Compositing: these days, users can chose from a variety of hardware- and software-based systems

Post, Nov, 2003 by Ann Fisher

How to compare apples and oranges?

You really can't, but what you can do is look closely at similarities and differences. With compositing systems, there are more similarities than you might imagine. Manufacturers recognize that the lines are blurring between different markets so they continue to incorporate new tools and try to address an ever-evolving industry.

Granted, there are distinct lines drawn between who would purchase a half-million-dollar hardware-based compositing system or a software package for a fraction of the cost. Listen to the manufacturers themselves.

"This really depends on how much client-facing work you're doing," says John Worthington, Discreet's director of product management/DTV. "If the bulk of your work is done with the client in the room, then the software-only solutions still have a ways to go. If you don't have a client watching over your shoulder, the software-only solutions give you an incredible range of options at a very affordable price. It's becoming more and more of a price/performance trade-off' rather than a feature trade-off."

Quantel, known for its high-end hardware systems, recognizes this. The Henry has gradually evolved to the current Generation Q systems (iQ launched at NAB 2002, eQ just earlier) whose architecture seamlessly scales down to the software-only package Q Effects.

"At the moment, we see that compositing in terms of its traditional application--standard definition commercials production--is not as profitable a business as it used to be for most of our customers, so Quantel is trying to find new areas they can take their skill sets into, and that's the kind of area we're pitching our Generation Q systems, at post and digital intermediate," says Steve Owen, business manager of post and DI, noting that the eQ and iQ are not de fined as compositing systems but systems that include compositing functionality.

"eQ and iQ are very much hardware-based with open hooks. The nice thing about Q Effects is it has exactly the same user interface, same tool sets and same project formats as the bigger systems. We announced it last year but it's starting to make more and more sense now as we have more and more software tools."

"The key difference between software compositing tools and hardware-based compositing systems is the need to render versus the ability to composite in realtime," says Rick Keilty, director of 844/X product marketing at Media 100. "We spent several years and tens of millions of dollars developing hardware that would composite multiple layers of video, graphics and motion-alpha data in realtime. The result is a product called 844/X that gives digital artists the ability to visualize creative changes instantly and experiment with their content in ways never before possible."

From Isaac Genuard, Eyeon Software's Digital Fusion product manager: "Hardware/software solutions have their place, but any efficient post facility sees that a small number of expensive hardware/software systems, supported by powerful and inexpensive workstations loaded with 3D software and Digital Fusion are the best way to get the best quality and creative results.

"Digital Fusion runs anywhere, from a laptop to full blown eight-processor server. I routinely finish NTSC effects shots using nothing more than my laptop. The work is done before I even return to the office, no expensive suite required: When I get to the office I can switch the footage from the proxy on my laptop to the original Cineon scans on the SAN and get a network of 10 machines to render the full 2K source at float color depths," he adds.

On the hardware/software-based system question, Adobe's group product manager, Steve Kilisky, weighs in: "I believe there will always be a market for a high-end Flame or an Inferno, but the broader opportunities are in the software-only market. Quite frankly, for interactivity and performance, the current generation of Mac and Windows PCs will make it harder and harder for the market to continue to justify paying a premium for only a marginal performance benefit."

The new Adobe After Effects 6.0 release addresses two key markets--the visual effects artist and motion graphics designer. All users, however, will benefit from Adobe's trend toward tools integration, both with outside vendors and inside its own products.

"Historically at Adobe, applications used to develop similar functionality but did that in their own fashion. The underlying code was different," says Kilisky. "Now we've been thinking, 'How can we take our common technology and have them do it a single code base?' It makes the experience of using the products identical, but also from a development standpoint it allows us to share technologies among our products. In 6.0, the new brush engine used for paint and cloning comes from Photoshop. The new text engine is used by multiple Adobe products. Now text created in Photoshop remains fully editable when brought into After Effects. The depth of integration among the Adobe products is something that other products cannot offer.