First and foremost, the headline of the review refers to "Shake Version 2.4: A new interface for Kaydara's compositing program," which is not only completely erroneous but lacks any context to Nothing Real's product.
Second, I take exception to the article's reference to Shake as the "baby brother of Nothing Real's high-end Tremor compositing suite." Shake is the company's flagship compositing product and was developed in 1996-years before Tre mor became available last June. It is a general-purpose image manipulation toolset that provides users with a low-cost, high performance compositing solution without the need for specialized hardware. Tremor, on the other hand, is a turnkey compositing solution that incorporates best-of-breed technology running on Hewlett-Packard computers, DVS acquisition cards, and Ciprico storage.
Although the author points out that Primatte, one of the industry's leading keyers, is bundled with Shake, he omitted to note that Shake is available with two other leading keyers. Keylight comes bundled with Shake, while Ultimatte is available as a plug-in. In addition, plug-in support for Shake is also available from vendors including The Foundry, GenArts, Colorfront, RE:Vision Effects, and Rising Sun Research.
 |
| Image courtesy of Nothing Real. |
And last, the author states that "At $9900, it [Shake] is more expensive than other desktop compositors, but its speed and ease of use make it worthwhile." It should be noted, that unlike packages such as After Effects and Combustion, Shake has been engineered for the film and hi-res image markets. As such, Shake is a more professional tool, with all the price/performance, quality, and depth that creatives in these markets demand. That is why Shake has been used in over 80 feature films, including the last four Academy Award winners for best visual effects. If you look at it this way, perhaps it should not necessarily be considered "desktop" software but more appropriately a cost-effective "professional" software package.
Thank you for this opportunity to set the record straight.
Vicky Gray-Clark
Clark PR on behalf of Nothing Real
Los Angeles
Editor's Reply:The reference to "Kaydara's compositing program" in a review of Nothing Real's Shake 2.4 compositing program was an editing error for which the author had no responsibility. Our deepest apologies to Nothing Real and to Kaydara.
I just read the "G4 vs PIII" review you ran a year ago (pg. 62, March 2001) and I enjoyed it. However OS X is out and we now have faster Macs, like the new dual 1ghz with a 64mhz video card. Maybe you could do the tests again and this time you could use LightWave 7 and Cinema 4D XL 7 to compare performance. I use mostly Macs but I will change if the new Macs don't live up to their hype. And anyway, LightWave and C4D are neck and neck, and it would be good to see who wins!
Dave HaaseLong Beach, CA
Editor's Reply: You're right that it's time to reinvestigate the Mac. Look for an upcoming article on OS X and 3D.
We welcome any insights you have to offer that would further our readers' understanding of topics discussed in this issue, or that concern the computer graphics industry in general. We may edit your comments to conform to our style and space requirements. Please address letters to:
Letters Editor, Computer Graphics World
98 Spit Brook Road
Nashua, NH 03062-5737
fax: 603-891-0539 ·
phill@pennwell.com