Do we need/ want a better lens distortion workflow in flame?

I was bored on a Saturday night and decided to watch the Revenant (because who doesn’t wanna see a bear maul Leo DiCaprio?) and there is some heavy lens distortion in there that got me thinking- why do we have such an archaic lens undistort/ redistort workflow in flame?

When I have to work with really heavy distortion, I default to syntheyes and ST maps, and that’s fine I suppose. But it is a curiosity to me that in Flame there’s just not a good option to undistort and Redistort.

Is this something that deserves some feature request love, or is it something that is just accepted as not being inside the software we use? Granted, I don’t often use a distortion workflow for the work I’m doing, but I’d probably use it more if it was within Flame. And I’d like to add- I love the forward thinking in regards to machine learning (and I can’t wait to see where it gets to), but I gotta say, I’ve definitely needed to undistort a plate more than I’ve ever needed to have a depth matte of a face. At the end of the day, I think I’m just curious why this facet of composting seems to be conspicuously overlooked in Flame. Any thoughts? Or perhaps there is a good workflow that I just don’t know about?

11 Likes

Completely agree that this is something that would make a much bigger impact day-to-day than some of the other ML tools and I would imagine that ML could be used to solve lens distortion.

The one nice thing about the STMap workflow is the way that it’s usable across different apps (e.g. Nuke) but if there were a user friendly way to generate, implement and export STMap for distortion from Flame, that would be a huge improvement over today.

3 Likes