DaVinci Fusion vs HitFilm

[alanthebox]

Just wondering if anyone here has experience with either (or both?) of these programs as a replacement for After Effects. Any insight is appreciated! Do they do the trick, or is After Effects still the strongest option? I mostly use AE for compositing different elements, intermediate effects, particles, and motion tracking, so, those would be my main areas of interest. I've watched quite a few YouTube reviews, but would still love to hear some first hand experiences.

Thanks in advance!

[Greenlaw]

When I was with Rhythm and Hues for 12 years, I used Fusion for all my composting and vfx work, working mostly in commercials, game cinematics, and some feature film work. I've been at Dreamworks Animation for about 6 years now, and I use After Effects and Nuke for compositing and vfx for our TV shows on Netflix and other streaming services. At home, I have a personal license of HitFilm and HitFilm plugins for After Effects; I also use Fusion and Ae at home. I can tell you a little bit about all of these.

Fusion is awesome! I still use it a lot at home, and at the current price it's a bargain! Back when I started using it, it cost nearly $5,000 and I thought it was a bargain when they gave me a discount to buy for $1,500. That was a very long time ago though, and now you can get it for $295! Fusion's great strength is that it's a nodal system and very efficient. It's a very different workflow from After Effects, which as you know, is layers based. The nice thing about Fusion is that it's easier and faster to experiment with completely different setups because you're not constrained by the linear 'top-down only' system used in After Effects. For VFX compositing, Fusion is top-notch, easy to use and learn, and I highly recommend it.

BTW, my first Moho short film 'Scareplane' was composited using Fusion. Many of the shots were comped straight from Moho output, but a few shots were constructed inside Fusion's 3D environment from Moho and LightWave renders. Fusion excels at this hybrid 2D/3D workflow.

That said, I don't think Fusion is as good for motion graphics, for example, like creating really complicated HUD displays. In my experience, if you need to do a lot of keyframe animation for your comps, node based compositors are more difficult to work with. This is where a layer based compositor like After Effects shines.

After Effects is probably my favorite compositor for cartoon animation and certain types of visual effects work. What I like about After Effects is that there are so many useful plugins that simplify certain effects that would otherwise be very complicated to create from scratch. For 2D cartoon renders specifically, there's a free suite of plugins called OLM that are an absolute must. (If you're using this with Moho, you'll want to disable anti-aliasing because these tools work best that way. When you're done applying any of the tools, just apply OLM smoother--that applies AA to your final renders as a post effect.) If you do a lot of fx work, the Red Giant suites are also a must have.

On the downside, being a layer based compositor, Ae may be easy to understand, but it's significantly harder and slower to work with when you have dozens or hundreds of layers to work with. You can manage this somewhat in Ae by creating precomps, but then you have effects an animations that are nested and not easily accessible by the main comp or other precomps. This is where a nodal composting program (like Fusion or Nuke,) can be easier and a lot more efficient to work with. With nodal compositing, anything can be branched out and connected in almost any non-linear direction. What I dislike specifically about After Effects is it has poor EXR support and its 3D environment is clunky compared to Fusion.

At work, I do all of my 2D cartoon compositing with Ae and most of my 3D compositing in Nuke. I'm lucky that my workplace provides both programs because there are definitely strengths with each one, and I use both programs every day, sometimes together on the same shots.

You didn't ask about Nuke but I'll tell you anyway. It's very similar to Fusion, and I mean VERY similar to Fusion. Except in price...Nuke is considerably more expensive. Like Fusion, Nuke is a nodal compositor, and the UI is very similar to Fusion. If your intention is to work in a big studio, Nuke is worth learning, but if you're an independent user or you work at a smaller studio, Fusion is much more affordable, and in my opinion, it's just as capable. Fortunately, if you know one of these programs, it's pretty easy to learn the other.

Hitfilm is the only one I don't have much experience with. I got it as part of a bundle for a Vegas upgrade. When I got it, there was an option to also get their suite of plugins for After Effects, and I've used these plugins way more than I have Hitfilm itself. My understanding is that Hitfilm is similar to After Effects in that it's a layers based system. Since I already have Ae, I haven't bothered to learn Hitfilm, but the plugin versions of the tools for After Effects are pretty cool. For example, when I was freelancing for B-movies, I used a tool that was specifically for creating semi-3D gun muzzle flashes. Seriously, that's all this tool did, and it did it brilliantly. When you have shots where dozens of characters are firing all sorts of weapons in the same shot, this tool seems like a godsend.

That said, I don't know what Hitfilm's EXR or 3D support is, so you'll need to research that if it's important to you.

I guess to answer your question about which is better, it really depends on what you intend to do with the compositing program. If it's for high-end compositing with a lot of layers, especially CG and live-action, and you want to use an advanced animation format like EXR, then you should go for Fusion or Nuke. (Definitely Fusion if you're on a budget.)

After Effects can do a lot of the same things as far as live action and VFX compositing go, but it's clunky for certain advanced techniques and for supporting formats like EXR. But for motion graphics animation, and 3rd party plugin support, it's fantastic! If you need compositing for 2D cartoon comps and vfx, I say definitely stick with Ae.

Actually, you asked about Davinci, which is a grading and video editing program that happens to have a version of Fusion built into a tab. My understanding is that the built-in Fusion has some limitations compared to the standalone Fusion Studio, which is what I use. From what I've read, the Davinci version Fusion is fine for simpler comps to insert into your video edits, but if you need to create complex comps and VFX, then you really want to use the standalone version. BTW, I think my Fusion Studio dongle will let me run Davinci for free. I haven't tried that but that's what I've read in their forums, so maybe something to keep in mind. (I haven't bothered with Davinci because, as I said earlier, I use Vegas Pro for video editing.)

Hope this info helps.

P.S., Moho, of course, doesn't output EXR format, but I've been pressing Mike for a few years to please, please start supporting it. In these days of high def media, we need Moho to support higher color bit depths like other animation and compositing programs can. And with EXR, there's the option to embed a lot of useful data that can be used by compositing programs like Fusion, Nuke and After Effects.

[SimplSam]

I only play with both Fusion and Hitfilm. But keep telling myself I need to use Fusion (in Davinci Resolve) more. I personally would prob only end-up using HitFilm for its plugin effects - if I was making something more film-like with significant vfx requirements.

After Effects has many great features & advantages - being hugely popular, powerful and pretty much standard everywhere - which leads to lots of knowledge, examples, plugins, interoperability - etc. etc. I used to use Photoshop, Premiere and After Effects, but weaned myself off of them a few years ago. I still occasionally work my way through some Ae examples & tuts - when I want to learn how some visual miracle was made.

I use Davinci Resolve (w/ Fusion) for NLE comps, video/audio effects, some color correcting/grading and occasionally motion tracking. Resolve uses Fusion under the hood for many of its built in effects, and you can easily dive into Fusions' more advanced node based system if so desired. You can also create Fusion templates that can then be re-used as prepackaged effects in Resolve. I like the fact that I have the power of Fusion at my fingertips, but rarely exploit it.

I would also like to throw a fourth hat into the ring - and that is Blender. My weapons of choice are Moho, Blender and Davinci Resolve.

Blender is hugely capable & extensible and I struggle to keep up with its development progress. There are literally new feature enhancements every day, and Blender is uniquely positioned to truly blur the lines between 2D & 3D. It also has a built in evolving Video Editor, which I don't use.

Now having trumpeted Blender, I have to say it can still feel rough around the edges, sometimes illogical, overwhelming and not so user friendly. You are presented with lots of control settings which can also mean lots of settings to mess-up. You have early (virtually immediate) access to new features, but also early access to bugs - and a tool that you use today can sometimes feel quite different to the same tool you were using a few months ago. So you end-up feeling like you are on a bit of a journey with the app, but I think it's an interesting and worthwhile journey overall.

[Greenlaw]

Oh, yes, Blender! The development pace for Blender's new features and UI improvements has been astonishing lately! It's always been available at places I've worked at but I never really used it. Sometimes, a co-worker would use it for specific tasks, and I was always impressed.

I want spend a little time learning it each day so I can at least find my way around the program when I do need it. I could have used one of its new features earlier this week, but right now I barely know how to navigate the UI. Sigh!

[alanthebox]

Thanks for the detailed write-ups!

I've played around with DaVinci and really like the idea of being able to edit, mix audio, and apply effects all in one place, but I'm a little wary about node systems. I've always found them to be a bit daunting. The stacked/layered approach in HitFilm appeared to be more similar to AE, which does make it more attractive to me. I'm thinking if I can just commit to learning how to use nodes in Fusion, it'll probably a better package overall for me to learn. And yes, I've played around with Blender for a few years but seem to have a hard time retaining the UI and workflow. I do have a project coming up which I think will benefit from using Blender/Grease Pencil, so, I'm looking forward to having an opportunity to sit back down with Blender and really get things sorted out.

Thanks again!

[Greenlaw]

If you've never worked with nodes before, it may seem intimidating at first, but it's actually very easy once you get the hang of it. If you know how a flow chart works, it's the same thing: Start at the top, follow the path and make stops to do stuff, and end your journey at the bottom. Snakes & Ladders? Maybe a stretch but kinda the same thing. The best way to work with nodes is to keep the flow of your comp clearly and neatly structured, and follow a top-down, left-to-right path.

Here's a quick general explanation of how it works...

Nodal compositing is compositing by connecting a network of modules called 'nodes'. You start with one or more nodes that load images, followed by nodes that do something to the images, like apply filters or merge images, and then one or more nodes that save the images at the end (or ends...like a 'choose your own adventure' game, you can have multiple 'ends' in a nodal comp.) That's pretty much it.

But if I haven't lost you yet, here's a little more info...

A 'node' is typically represented by a small graphical box with its name on it. Each node does something special, and they are added to an empty workspace as you need them.

Each node has a connector you can pull out of the box and connect to another node. This tells the program which direction the 'flow' goes. Depending on the purpose of a node, it can connect to one or more other nodes, and each node can receive connections from one or nodes.

This system makes it very easy to change how the nodes effect an image, and you can see your changes immediately and interactively in a viewer window. To view the result of any node in your comp in Fusion, you simply drag that node into a viewer window. In Nuke, you need to add a 'viewer' node, and that node is displays any node it's connected to in a viewer window. In either of these programs, you can have multiple viewer windows to compare results, and you can even use a split screen viewer to wipe between any two results. Because it's so easy to make changes and see the results, this system encourages experimentation. Nodes can also be reused easily by branching to several nodes; for example, create one mask node and plug that into multiple tool nodes or merge nodes; there's absolutely no need to duplicate it over and over again like you might in a layer based compositing program. This level of flexibility and efficiency is why nodal compositing is preferred in many high end productions, especially where the comps can get really complicated.

And, a little more info...

Most nodal compositing programs have an input and output nodes. In Fusion, these are called the Loader and Saver nodes, and in Nuke they're the Read and Write nodes. How they work is pretty straightforward: the first one imports your image, video, animation, etc., and the second one saves your image, video, animation, etc. Even with just these two nodes, there are many different ways to manipulate the data. For example...

When you connect an input node to multiple output nodes, you can have each node save in a different format.

Or, you can follow each branch from the input node with different filter or fx nodes, and have then have each output node save a different versions of the file.

There are nodes for almost anything you can think of: merging, adding fx, masking, 3D, tracking, adding motion blur, adding depth fx, re-lighting a 3D scene, morphing, retiming, etc. And if a node you want doesn't exist, you can probably assemble one using existing nodes, and save that as a new node.

I hope this helps you get started. Granted, what I described is pretty generic but it applies to pretty much any nodal system, whether it's Fusion, Nuke, or Toon Boom Harmony, and even some 3D animation programs. My advice it to start with some small simple projects, and then experiment by inserting new nodes to your flow and seeing what happens.

And to be clear, I don't necessarily think nodal compositing is always the better solution. There are many situations where a layer based compositing system can be quicker and easier to work with. It's great when you have access to both types of composting programs, but if you can only choose one, it should be the one that works best for the type of work you typically do. (Described in an earlier post.)

Good luck!

[arglborps]

If you happen to be on a Mac, you might want to check out Apple Motion. It's 50 bucks, and 85% of what you can do in After Effects, you can do in Motion, but way, way faster. Not only faster in setting it all up, but even masking 4k video is done in real time on a MacBook, and rendering is just incredibly fast. Once you get the hang of "behaviors" instead of using keyframe animation, it's so much more efficient and fast tweaking stuff and changing it.

Also personally I never got warm with nodal editors, I always hear nodes seem to be more efficient for very complex compositing, but I could never really wrap my head around that way of working. Maybe I'm just too old school for that…

[alanthebox]

I'm on Windows, but thanks for the recommendation.

And I agree, I've worked with nodes in the past and have never really found it enjoyable. I never know which node to use or which input should connect where. A vertical stack of effects is much easier for me to comprehend.

[MrMiracle77]

I used hitfilm for the past 6 months so that I could use uncompressed avi files from Moho, which first have to be converted to uncompressed YUV before HitFilm will properly import them. Hitfilm is pretty simple, but some staples of video editing are paid additions in the current version of the software. They do have humble bundles and holiday sales sometimes for features if you want to save some money. Hitfilm is a bit picky about multiple installations, so if your budget is as tight as mine, you may have to keep your editing on one computer. HitFilm also requires Windows Quicktime to be installed for some import/export options to work properly. Some of my h.264 exports have artifacts when replayed in VLC, but show up fine on youtube.

If you want all the features of After Effects, you're going to have to pay extra. If you just need basic editing, though, it's still pretty cost effective. HitFilm's users and staff produce a lot of great tutorials, though, and will often demo ways to replicate the effects you see in tv shows and movies.

[pihms]

Have any of you used Natron as a compositing software?

[Greenlaw]

Natron is a node based compositor and it's very similar to Nuke and Fusion (just as Nuke and Fusion are similar to each other.) My understanding is that Natron is unstable and development has been dead for some time now.

If you want to get into nodal compositing, I highly recommend Fusion; it's relatively cheap, easy to use, and it's a real powerhouse for vfx work.

As mentioned earlier, I used Fusion for TV commercial, feature film, and video game cinematic work for over 12 years. To see some examples, everything on my Rhythm & Hues demo reel was composited using Fusion. (One of these days, I need to cut a second R&H reel...I have tons more footage to show off.)

I generally prefer using Fusion for fx work involving live action and 3D animation. It's really easy to use and very efficient to work with, even when I have many dozens of layers and very complex fx to add.

But is it good for 2D animation compositing? For motion graphics, HUD and tech screens, certain types of vfx, and most 2D cartoon animation compositing (i.e., Moho Layer Comps,) I actually prefer After Effects. This layer based system works well with layers broken out using Layer Comps and Moho Exporter. Ae is basically Photoshop with keyframes, so if you know Photoshop, it's pretty easy to switch to Ae.

Where Ae gets kinda horrible is when when I have a ton of layers to comp and I need to nest lot of precomps, in which case Ae gets unwieldy and too slow to work with; this is where nodal compositing has an undisputed advantage. Also, Ae support for EXR and FBX files is kinda clunky compared to Fusion and Nuke. But for most cartoon animation, these issues are usually not a problem.

Currently, I use Fusion in my home studio and Nuke at my workplace. I also use After Effects at home and at work. FYI, Scareplane was animated with Moho and composited in Fusion, but nearly all the 2D work I do at DreamWorks Animation is Moho composited using Ae. Depending on the nature of what I'm working on, I may use Ae or Nuke. As a matter of fact, for the show I'm currently assigned to, I use both Ae and Nuke on different aspects of the same shots every day.

Hope this helps.

[Greenlaw]

My mistake...Natron is apparently back in development. The last time I checked on Natron was a few years ago but, according to Wikipedia, the most recent stable release came out last month.

If I have time, I might check it out and let you know how it compares to Fusion and Nuke.

[pihms]

Your demo reels are outstanding! Something to aspire to.

I would be very interested in hearing your comparison with Natron, Nuke, Fusion, and AE, when you find the time.

I’ll really look into Fusion. It sounds like the best way to go at the moment and stay on a budget.