Should Apple Motion Category be changed to Final Cut Pro?

Hey guys,

I’ve long held the opinion that videohive would be better off if the apple motion category was renamed Final Cut Pro. I don’t know many of the customers I’ve had that are looking for templates for Apple Motion. Apple Motion is seen as a difficult tool most Final Cut Pro users are happy to avoid and are specifically looking for Final Cut Pro templates in their searches and not apple motion. If anything I believe Motion is seen as a tool to create templates for FCPX. With the name change I believe the site would see increased traffic with proper keywords from google searches and a more accurate representation of what many authors on the market are producing and as authors we all stand to benefit along with Envato.

I would love to hear the opinions of some of the other FCPX authors, @BobJacksonHive @LaurentiuDorin @digitalproducts669 @EasyEdit @afteryou @BoxMotion @nitrozme @JoelStarling @Pixflow @IronNetwork hope you don’t mind me tagging you, but I think as a community it would be beneficial to hear other thoughts on this. I would also love to hear from Envato if this has ever been considered.

Peace and love.


I agree. I think it would be beneficial for SEO and for better customer understanding in the long term.

The items made for solely Motion and not FCPX will have to retain in a pure Apple Motion category, though. This may lead to some confusion during the transition period.

And as this transition poses some work on the devs of the marketplace, I don’t have high hopes we see this change.

But I’m all for it to be done.

Thanks for the feedback @Creattive :smiley:

At the same time I would argue there are more templates that are solely for FCPX and actually don’t make any sense purchasing if you plan to edit in Apple Motion. Take transition templates for example. You cannot really use templates inside of Motion because Motion transitions are essentially the backend for an editor to be able use them inside of FCPX.

An editor would have to completely retime a motion project, find the folders where the transition A and B are sitting and then put their footage in there, completely counter-intuitive and not how its set up. They would also need to shift keyframes around if they wanted to speed up or slow down the transition and could only do this once at a time before they have to export the video and bring into the next motion project to make another transition. Its just not what its set up for.

I don’t believe there needs to be a whole different category for Apple Motion, I would say just a renaming of the entire category is necessary for the market to be more succesful; there are so few users looking strictly for apple motion categories (my opinion based on my experience selling here) that it just doesn’t make sense to create two categories. In any case all motion templates should be setup to be edited inside of FCPX, thats the whole point of Apple Motion in the first place, a software thats used to create editable Motion graphics for editors inside of FCPX.

Also by this logic surely all .Mogrt templates that fall in the Premier category should be in the After Effects category as that is the backend software they were created in.

Happy to discuss anything, really in favour of a healthy discussion, I’m clearly quite passionate about this :stuck_out_tongue:

I’m not a FCP/Motion user, but I’m pretty certain this is not true. At least couple years ago, Motion was more of a standalone software which project files were meant to be edited in Motion, not in FCP.

It may be mostly used for creating Templates to be used in FCPX nowadays, but there are projects that need editing in Apple Motion. If those are rare today is another question.

Your comparison with MOGRTs is spot on. There are MOGRTs, Premiere Projects, and After Effects projects. MOGRTS are After Effects projects that are meant to be edited in Premiere, and therefore belong in the Premiere Category, as the End User needs Premiere, not After Effects.

Motion templates that can be edited in FCPX are like MOGRTS. Motion templates that need to be edited in Motion are like After Effects projects.
They live in separate categories.

We can rename the Motion Category to FCPX-Category, and have the same irregularity as now: Some items in that category are actually meant to be edited in another software. But this way around, it is actually fatal. While a Motion template that can be edited in FCPX can also be edited in Motion (even if it makes less sense sometimes as you pointed out), the other way around is not the case. Not all Motion templates can be edited in FCPX.

If we have a Final Cut category, all items should work in Final Cut. Therefore, we need another Motion category for the templates that require Motion.

I think it’s a good idea to change the category name, because most of the customers are actually looking for FCPX stuff there. I don’t think that there is any demand for Apple Motion only templates.

1 Like

@Creattive has a very good point. There are many Apple Motion templates that are not optimized for FCPX and will not fit the new category. Also creating a whole new Final Cut Pro X category has the chance to broke the current SEO with unwanted consequences.

One solution to further streamline the software selection procedure is to move the current 'Software Version" filter on top of the filter list with option for Apple Motion and Final Cut Pro X. This will make it easier the customer to filter the projects for FCPX. Currently the software selection option is buried on the bottom of the page and is not visible at one glance. Another option is to rename the category “Final Cut Pro X and Apple Motion.” This will cover all types of projects but we need to make absolutely sure that renaming the category will not broke the SEO.

Surely then Envato should be encouraging the authors to optimise their Motion products for FCPX? Any template built in Apple Motion can be built to be usable in FCPX and when the market is looking to increase traffic why does it make sense to market itself with the software that would only bring in a fraction of the interest of the other?

I really don’t agree with the notion that because there are templates that have been created with the intension of only being used in Apple Motion that there then needs to be two separate categories. We are all well aware that there are many many more users looking for FCPX templates than templates that are only functionable in Motion. And if any motion template can be customised to be suitable for FCPX then why shouldn’t that be the direction taken?

It seems crazy to think that a market wouldn’t want to increase traffic with the more popular software terminology because of outdated products that haven’t been optimised for Final Cut Pro still exist on the category.

It doesn’t seem the change will come, I’m not sure if theres enough awareness on what the differences between Apple Motion and FCPX are but it just feels backward and outdated that the category is still called Apple Motion. What I would love is for Envato to just change the name of the category for a period of time to test the traffic, am no expert but I am very confident we would see increased traffic which would benefit anybody selling in the category.

@vystina I perfectly understand your view, and I’m not against it, FCPX is the way to go, is much popular and has a larger user base. As I was said, the category can be also renamed to “Final Cut Pro X and Apple Motion”, will fit al projects and attract new traffic but we need to make sure that renaming the category will not broke the SEO.

@LaurentiuDorin Sure I understand that but if Motion projects can be optimised for FCPX then why the need to make it a dual category. That would also simplify the SEO problem. I do believe that if the category was called ‘Final Cut Pro’ it would see more traffic driven to our products than any other term or group of terms used to describe it. If anything I think its at least worth a test on the site.