Welcome to WSL!

New to the forum? Please read this and this.

The future of Fusion?

Moderator: SecondMan

User avatar
SecondMan
Site Admin
Posts: 4855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:31 pm
Answers: 31
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Been thanked: 47 times
Contact:

Re: The future of Fusion?

#76

Post by SecondMan »

Those pitches were terrible from a business perspective. They basically said right there and then that their seed money was running out and their investors were getting nervous (bit of a facepalm moment). That was why they rushed the roto part of the software to market, competing against established workflows with Nuke, Silhouette and Mocha, and where outsourcing was rapidly becoming the norm.

Nobody would tie anything in their facility - let alone the compositing department - to something that fragile, no matter how good some of the ideas were. Too bad, really.

I agree, some of the concepts in it were very reminiscent of Fusion.

User avatar
wfolta
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2020 2:22 pm

Re: The future of Fusion?

#77

Post by wfolta »

I have to add that I'm another new Fusion user that has come via Resolve. First Resolve, then thinking about Resolve Studio, then the Speed Editor offer and got Studio for Christmas, and now that the Resolve Studio key works with Fusion Studio, I just had to try it. Very happy so far, and evidently following the path that Grant so cleverly laid out for me.

User avatar
MelbFilm
Fusioneer
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 2:38 pm
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The future of Fusion?

#78

Post by MelbFilm »

If the team at Blender decide to focus on their Compositor it will become something special. Those guys have made some big advances and Blender is not far off being a market leader. The focus on development is so far ahead of anyone in that space now and with partners and sponsors leaping on board it will only accelerate. They develop for their users with such thought and planning I am a bit in awe of what they have been achieving.

With regards to Fusion, I think its next iteration in performance would have to be a parsed based workflow where operations are compounded before they are executed (As it does currently with Transforms and a few other operations). This would probably require more GPU processing than CPU but would align more with the way that Resolve works. It would be a lot more complex than the current workflow and some nodes it may not be possible but I figure about 90% of the operations I use in a flow would benefit from this. If done right it could yield very close to real time playback in a lot of situations. Would not want to be the developer asked to implement it though!

User avatar
Pinionist
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 6:31 am
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: The future of Fusion?

#79

Post by Pinionist »

With regards to Fusion, I think its next iteration in performance would have to be a parsed based workflow where operations are compounded before they are executed (As it does currently with Transforms and a few other operations). This would probably require more GPU processing than CPU but would align more with the way that Resolve works. It would be a lot more complex than the current workflow and some nodes it may not be possible but I figure about 90% of the operations I use in a flow would benefit from this. If done right it could yield very close to real time playback in a lot of situations. Would not want to be the developer asked to implement it though!
I think we would see Blender Compositor made quicker than this implemented in Fusion at this pace.

User avatar
MelbFilm
Fusioneer
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 2:38 pm
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The future of Fusion?

#80

Post by MelbFilm »

Ha! Very true, I reread my post and thought 'What the heck was I thinking?'

User avatar
SecondMan
Site Admin
Posts: 4855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:31 pm
Answers: 31
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Been thanked: 47 times
Contact:

Re: The future of Fusion?

#81

Post by SecondMan »

Pinionist wrote: Mon Dec 07, 2020 1:15 pmI think we would see Blender Compositor made quicker than this implemented in Fusion at this pace.
Not exactly a fair contest, is it?

User avatar
Pinionist
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 6:31 am
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: The future of Fusion?

#82

Post by Pinionist »

SecondMan wrote: Mon Dec 07, 2020 3:59 pmNot exactly a fair contest, is it?
Well I'm one of those people promoting Fusion where I can, but even me I'd say that BM is taking their sweet time with it. Or they are just using it to pump Resolve. In any case, we don't really know what they want to do with it, and this uncertainty is holding Fusion adoption as a serious VFX tool for all of those people who can leave Nuke workflows.

User avatar
SecondMan
Site Admin
Posts: 4855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:31 pm
Answers: 31
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Been thanked: 47 times
Contact:

Re: The future of Fusion?

#83

Post by SecondMan »

Sure. All I said was making Blender quicker does not equal rewriting the entirety of Fusion's core.

Fusion is a serious VFX tool. Today. But looking at how Fusion is often being discussed, I think it's a mistake to see it and other software as either/or. Fusion's merit should not be measured in how much it displaces AE or Nuke, or Blender or Adobe.

Instead, as the userbase is growing (and it is) I would hope that more and more artists and studios will come forward and talk about their work and experience in public places such as this one. BMD's press department is also more than willing to help. As a user you may not be able to change how BMD does things, but you can help shape Fusion's public image, which may also in part drive where Fusion will end up, which will in turn change the type of requests BMD will receive, and that's where things become interesting.

I also don't think this is a chicken and egg thing. The egg is already here. It may not seem golden to everyone, but it's well worth hatching.

User avatar
Pinionist
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 6:31 am
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: The future of Fusion?

#84

Post by Pinionist »

I agree with you completely and that is something I always try to explain to people - that Fusion doesn't necessarily needs to replace Nuke, but it sure can complement it (just thinking that it can be great particle tool, as Nuke particle rendering speed is comical slow). But the problem is that people are either invested in Adobe or Nuke. Even though they can barely afford it, they just throw "but it's an industry standard", "no studio will employ you if you're not 150% Nuke user" etc. Sometimes I tell them grab a beer and have a look what I can do with Fusion and their minds are blown but still it doesn't make them learn it and use it along Nuke.

But well, their loss is my gain.

User avatar
Guido
Fusioneer
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:56 pm
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: The future of Fusion?

#85

Post by Guido »

Fusion doesn't have to 'win' it just has to keep getting new features and better performance and BMD will organically grow its userbase. Fusion was going nowhere before the BMD acquisition and it's now on all three OSes and an integral part of Resolve. I expect Fusion will always be a bit of a niche because it's not AE or Nuke but its chances of attaining much greater popularity have never been better.

I understand why some people feel they have to learn Nuke if their career goal is to work in Hollywood VFX but I've always been surprised why AE is even used let along so popular. Without a significant investment in 3rd party plugins AE is a pretty nasty experience but I do understand that nodes still seem scary to a lot of general Editor and Mograph types. I've seen this 'fear' in 3D software too, nodes are a mystery to a lot of people.

BMD just have to keep adding features and adding performance, keep making more and more good reasons for people to adopt Fusion in their workflows. Perhaps broaden its appeal by adding more Mograph centric features and pick up the baton from Krokodove with the ability to work with data effectively. I'd like to see more modifiers for more procedural/behavioural i.e keyframe-less animation like Apple Motion offers.

Fusion could become much more popular if it made authoring Templates of the quality as those below much easier and with greater performance. I'd love Motion level performance in Fusion and I suspect a lot of 'fear' of nodes would disappear if the performance was off the charts.
https://www.motionvfx.com/store,templat ... tml?page=1

User avatar
Kristof
Fusionista
Posts: 950
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2014 1:30 pm
Answers: 6
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: The future of Fusion?

#86

Post by Kristof »

About the modifiers and procedural workflow, check the "demo_numbereasing.comp" file in here (you do need to install the modules and fuses to get it to run):

https://github.com/xmnr0x23/fusionnumbe ... r/examples

Or, "demo_fusiontext002.comp":

https://github.com/xmnr0x23/fusiontext/ ... r/examples

A lot can be done as the building blocks are there. There are a few bugs (view buffer needs a force refresh when switching between DataTypes) that mar the experience, but even that doesn't stop me from exploring this more and more.

Data is Data, in Fusion. Almost...

User avatar
Guido
Fusioneer
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:56 pm
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: The future of Fusion?

#87

Post by Guido »

Thank you for those examples @kristof, I'll take a good look later.

Motion's Behaviours have the benefit from easily being able to be animated by a tiny strip timeline under the main viewer where in/out can be quickly positioned without ever needing to open the main timeline. Setting up complete Behaviour based camera moves is a complete doddle and very fast.

The irony is Motion is fantastic but Apple has done very little with it, there are so many good ideas that have been started but not followed through which prevented it being any sort of competition to AE or reaching its full potential even as a Template tool for FCPX. You would've thought it would've sold more Macs if they'd taken it more seriously. Since moving to PC Motion is the only software I miss and would love to get some of its functionality into Fusion.

User avatar
UserNoah
Fusioneer
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2020 11:43 am
Been thanked: 3 times
Contact:

Re: The future of Fusion?

#88

Post by UserNoah »

Seems like there is a new open source competitor. Not really to Fusion but rather to Resolve. It seems to be very very fresh and the version number is a 0.2 Alpha.

https://olivevideoeditor.org/020.php

I haven't tested it myself as I don't have a working computer right now but I'll definitely try the Compositing features when I can.
I obviously don't believe that this can replace anything right now but it might be interesting to follow the development.

User avatar
Taqiisk
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri May 07, 2021 7:43 pm

Re: The future of Fusion?

#89

Post by Taqiisk »

UserNoah wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2020 7:34 amAnd I could live without the toolbar and just have the Play/Pause and playbar
You can hide it.

User avatar
RobertLe
Posts: 31
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2020 4:56 am
Real name: Robert Lechl

Re: The future of Fusion?

#90

Post by RobertLe »

I don't see any threat for Fusion. Its basically like Nuke, but lot cheaper. In same aspect less good in others better, all depending on what you using it for.
The good news is, that with Resolve Fusion will become more used and get more attention from people who did ignore it before. Hence that could lead to more development.
The bad thing is, that BMD has not really shown great interest in Fusion, except integrating it to Resolve and getting as much as possible to support FX in its Editing tool. And no Resolve has no competitor at the moment, its success is very much depending on BM Cameras and hardware. So they will grow without fear.
Means, why should someone use Blender to comp? Its ok to have a simple comp tool in Blender for some people. But Fusion is so different that I see no problem here or with any other open source tool. Even Natron stopped because of a lack of interest.
The main issue with open source is, that selling software has become more risky and that again will reduce the budget for development. Here I see a problem with 3D software in general, except you have a lot costumers that are very much bound to it. Like Nuke and Maya for example. The studios may think about saving money, but thats will take time. The next generation grow up with Blender and that can lead to a serious threat to Maya. Hiring cheap young talents that work on free software, welcome.