I made a video that needed to be looped for a while. I used the Flow transition and while some of the transitions worked, some didn't.
First, I slowed the clip down to 10% of it's original speed. Then added the transitions.
I edited the link.
I hate it that YouTube changes the UI so much. I copied the link to the video manager because now when you click one of your videos it goes straight to the video manager instead of the video as the public sees it.
And yes, I did test clicking the "re-analyze" button for morphcut, and it made no difference at all.
Also note that neither of us tried to render the timeline, nor export a final video, so verify what the final product would look like. So not a really conclusive finding on either part.
Both of our examples are stretching way beyond the limits of what these were meant to do, hid jump cuts in simple talking head interviews. Something I do a ton of weekly. I used to use Morphcut daily when it was released, was great. But once Apple released Flow, I use that exclusively, as I have found it, in my work, to be far superior, faster, more accurate, for what it was made for.
So I guess the upshot is if you have both, you may find that each has strengths in varying circumstances.
However, as a user of MorphCut since the week of its introduction, I'm not sure either product is really meant to work adequately across a cut that has this much difference between the subject position from clip to clip.