I feel like a lot of people would immediately bring up the sort of clunky way flame deals with multichannel workflows in batch, as opposed to the very streamlined approach of Nuke.
As someone who works at a shop that’s editorial focused, it’s hard enough to get a real assistant editor on a job. We haven’t had a flame assist in years. Training someone to be a flame artist is a challenge these days…since we’ve gone remote it’s even worse.
@julioleon @BrittCiampa yes multichannel. Hard to beat Nuke there… But even alpha channel handling and 3D environment, seem to stick with old ways. Again… I understand there may still be there to plase established workflows and users.
Im am just talking about compositing tho. There are a bunch of other tasks I rather do in Flame first.
1 Like
The whole Nuke or Flame idea is interesting from another perspective. Fusion is never brought up. It is free for a start (in Resolve not sure about the standalone) or ridiculously cheap for the paid version (though the prosumers complain). It is highly functional, even though it lacks some of the features of Nuke & Flame. Apparently they are using/teaching Resolve a lot in schools now too.
Do I know of a single Fusion VFX artist? Nope. Only Finishing/Online Editors or Colourists that use it for cleanup work or simple comps. I also knew a couple of designers that used it back in the Eyeon days. I wonder though if that might be different in 5-10 years time. With the cost savings and free render nodes, if they develop Fusion to include some of the missing tools then a lot of bigger facilities would consider it to lower overheads, especially as it is not a steep learning curve from Nuke or Flame.
As I mentioned in another post, Autodesk owning Flme is a good thing as it is not their main product and is still profitable. Fusion being owned by Blackmagic makes it a lot safer as it is a billion dollar company that essentially is using Resolve & Fusion as a marketing tool to sell hardware. The Foundry is reliant on Nuke users. If Nuke artists start switching to Fusion in significant numbers…
1 Like
The grass is greener on the other side because it’s fertilized with bullshit
6 Likes
Isn’t being able to bullshit one of the main attributes needed to do what we do? Actually, that’s probably more important when working on TVCs.
3 Likes
I think what I found so curious about the comment was that it got me thinking about the user base: again. It strikes me that the majority of us are of a certain age. When is the tipping point to make it economically unviable to support the software? I have no doubt this is being talked about by Autodesk in Montreal but due to being in the stock market, its not the sort of information to be broadcast.
Nevertheless, it was a comment by one person. It wasn’t an in depth study or survey. But it would be nice to see some marketing and buzz out there like the old days. Maybe we should do a collaboration.
I think @robert.doche might be interested in such.
(Going to get in touch as soon as the craziness dies down, Robert!)
2 Likes
HA HA HA HA HA!!!
-That’s 100% accurate.
This is such an interesting topic and I know was talked about in another thread too.
I’m not young in this industry (I’m 41), but very much a junior when it comes to flame. I think the barrier to entry had been so high over the years it never even got in the toolbox of a lot of creatives who were making do with what they had.
I’ve been doing my clean up work and VFX in After Effects (a splash of resolve/fusion) over the years mainly because that’s what we had at shops I worked at. I always knew of Flame, but my career never put me into a facility that had one with an artist I could shadow. I know After Effects really well, so it made sense to use it, especially since I work with other artists the could do the same.
But… shot management, managing the online process with endless sizes and versions, keeping color spaces in check, back and forth with Premiere… it’s a mess! I started to learn more about what Flame could offer and I loved what I saw (frankly wish I had been able to learn it sooner). The tools for managing and delivering seem to be right on point (love what connect and conform can do for managing all the versioning). I’m now trying to transfer my skills and workflow to flame, but being the only person in my shop to do so is a bit tough when we still need to toss projects between artists.
The young creatives that I’ve worked with recently have no idea what flame is, or if they do, why use that over more affordable software like AE or Resolve/Fusion. Even Nuke now has an Indi version for something like $600yr. Some more buzz or YouTubers making Flame seem like the “new” hip thing would probably go a long way in stirring interest up. In the end though, if they can get what they see as the “same” results without spending what it costs to get a flame, I think in a few years time, we might see most commercial finishing work living in Resolve.
That being said, I’m still really trying to make Flame the place I get to spend most of my time. Maybe I can grab the interest of a couple of the young ones on my team too.
4 Likes
I am 25 years old and have recently completed my 3 year Flame course and now I’m a Junior Flame Artist.
I don’t think Flame is for older people…Flame is so unknown in my circle that most of them just know Nuke.
12 Likes
Fantastic. Spread the word.
1 Like
Congrats!
1 Like
I’ve used Resolve Studio. What I like about it is the color grading, and editorial functions. Fusion, not so much. What Blackmagic needs is a Grant Kay training series for Fusion. Maybe it’s out there, I dunno haven’t looked in awhile. If you search for real, professional-level training videos for Fusion, what surfaces is a lot of chaff & no wheat. Zero consistency in the training.
I work at a large facility, and not long ago we were looking for someone in-house to use Fusion. We found one guy out of perhaps a hundred VFX artists that could use it.
I’m extremely biased, but as a Finishing Editor, nothing even comes close to Flame.
2 Likes
That’s like saying, “if Maya artists switch to Blender…”
It’s unlikely to happen because the cost to retool a shop AND retrain the staff is too high for shops to consider. New shops build their infrastructure around what the current workforce knows.
Boeing built planes that crashed themselves because airlines said it was too costly to train their pilots on a new platform.
1 Like
Bingo.
The company I worked when I started vfx in the early 2000s was an Inferno only boutique with a few Fuion artists (including me) . Fusion was used for feature work and Inferno for commercials and some feature shots. In the couse of 5 years the place went form Inferno > Fusion > Shake > Nuke while transitioning to only feature work (mostly). It was interesting to see Inferno artist leaving the place, becoming Supes or switching to Fusion.
Fusion used to be big in Vancouver before Shake and Nuke. I was good at it… Not anymore.
Im to old for Fusion now 
1 Like
I asked my supervisor (he was a editorial guy that has worked in bigger commercial post facilities) if I should learn flame , that was maybe in 2013?
He said no because thats old stuff, so there is definently the mantra out ther me in some parts, inpicked it up afterwards trying to do online jobs as a freelancer in nuke studio, hell zi leanred flame pretty much out of neccesity.
also depends on where you start, most compers in the larger vfx houses have never even seen flame.
It’s only old because we talk about it like old people talk about World War II or the Great Depression.
6 Likes
I had people telling me “big box” compositing was dying back in 2003.
It all goes back to talent pool, and as long as we are still the best option for the bullshit problems we solve Flame will exist. In some way we’re protected because Nuke took all the whippersnappers. They’re all off making Marvel movies and NOT kicking my ass in Flame. I should be grateful. Haha.
6 Likes