Hey Tilt,Tilt wrote:Sorry, I don't want to pick on you personally or deride what you've written, ronviers I think that BMD will do something with Fusion and since most of eyeon's shortcomings were due to their small dev team I think the road map will be sped up a lot now.ronviers wrote:... maybe ... ..., ..., ..., maybe ... It could be ... ... ... .... So their priority may be ... .... ... could be ... .... And whatever they're plan, ... seem ...
i don't know ..., ..., but it looks to me ... ..., ... ... ... - time will tell.
But reading your post has made it clearer to me what I think is the elephant in the room: we're still in the same boat as before the acquisition. Nobody knows what's going to happen to Fusion, everybody just hopes for future versions.
Compare this with the R&D videos from the foundry in the Off Topic board. There'll be nifty paint improvements, there'll be a toolset for VR. Compare that with the Foundry's road map accuracy ("will be released in Q4 of this year - boom, version gets released in Q4 of that year") the only thing you - as a vfx company owner - can lament is their pricing.
On the other hand, there was... sven? theo? don't remember, but they made VR stuff in Fusion and said something along the lines of "well, there really should be an update to the polar coordinate tool". But will they know if or when that is being considered by BMD? Or take myself. I'd love to augment our Linux/Nuke/Houdini pipeline with Fusion. But do I know when there'll be a version for Linux to try? And will there ever be proper multi-channel support in Fusion? We're making excessive use of it in our pipeline (Mantra can render out per-light passes).
I understand the idea of multi channel exr's, but I will act ignorant and ask how important do you really feel it is. I gather it is for your pipeline, just wanted to ask. The thing is, I worked on flame for many years and we had only just got an ok way to deal with multi channel files and for the most part it was ok, it split out a group node with each channel displayed so you could connect to each channel. This is not like nuke, but just a nice way to deal with the files. I assume you would like to see something more like that? Just a way to deal with the single file? We all have different ways to deal with this issue, I like the storage aspect of many passes in one file, but prefer seeing its layers out on the flow so I know what is in front of me. Many like the nuke approach and that is fine. Just was wondering what you felt would be considered a better way to deal with it in fusion? The nuke style will not come to fusion, and personally I don't think it has to, but rather just as you said, have a smarter way to ingest and present the passes to the artist.