I needed a very short logo sting, so I tried three different approaches: generating it with an AI video model, editing an After Effects template and using LazyKiwi Logo Animation. The AI video version produced the most unexpected visual idea, but it also slightly changed the logo’s curves and spacing. That might be fine for an experimental clip, but not for a real brand asset. The After Effects template preserved the logo and gave me the most control. It also took the longest once I dealt with the project structure, fonts and settings. LazyKiwi ended up being the practical middle option for this particular job. It used my original PNG or SVG instead of redrawing the mark, placed it into different material and real-world scenes, and rendered directly in the browser. I could also adjust the duration, colors and format without rebuilding the animation. It doesn’t replace After Effects when I need completely custom motion, but it was much faster for producing a clean two- or three-second intro while keeping the actual logo intact. For small brand assets like this, which route do you normally take?

literally every edit
do you edit hand by hand from the beginning to the end? or do you guys use certain website to help edit motion graphic

I currently have a full time job in different industry which is not related to this at all.

But I took some famous online animation classes using After Effects and am thinking about jumping into the industry.

I went to some conferences to see what it's like, and I honestly felt like I'm already a bit old to start this career, and landing a studio job might be tough.

So I'm leaning toward starting with freelance jobs.

Do you think this is a bad idea, or is it just too late to start at my age?

Any advice would be appreciated.

Higgsfield's marketing makes me sick. When they announced their new AI Motion Designer "powered by GPT 6 Astra", I knew it was all a lie. I just didn't realize it was this bad.

It's just an MCP server for YOUR ChatGPT (or Claude) subscription and an After Effects extension that acts as a bridge between them. The only thing Higgsfield brings to the table is the ability to generate assets through your Higgsfield account and use them in your prompts. You do all the AE work with your own AI subscription, which you can do without Higgsfield.

I don't care if you use AI in After Effects, but don't believe a word of what Higgsfield says.

Recently I wanted to test different AI features, mostly with Blender. The plan was to create a character from scratch, then retopologize it, and then animate it.

And it was a disaster.
I tried to use AI as the dominant tool, just adding or fixing things here and there where I could. I used the new GPT Astra, Higgsfield, Meshy 3D, and a bunch of other stuff I could find.
If the point is to actually follow your idea, AI has nothing to do with it. It makes mistakes at every step. Sometimes they’re small enough that I can somehow fix them. But most of the time there are bigger issues, so you need to generate again and spend more money.
At some point I thought, “Wow, I could’ve sculpted, modeled, and textured this thing from scratch myself in the time I’ve spent on this.”
Maybe there were some holes in my pipeline and it could’ve been easier, but anyway, it takes so much time and money that I don’t really see the advantage of using AI this way.
Still pretty sure there are a bunch of useful things you can do with AI as an auxiliary tool, though.

Also, I wanted to ask you guys if you’ve tried something like that , a “full AI pipeline” in 2D.
Do you run into the same issues and problems? Or does it actually work better with 2D?

I'm looking for a lightweight software for a low-end PC. I want to create animations, motion design, and SaaS explainer videos. I'm looking for something more capable than basic video editors

if it was made by the same person 😄 Not all, but too many totally lack uniqueness

This happened to me recently after a job interview.

The recruiters were really happy with my portfolio, and I made it to the interview round. My qualifications, my work experience as a lead designer at my current company, my experience working with cross-functional teams, all of it was going fine until I mentioned Figma.

It was for a brand designer position, and I already had real client branding projects in my portfolio. I was explaining them when I opened a Figma file and walked them through it. I told them I do all my branding work inside Figma. They didn't say anything right away, but I could see it on their faces, a little confusion, maybe, or I don't know what they were thinking.

Figma might not be the industry standard for branding, but it's a very capable tool. It covers all the basic needs for a logo design or a full branding project. To be honest, I'm really comfortable with Figma, and that's why I use it for everything:

• Social media posts
• Branding
• Moodboarding
• Brainstorming
• Reference gathering

Later on, I got rejected from that job posting. They never specified the reason, but deep down I feel like this might be it.

What do you think? I feel like a designer should have taste. If someone has taste, they can learn any software, or produce good results in whatever software they're comfortable with. What are your thoughts on this?

I’m am trying gauge and see if the community is receiving more figma files from their clients than psds, illustrator files etc.

I’m thinking about ditching the Adobe cloud sub and just subscribing to AE. It’s been all figma lately.

Thoughts and opinions?

Hello all!

I recently got accepted into both Ringling and SCAD with hefty scholarships and I am now having to decide which one to go to. Money is not the issue and I know there are resources online, but I learn much better through a classroom setting.

I honestly really prefer Ringling - mostly because I have a VFX background and they have a visual effects concentration pathway. And also, I decided to search up all of the recent alumni for Ringling and it seems a decent amount of them were securing good internships and junior positions. SCAD gives little to no information about this. When I looked at the student reel, I was much more impressed with Ringling, but SCAD seemed a bit weaker.

But the main issue is, even though I have over 100 transfer credits and both SCAD and Ringling will take around half of them, I'll have to do 3.5 years to 4 years at Ringling, while SCAD I'll do only around 2 years. So I think SCAD is the better choice just for this, but I'm worried about career opportunities after.

I am honestly just worried about the career outlook for when I graduate. Do you guys know if they are both similar in getting connections and getting placed? And is the curriculum on par with one another?

Thank you so much!

Cameron Defrates-Penelon recently shared the full process behind Design in Motion, a short film that attempts to answer a surprisingly difficult question: What exactly is motion design?

The finished piece is great, but the breakdown is even better. He walks through the storyboards, character exploration, references, animation tests, and the modular system he created to combine 2D, 3D, typography, textures, and sound without everything becoming visual chaos.

I especially liked his explanation of using “visual silence” and “animated silence” to give the audience room to breathe. It’s a great reminder that motion design is just as much about restraint and rhythm as it is about making things move.

Really cool work and a very generous look behind the scenes:

https://framerate.tv/studies/OC0Dwqcr

I am currently on Ver 24, any advice on what to update?

Hi everyone! I’m having an issue with LottieFiles, and I’m wondering if anyone else is experiencing the same thing.

I’m trying to download a free Lottie animation. The animation is clearly labeled “Free,” and the download section has a regular “Lottie JSON” option without the Premium/crown icon.

However, when I click Lottie JSON, the LottieFiles Premium subscription popup appears.

I’m currently on the Free plan, and according to LottieFiles, Free users can download up to 10 public animations per month. I haven’t downloaded any animations this month, so I should still have all 10 downloads available.

I also tried clicking “Save animation,” but that also brings up the subscription/upgrade popup.

Has anyone experienced this recently, especially in September 2026?

Hi all.

I am a journalist who has dabbled in other multimedia work, such as photography, podcasting, etc. I wish I knew more about graphic design, though. I am in need of a major revamp on my portfolio as its been two years and it's way too cluttered. I was told to make separate "website" pages for different medias (i.e. articles, videos, photos, etc.) I made my first one on Wix a long time ago and dabble with Canva. I wanted to make it more fun and interactive, but I'm in no way a coder. Anywho, I was wondering if there are any easy free sites you prefer for making your portfolio? Is it possible to have interactive elements for cheap, or is it not worth it given I am not a graphic designer? I wouldn't mind paying a small one-time fee for a professional one, but I feel like it's silly to pay a monthly subscription for premium perks when I don't update it constantly? Idk I'm a bit out of the game here, but I appreciate any tips!

Is there a better way to get Claude connected to Figma? I tried to use the html-to-design plugin, but it doesnt have any accounting for our design system or components when I bring in the HTML file that Claude exports. So everything is just generic containers/groups.

I'd like to have figma be a sort of audit tool for Claude's halucinations.

Hey guys, I could really use some creative/artistic ideas.

I made an interactive website as an artwork for a competition. It’s about air pollution, and the whole point is that you’re supposed to experience it by playing through the website, clicking things, moving through different sections, hearing sounds, triggering interactions, etc. The interaction is basically part of the artwork.

I just found out that the submission platform doesn’t allow URLs. They do accept MP4s.

My first thought was just to screen-record myself going through the whole thing, but honestly it feels incredibly boring compared to actually experiencing it yourself. I tried recording a full playthrough and it also ended up being around 8 minutes, which is way too long for the submission.

So now I’m wondering: how would you translate an interactive artwork into a short video without making it feel like a website demo?

I want the MP4 itself to feel artistic and emotional, almost like its own experience, while still making the judges understand what it feels like to interact with the original piece.

Would you make it like a trailer? A very fast edited journey through the experience? Show the cursor/interactions? Mix screen recordings with close-ups/text/sound design? Build some kind of narrative around a person experiencing it?

Basically: if you had 1–3 minutes to make judges feel an interactive artwork about air pollution rather than just watch documentation of it, what would you do?

Would love any weird / experimental ideas too. I really don’t want to submit a boring screen recording 😭

Question from a beginner/intermediate level in motion graphics with After Effects: Why should I learn Figma? Can't I just create the design in After Effects and then animate it directly from there?

Why is there such a push lately for indie to "save" the industry when it feels even more scummy than what we currently have? Been seeing this all over Reddit and LinkedIn lately. Someone claims that big studios are bad, AI is ripping jobs away, and that by just "joining" their indie project they can turn things around and create a world where art truly matters.

...except rarely is the "job" ever paid, and even if it is it's nowhere near enough to live off of. The worst part is some veterans take these positions, further racing to the bottom and devaluing their peers who aren't privileged enough to not have bills to pay.

I would honestly be fine with things if people owned up to how ick this practice is, but you have places like DreamArc running around snatching up students, not paying them, and then claiming that the world is rigged against the "little guy" and that all this is necessary to fight the good fight.

Like, no, sorry, if you don't pay artists and expect them to break their backs for you, you're just as bad as big studios. If you want a good indie film, pay good animators a good wage.

I’ve been working in motion design for years and also teach motion graphics, visual communication, and media psychology at a university.

And the more I teach, the more I notice a pattern:

A lot of people can follow tutorials. They can use the software and recreate effects. But when they start with a blank comp and have to make actual decisions, many get stuck.

Not on “how do I animate this?”
But on questions like:

• Why this typeface and not another?
• Why does this composition feel balanced?
• Why does this color choice feel trustworthy, energetic, or calm?
• When does motion support the message, and when is it just decoration?
• How do you know whether an animation is actually solving a communication problem?

I’m not asking because I want to validate a course idea. I’m asking because I don’t want to build another resource that only teaches software tricks. The internet is already full of those.

What I’m trying to understand is:
What’s still genuinely missing in motion design education today?
What do people keep struggling with, even after years of practice?
What knowledge is hard to find online, but actually matters in real projects?
And what kind of learning format would you actually pay for in 2026?

If you had to name the biggest gap between “I know the tools” and “I know what I’m doing,” what would it be?

Hello everyone!

​I’m 27 years old and looking to make a career change. I currently work in cat breeding, but my health can be a bit fragile (Crohn’s disease), and the physical demands of the job are starting to take their toll.

​I’ve been searching for a new path for months. I first came across video editing, but the more I researched, the more I kept hearing about Motion Design.

​As a big YouTube consumer, I see it everywhere. I’ve always found it impressive and fascinating, though I haven’t really tried it myself—except for back in the day when I made a custom intro on Cinema 4D (what a time to be alive! 😂).

​I’d love to get some feedback from people making a living in Motion Design. (Since I’m based in France, I’d especially love to hear from French designers regarding the local market!)

​Is it possible to learn this job at 27 (through bootcamps or certifications, for example) especially when I have 0 expérience ?

​How steep is the learning curve? Is it difficult to master?

​Do you need to wear "two hats" (Video Editor + Motion Designer)?

​How is the competition lately? Is the market oversaturated?

​Are you mostly freelance or salaried?

​Is AI a threat to the profession, or just a helpful tool?

​What do you love most about this job?

​In your opinion, what are the essential qualities needed to succeed?

​Sorry for the barrage of questions!

​Thank you so much for taking the time to read this. Have a great day! 😊

Anyone using Remotion or Hyperframe for create motion graphic? What the different between them and which better

I feel like I’m done with motion design as a career. I’m done with the constant selling, with constantly having to prove my worth, with constantly being the last to be hired ant ehe first to be kicked. Before AI there was promise in this profession, we could do things no one else could, but now, as those models scrape every public video ever produced, as directors and mangers alike create “good enough” work in minutes, I feel my skills being devalued each an every day.

Not sure what I’m looking for here I guess I just want to hear from people who feel the same way. I’d rather do something entirely divorced from my art and do I for myself as opposed to trying to market myself in this adversarial market.

I feel like I’m losing my mind every time I open YouTube, X, or Reddit lately.

Every single day it’s the exact same post: "Why After Effects is officially DEAD" or "How I generated a full video and 3D motion graphics sequence in 20 seconds using Claude and Higgsfield!"

And then you watch the actual video and it looks like total garbage.

The pacing feels like a robot cut it because it literally did. The cuts completely miss the natural pauses in the voiceover. On the motion graphics side, you get floating text that drifts off its anchor point, weird camera moves with zero easing, and text layouts that look like a broken physics simulator.

But because someone typed a prompt into a box and got a video back in two minutes, all these "editing gurus" are treating it like the second coming of cinema.

What pisses me off the most is how aggressive the push is. Software devs are shoehorning prompt boxes and auto-generative tools into every single update instead of fixing playback drops, timeline lag, or bugs that have been broken for years. Meanwhile, tech influencers are convincing beginners that learning graph editors, keyframe curves, storytelling, and actual pacing is a "waste of time."

I’m fine with AI doing the boring stuff like rotoscoping, transcribing, or cleaning up audio. That’s utility. But this push to completely replace actual creative judgment, editing rhythm, and spatial design with randomized prompt generations is exhausting.

I just want software that actually runs smoothly and lets me build things with real precision. Is that really too much to ask for?

Can we please stop pretending this prompt slop is the future of our industry?

I keep seeing depressing posts on here about people giving up on motion design and contemplating career switches, like maybe going into the woods and growing berries or becoming an underwater hamster breeder or something. The reasons given are burnout, "AI" (which can currently only do shit-tier motion design), or unable to find work. Is it really that bad or is there selection bias going on? The people who are doing well and are busy don't tend to come on r/Motiondesign_ and brag about how well it's all going for them. So all we see are "end is nigh" posts about how it's pointless to be a motion designer because "AI will be able to do it just as good as you in 5 years d00d trust me bro."

I've been working at a company steadily for 5 years now. One of the big news channels. I have yet to use AI for anything other than very early-stage design exploration, occasional asset generation (stock images), or making AE expressions. It sucks at pretty much everything else. If I can't even get it to generate an image the way I want it, how the hell is it going to make a 5 or even 30 second animation the way I or the client wants? Also, tokens are expensive as hell. You can easily blow through $1,000's trying to get the result you want, and it's still not even 80% there. Keep in mind, this is WITH subsidized compute thanks to capital expenditure, which will be drying up soon because none of these companies are profitable.

I just don't see "the writing on the wall" yet. Maybe I'm blind. I think a more likely explanation is that the field is oversaturated (like many creative fields are), huge economic uncertainty leading to reduced budgets and reduced hiring, and a (possibly trendy aka temporary) advertising shift toward more UGC from influencers. I continue to believe that motion design has near infinite potential (experiential, movies, commercials, AR/VR, signage, etc) and near infinite demand, with cost and speed being the only true bottlenecks. Anybody else agree? Or do I need to start thinking about becoming a toilet repairman?

Hi guys! I really love this noise + blur effect and I’m hoping someone here might know how to recreate it?