Looking a younger generations, lately I am starting consider myself a Mid Level Impostor.
5 Likes
@milanesa - does that mean you have artificial intelligence?
Maybe that simulation theory is trueā¦ and I didnt get the latest version update.
The realization of being a mid-level impostor is what makes a great seniorā¦
4 Likes
@BrittCiampa - does the fact that I keep having āsenior momentsā relate to your logic?
1 Like
THIS. My first thought was to get an accurate assessment of how many people use Flame, to ask the people who are selling the licenses.
1 Like
I think Flame IS specifically M&E.
Somewhere in-between.
Revenue wise it most likely rolls up under M&E.
However anytime you have to select from survey or other dropdown in many webpages, Flame is not listed as option and you have to write it in under āotherā.
The stepchild forgotten in a barn at the back of the property.
Every time I talk to the ADSK researchers for interviews they are surprised by this.
1 Like
not even mentioned here at all
1 Like
I found it, eventually, you have to click on visual effects, twice, then voila!
I know of 2 major VFX studios in discussions about moving to Fusion from Nuke to save on software costs.
Why isnāt Flare in the equation?!! Probably because they donāt know it exists. Thereās not even a product page for it any more.
4 Likes
And why isnāt flare available as a monthly sub?
2 Likes
Or even a quarterly?!!
1 Like
thats completely nuts, i mean they will have to spend so much time in tooling fusion to work , but then if you have 500 nuke licenses thats a few million a year just in licensing software thats abandoned
2 Likes
Probably theyāll need to find a workaround to the lack of deepsā¦ unless the donāt work in really complex big shots.
Just a note that I believe the VFX Studios I am talking about are in talks about it. Iām not suggesting it is definitely happening.
Iāve watched a couple of Nuke Artists trying Fusion videos recently and their impression is usually along the lines of (paraphrasing here) āFusion is a lot more capable than I thoughtā and āIf I spent a lot more time on it and got to know lot better then it could workā but then generally list a whole lot of reasons why they prefer Nuke, some justified, some not. In general they think they can achieve what they want faster and easier than in Nuke. One other complaint is the deep compositing toolset of Fusion lacking (I thought Fusion was capable of deep).
My generally thoughts on the above are, what would those same artists feel if they were to try Flare instead?!! Probably wonāt happen as they wonāt know itās a thing and getting access to it is near impossible. Totally an untapped market.
In another life I used to be a Senior Fusion Artist. My Nuke coworkers complain all the time about my horizontal node script (flow) style. I have also used Flame (not much). All have strengths over each other. The big factor for Nuke in how complex the shot is. Also Nuke is way easier to customize than the competition.
3 Likes
The license savings from Nuke to Fusion are substantial. Not so much with Flame, not sure what a Flare license costs?
On the flip side, itās not just the core tool or even deep, but the wealth of gizmos that exist that make shots a lot easier. Donāt know how comparable python customization is, and how well Fusion holds up at scale or in collaborative environments (e.g. live groups), or pipelines, integration into workflow tools.
For the savings you can plug some of these holes. But then there is a massive productivity hit while everyone gets back up to speed and re-learns all the tricks. Also rebuilding existing setups everyone re-uses.
Just seems like one of these things that sounds like a fantastic idea in the board room, but once you get boots on the ground the reality is utterly ridiculous.
Seems to make more sense in small shops where budgets/margins are tighter, things simpler, and maybe a bit of extra time on hand.
1 Like
A Flare annual subscription is slightly less than half that of a Nuke X subscription. So itās not small change.
Whilst I agree in the majority of cases the status quo whilst being the most expensive, makes the most sense. However, on the flip side it would be nice for Flare to be in the picture at the very least.
Fusion seems to have its own fair share of Fuses (I think thatās what theyāre called) and a lot of devs have basically recreated the Nuke tools for Fusion.
Iām sure some much cleverer people on here could do something similar to Flame but then again, maybe not. To be honest, the only tool Iād like that is missing for me would be a UV unwrap tool but there are workarounds for that.
1 Like
One thing to account for, is large shops will want to have a large render farm to make those Flare compers productive. We have large farm for a small company, and Burn is so un-reliable that we have to constantly render watch and manage stuck Burn jobs. We render Nuke and Maya on the same farm, literally using the same render manager (Backburner), and have zero issues. That also does not take into account the multiple this renders valid locally but broken on Burn, or the vice versa, this renders valid on Burn, but is broken locally. No way Weta/ILM/whatever massive 2000 person place is going to deal with that shit.
Also, with many resource in-effecient aspects of Flame/Flare, you basically need to give it a top kit machine to be useable. Nuke can run on a much larger range of configuration and still be 100% usable. I donāt think these large shops are going to replace all their existing comp machines with $20K workstations with A6000 gpus.
Nuke it is.
4 Likes