be Computer Generated, or Computer Graphics... which, as I recall is what they USED to call it, before they started throwing that I in there mucking it all up. ;)

As for your original question... I suppose it all depends on what you intend to do. Are you looking for compositing software, or software to generate elements (3d, etc)?

As oakstreet mentioned, Blender3D and Lightwave are great for 3d, as well as a handful of others -- Blender has a good price though (FREE).

There is decent selection of compositing software available, like the FXHome stuff you mentioned (which looks impressive by the way). The biggest three are probably: Adobe has After Effects, Autodesk has Combustion (as well as Smoke, Flame and Flint, all of which used to be developed by DISCREET before autodesk bought them out), and eyeon software's Digital Fusion (or DF) which is one that a lot of VFX guys seem to be hoping will become the most widely used.. couldn't find much other info on it that their few videos of reasons to use it, here

Hope that helps a little anyway.
 
Thanks for the help guys.

Those Fusion videos were great... though I can't stand it when narrators of these types of videos constantly say "uhhh" and "uhmmm" after every sentance :grrr:

Fusion pricing is way out of my league. And like Oak said, the cheaper ones seem to fall a bit short. I'll look into After Effects. I have some experience using Premiere Pro, so maybe AE would be the best fit.

Any other suggestions of ones people have used?
 
After Effects is the industry standard compositing tool. There are plug-ins for most of the visual effects you'd want, but I've always been a little put off by the price. I enjoyed working with Combustion, when I had access to it.

My final word on all of this is that you should assume the time you spend really mastering a high end tool will probably be more significant than the license fee. Pick wisely, then commit to learning the tool. Don't jump from tool to tool so much that you never attain in-depth knowledge of any tool. Having a tool you know really well probably trumps having the "best" tool, if there is such a thing.

What I am saying is, don't just budget money for the purchase ... budget for learning resources and allocate a lot of time for getting to know your tool.
 
Ok, I can hear Spatula laughing already. You guys know what I meant.

haha.. nice.

I agree though, you need to spend the time going through tutorials and whatnot to really get a good handle on the program you're working with. I would recommend a serious look at combustion versus AE. Simply because it uses the 'nodes' method of setting up the comps, just like Apple's Shake does, and numerous others... AE has the timeline with keyframes. Both techniques work, but I'd wager that learning a node based method would lend it self to an easier transition to shake or Digital Fusion or something else that uses nodes -- prepare for the possibility of future upgrade/change as it were.

Ultimately, however, I think it's a lot like the which is better, PC or MAC, Vegas or Premiere, Avid or Final Cut, arguments... the tools all do essentially the same job, so in the end it generally comes down to personal preference (and budget)
 
Thanks for all the advice. Yeah, I am more concerned with committing to a good effects program than the actual price. You both have given me a lot to think about.

Thanks again!
 
Back
Top