Didn’t want to hijack the other thread about text in Flame, but @johnag posted screenshot of Boris CC OFX installed in Flame:
Is this a thing?!? I thought BCC hadn’t been available for Flame for several years. On their website it says OFX is supported for Nuke and others but not Flame?
Flame 2022.0 Linux Centos 7.6
Interesting!
So here’s the deal- Continuum OFX is not supported for Flame because there is no linux installer, same for Nuke and Resolve. While we offer official support for Continuum OFX in Nuke/Resolve on Mac/Win, we don’t test it extensively on Flame Mac because we feel a large proportion of the user base in on linux or needs to pass a setup over to linux at some point. So it currently falls under under the “some things might work, other’s definitely won’t” category.
Everyone is more than welcome to try out the Continuum OFX demo for Mac (it will red X watermark) to see if there are effects that work, and then can purchase a license. Just be aware that a product being un-supported means just that- if there’s an issue our internal team won’t be able to help since we don’t internally test Continuum OFX in Flame.
Last, there are many attractive lower price options for Continuum, like effect units and individually priced filters so if you find an effect you like and it works, then it might be an easy low-cost decision.
Thanks,
Brian
Thanks very much Brian, all good info.
(Yeah right now I’m actually just interested in the Image Restoration module, which I used to use extensively in Avid years ago - we already have Sapphire which covers a lot of the other stuff).
Is there any plan to extend support to Linux platforms?
That’s a hard question. It’s not a small task, and there would have to be a large interest shown in the need which to this point hasn’t happened. Certain parts of Continuum would be very easy to port to Linux, others would be extremely difficult. In a perfect world, I might dare to imagine a subset of Continuum effects for Flame Mac/Linux but not the whole package- similar to how we deal with FCPX. Again, the need would have to be there from the user base.
OK, fair enough… How do we register interest and need?!
Ahh now we are at the good stuff. I’ll be sure to pass along your info to the team, but you can always post here to start up a discussion with the Continuum team- it gets monitored pretty closely.
Cheers Brian! Very helpful.
In case anyone else would like this too… please add your vote on this Boris forum thread!
There are a few tools in the BCC Image Restoration module which are great for quick cleanups, and which (afaik) don’t have equivalents in existing Flame OFX or matchboxes.
It’s there. Plenty of finishing editors could use them.
This would help with at least some Continuum uses in AVID over to Flame.
Hi Chris, actually I just went and looked in one of our Avid suites and admittedly there aren’t as many as I remember there being years ago…! But BCC Pixel Fixer and BCC Flicker Fixer are probably worth the sub alone. eg Flicker Fixer often just nails shots which S_FlickerRemove, y_flicker and even Neat make a mess of.
Hello all. Sorry to retrieve such an old thread, but I wanted to ask if there’s any update on Boris Continuum OFX now being available for Flame on Linux?
When I go to their website it now says Linux is supported, but I wanted to hear from the community whether it is the case now.
Looking forward to the development of Continuum OFX for Linux may be a distant prospect. But I am looking forward to Title Studio for Linux, both the standalone and OFX versions being very useful.
Does anyone know if there’s any update from Boris about the Continuum OFX for Flame on Linux?
Hi there.
So while we have no updates to report on with regard to the Linux port of Continuum, it is something that has been discussed several times at high level meetings. One thing that we’re never really sure of is how many Flame users on Linux would be likely to use Continuum on that platform. Would folks here like to run a loose poll to determine what the interest level for something like that might be? So that’s Continuum in Flame on Linux.
One thing to consider, and a more general question, is that Continuum is comprised of two sets of tools - one set is labelled with the BCC+ prefix and the other set with the BCC prefix. The BCC+ versions will be far easier for us to port to Linux than the BCC versions due to the underlying codebase upon which these effects are built. So with that, what are some of the tools from Continuum that would be of the most interest to Flame users on Mac and Linux.
Thanks,
Peter.
I think the most anticipated one is Title Studio for Linux. In addition, if Continuum has a Linux version, not only can Flame benefit from it, but also Davinci， Fusion， Nuke， Baselight，Mistika， Even Houdini and a series of Linux platform OFX hosts can benefit from Continuum. Continuum can also win wider user support. As you said, we can start with BCC+that is easy to transplant.
Think of the dozens of customers!
I’ve used Title Studio for a while in Avid. Among title tools it’s capable and above average, but far from easy to use. I can’t see many Flame users being adopters.
The one thing these title tools have on standard text/gfx tools are elastic timelines that auto adjust to edit revisions. A true time saver. Don’t have a good sense how often that comes up in Flame though as opposed to NLEs.
I think a poll wouldn’t hurt, if that helps our friends at Boris. Of course this just the vocal part of the Flame community, not everyone.
Looking through the list - ones I could see value in Flame, as in expanding what already exists in Flame natively. But ask 5 people and you’ll get 5 different answers.
I think Primate is a good addition to native keyers. And being able to bring in the BorisFX ML features (like Matte Refine) as individual notes, rather than having to setup an entire Silhouette or Mocha project could have some appeal. Boris has added a lot of useful ML features, where ADSK has been more conservative.