Flame multichannel exr renders in baselight

flame 2023.2

I have an issue where the layers of multichannel exr files i write from flame are being read differently in baselight than the original multichannel file that i am working on as a source.

source is rgb exr with matte/roto layers. even when i just right-click and add multichannel write file (t-click the source clip) but do not add any other flame nodes, the resulting file is read differently within baselight than the original source file. the file from flame shows individual _r, _g, _b layers for each matte channel rather than a single channel per layer a la the source file. however the way that flame reads the source file and the flame render matches exactly as far as i can tell. has anyone had to deliver multichannel to baselight and experienced this issue?

corollary to this - i wonder if anyone knows if there can be modification made to a multichannel source that effects every channel without having to connect the work to each channel individually? ie - can i stabilize a shot with multichannel layers and write a file back out with all of the layers effected acordingly, without having to duplicate the action or auto-stab node and attach to the output of each individual layer? i saw this question asked in an older thread here, but i am curious if something has changed with the release of 2023 and the multichannel enhanced capabilities. i’m having trouble finding autodesk documentation or tutorial to answer this, and my own attempts haven’t been successful.

I have sent multichannel files I’ve created in Flame to Baselight. BUT they only had an embedded alpha & worked fine. As to files with channels in addition to an alpha, I haven’t tested them.

thanks! i appreciate the feedback. and maybe my original post wasn’t clear- but the files i make from flame do appear to work in baselight, but since the channels aren’t read in the same way that the original exrs are, it breaks the workflow. can’t swap in a flame fix quickly during di color

1 Like

This would be great for many things (lens distorion, repos, resizes), but yeah, you can’t do it. Maybe someday they’ll get multichannel in, since this would be an easy first offering, but for now you’re gonna be making a lot of node spagetti to accomplish this.

1 Like

i was afraid of that… well, thanks for confirming.


1 Like

There’s vomit on his tablet already

Node spaghetti


I fear that joke will be massively overlooked

1 Like

Story of my life bro

i did die a little bit at ‘node spaghetti’ - both because of what it implies but also because of the sheer hilarity of the phrase. I only didn’t comment back on it because i wasn’t sure if it was an already common lingo in the flame community, and i was trying to seem cool- haha!


To be honest I thought it was common myself.


i will now forever think of ‘node spaghetti’ whenever i leave the comfort of my conform timeline ‘layer lasagna’ for the boiling pot that is bfx

sorry, i’ll see myself out now


@ryan_m could you provide a sample to our Support team so we can have a look at the structure of the media file?

hi, just following up to say that i did open a ticket with autodesk