animating 3d objects in motion

You can import 3D models in usdz format into Motion, and you can animate their position and orientation but you can’t do the sort of animation you described with Motion alone.

There is a plugin called mO2 by motionvfx that can do that but it costs more than Motion itself. I haven’t used it.

To expand on Luis's post a bit. If you are familiar with 3D animation software, you can create animation "cycles" with a model and export that out to use in Motion, the format must be USDZ. Maya, Blender, Modo all have this ability an other software will probably be adding it in the next few months/years. If your software doesn't support USDZ export at this time, you can export the model to the .gtlf format and use Reality Converter, which is available from Apple's developer tools to make a USDZ.

I would probably start by looking at https://www.rippletraining.com/. They have some great tutorials and at least one on 3D Objects in Motion (I have not seen it). This would be one of the best starting points. I'd be pretty sure they will at least discuss minimal paths to working with 3D software to create assets and then use the min Motion in a way that might meet your needs.

One last thing, remember, Motion is not a fully fledged 3D software, don't expect you can rig complex characters or elements in it. It just supports integrating USDZ assets into your projects, which is still a huge step. :)

I think that this all comes down to what your goals are, your level of comfort with 3D, and how you want to deal with 3D elements in your project. I would outline the pros and cons of both formats, it's up to you as the artist to work with what is best for you.

3D Text and 3D Objects both have advantages and disadvantages in Motion (as Fox points out). Both of them get restricted into layer order rendering at points, this can happen with composting order, blending or filtering. Both absolutely support Motion Lighting, only shadows casting is not supported for 3D objects (can be faked).

As mentioned, 3D Text does have the benefit of casting shadows on other 3D text layers and the ability to edit the texture within the applications. But you also can't cast non-3D Text layer shadows on 3D Text layers. Yes you can mix various letters together to create more complex shapes or "models", but if you don't have the shape you need to extrude, you still have to generate that shape, convert it to a font and then bring it into Motion. I'd argue this is just a different type of modeling. You also have limited texture mapping options (no UV, or planar projection, spherical, cylindrical, etc.). Fox has a wealth of great examples of what can be done with 3D Text and it's worth experimenting with or having in your toolkit. I would say one disadvantage is that as you make 3D Text models more complex (lots of glyphs, complex textures) you may see some performance impact (also possible with USDZ in the right circumstances).

USDZ is more limited in how you can override the model inside Motion. It is not possible to manipulate the internal rigging of elements (you can't animate bones in a model), and you can't switch out textures. So if you want to create an Iron Man suit, rig it and swap suite shading and materials Motion, this is not really realistic. Also you will have to fake shadows, but this is can be easily done with some shapes blurred and multiplied into the composite. Where some may see an advantage is if you are familiar with 3D modeling and animation software. For example, I was able to grab a model of a famous robot put out by Video Copilot a few years ago. I was able to break out the various parts (head, body, arms, feet) into separate models, import them into Motion and create a full rig that allows me to drive the character around inside Final Cut. It was even easier than in a full 3D software. This can be done with vehicles, machines, etc. I also enjoy the fact that I can create and animate elements in a 3D software, texture them and save a single file that contains everything (Model, Animation,Textures). Playback and render of these elements is far faster than if I had to render these elements to a movie, check the results, make changes and repeat until satisfied. If I need to change textures or animation it is quickly done in my 3D app with a new model save and I have versioning. If you have projects or clients that work with 3D assets, this is going to be a great help.

I would offer this example that someone put together recently as an example of what can be done with prebuilt models converted to USDZ for use in Motion. https://www.fcp.co/motion-news/2403-nasa-s-perseverance-built-and-animated-in-apple-s-motion

@whynotme

I would say play with USDZ, get familiar and figure out what you need and which method works best for you. If the options available are to limited you clearly have options (use 3D Text, try mObject, learn a 3D application to get more control).

@joelle184

If your machine supports 5.5 or higher you can try out USDZ, the performance is surprisingly good. IMO, it's always worth upgrading when a new release is available. Remember updates don't just contain new features, they contain bug fixes. You can always archive your current version to back it up and try the newer version. If you have too many problems you can go back to working with the old version (you just can take projects backwards).

Hi Joelle —

For what it's worth, the USDZ model performance is really quite good (but I've only tried out the models that come with Motion — nothing extra or fancy — or paid for!!) I didn't have to render the Earth/Moon animation for the GIF in this thread:

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252501700?answerId=254717189022#254717189022

I don't think you'll have too much trouble with them in longer projects.

On the other side, I haven't seen any USDZ models I would consider worthwhile. I can't do anything with them except display them. When I bought mObject, I could at least open the models and control the various parts of the model.

Lamborghini Donut

https://youtu.be/qt5WUh00W-c

I could turn the front wheels (steering) as well as the individual wheels (spinning).

Blackhawk Up

https://youtu.be/qt5WUh00W-c

The two props (I did have a little trouble "sticking" the landing :D)

Automatic Strings

https://youtu.be/qt5WUh00W-c

The instruments are all the default violin model that came with mObject (I show it at the beginning of the video as it appears by default). The bow could be separated from the model and I animated the individual bows with behaviors (combination of audio and oscillation and maybe some others...)

As much as I enjoyed working with mObject and OBJ 3D models, the models with this kind of functionality were still very hard to come by (at least for the ones that were free). You can tell by the number of views on these videos that the was very little interest in what you could do in Motion with 3D modeling.

3D USDZ models do not interact with 3D Text - you're stuck with layer ordering — this was also a problem with mObject (and from what I understand, mO2 as well.

Apple keeps missing the opportunity to really bring something amazing to the application. I wish they had added just a few features to 3D Text instead of making a left turn. All the USDZ models worth working with require Catalina or better + Reality Converter + in most cases, commercial ($$) models. They could have made huge strides by making Motion Paths exportable as SVG (which can be converted to fonts), adding the ability to custom map surface textures, and the ability to revolve shapes.

I think people freak out when they have to think of using fonts for modelling — but all a font is, is a collection of shapes in a database. No different than saving illustration paths in a folder.

-----------

It's kind of ironic that the better 3D environment is 3D Text. USDZ 3D models amount to about the same as "Tiny Planet" for the controls you get (actually, you get more controls in Tiny Planet!) You cannot even keyframe the Orientation parameters of the 3D Model... you can't add texture or color or lighting features (or shadows)... you can't really do much except try to *find* a model that looks decent ... Try to colorize it in any way with the built in Filters and it's flattened to 2D... or at least "layer order".

Motion will "play" pre-animated models, but have you ever tried to find a model that does exactly what you want it to do? Want to learn Blender? (I don't -- tried to a few times -- not worth the trouble). I'm not inclined to pay for models to begin with, I prefer to make my own.

There are hardly any tutorials available that go into any depth about USDZ 3D in Motion because it's not gaining any traction. 3D Text used for modeling never did (and I tried *hard* to spread the word...) Apple didn't have very far to go to really boost the abilities of 3D Text, but instead they decided to add... basically a toy to the UI.

Check out the detail in this 3D Text:

How about that glass? Can you see the aperture?

Some of the things I build for 3D Text might look cheezy, but they're still a lot of fun and as far out of Motion I have to go is FCPX.

I made this a few years ago - I know it is silly, but I still like it.

Oh - I used mObject for awhile (until it broke). There was no upgrade path to m02 and I certainly wasn't going to outlay $70 more than the cost of the original for software that is likely to break on the next version level — with no upgrade path. But that's me. I'm old and I don't buy into bull....

@fox: the URLs you give for the car and the blackhawk are wrong ones.

So it seems you can’t give these usdzs textures of your making, the way we do with 3D text. Can you get the camera into these udszs for a full 3D spacial experience without and within (apart from possible rasterisation) ?

“3D USDZ models do not interact with 3D Text - you're stuck with layer ordering — this was also a problem with mObject (and from what I understand, mO2 as well”: Woooooow, major no-no here.

“I think people freak out when they have to think of using fonts for modelling — but all a font is, is a collection of shapes in a database”: I happened only once to use a font for a text element that comprised too many sub elements and that I compounded into one, it was a railway track, a very easy case. If I understand correctly, you draw all orthographic faces of an object, with corresponding dimensions, then go through svg, then use a font converter online (glyphter or the like) then get your fonts. But this red car I remember you made is not possible with 3d text elt, given its rounded shape, or is it ?? (by tweaking Text>Appearance>edge values again??).

@GFXZen

“only shadows casting is not supported for 3D objects (can be faked)”: what kind of faking is this about? In my experience, faking shadows in a 3D environment generally leads to further blending problems but I may be wrong.

Anyway, thx for your interesting explanation that seems to hint that any non-usdz model imported in Blender and discomposed there in elementary units can be exported in usdz (https://github.com/robmcrosby/BlenderUSDZ) into Motion (?). I could be seduced by this idea (though my handling of Blender is very clumsy and half forgotten…), but then again, there’s this layer order thing which promises to bother me anytime I’ll want to have a keyed live-character in the scene (with a 3D text elt), not to mention again the shadow problem, which I already have. I suppose it’s food for thought though.

1. Don't say you're old, fox-m, you're the most brilliant Motion-guru we know.
2. I'm on a Motion version that doesn't support USDZ models. Since I'm quite well accustomed to 3d text (thx to you), do I have any interest in upgrading to Motion 5.5 (or is it 5.6 now...) or is it useless?
3. By the way, how do CPUs/GPUs put up in Motion with these USDZ models when they're animated? Are they brought to their knees or what ? My Motion projects are music videos, so they are generally "long" (3-4-5mns), hence my question.
4. Thank you.

(Don't know what happened with those youtube links!)

Blackhawk: https://youtu.be/1jZltkKP7U4

Lamborghini: https://youtu.be/kwGqkeaYQUI

Yes - you can move a camera "through" USDZ for the spatial experience.

You simply cannot "mix" the different 3D environments as one in Motion. mObject/mO2 suffer the same fate.

The "red car" -- yes - done with a font and Motion. I wasn't all that happy with how it turned out, but it was "passable". (I learned a lot more since then!) All surfaces are flat design and shaped with the available tools in Motion (and in most cases, pushed to extremes). What makes dealing with fonts difficult is that sometimes it takes some experimentation to get the shapes down the way you need them. On my wishlist is for Motion to allow exporting paths drawn in Motion as separate SVG shapes which can be reimported for 3D Text shapes (even if that means wrapping it in a "TTF font" as a single character — but it shouldn't be that difficult to create a "collection" of shapes as a font, after all, anyone can make a Zip folder files droplet in Automator.) As another example, if I want to change the frame rate of a project I'm still working in, I can go out to Finder, open the project file and make edits to the XML *while the file is still open in Motion* then have Motion update it in real time.

Oh - I've been making fonts since 1986... so I have the tools (but my favorite has become obsolete). I'd like to see Apple step up and make this process easier in Motion.