if only someone were actively working on those things…
3 Likes
This, exactly this!
I would add true multilayered exr support in this. Where layers/channels can get named exactly or else it breaks pipelines (there is a big difference between .red and .r in a pipeline for instance)
OTIO still needs a lot of work overall but is the future for exchange.
Your points about USD and a new 3D environment are also spot on. Having a Ray tracing renderer is also an excellent idea.
There already tools that have all of the above. I know that comment is not helpful but trying to be pragmatic here. I’m sure the dev team are aware and would like to do all of the above as well. Autodesk needs to throw a whole lot more resources at Flame development but if they’re getting rid of people instead…
If I had time I would suggest getting the community to band together to petition Autodesk management to do a short term dev scale to push Flame back to the forefront where it once was. Unfortunately the cynic in me would be concerned that Autodesk would look at it and just shut down development altogether.
3 Likes
Autodesk abandoned Smoke and Lustre, but fortunately their features were mostly integrated into Flame. As a large-scale high-end production software with nearly 30 years of development history, I believe that Autodesk will not easily give up Flame unless absolutely necessary. However, Autodesk will definitely weigh the input-output ratio. They are unlikely to love Flame like Filmlight loves Baselight, Foundry loves Nuke, and SideFX loves Houdini······. Because Autodesk has many children, and Flame may not be the focus of his training. All we can do is to support him as much as possible, help him grow, strengthen, and become independent and self reliant.
1 Like