Based on a few recent discussions. Curious:
How many of us want/have to/can take a pure approach to Flame to get their work done vs. how many of us want/have to/can take a toolbox approach?
And I see two circles there -
An inner circle that contains what I would call auxiliary tools, that run inside Flame, but require separate install/licenses.
An outer circle that contains alternate tools that may require a round-trip to augment Flames functionality.
Inner circle would be Neat Video, Mocha Pro, 3rd party Matchbox, Sapphire
Outer circle would be Nuke, Silhouette, Fusion, After Effects, SynthEyes, Photoshop
In a pure case you have to denoise with Flame’s denoise node, do any type of roto with gMask Tracer, 3D tracking with camera analysis, etc.
In the inner circle you might roto in Mocha, use SynthEyes for some tracking, etc. but do your entire clip processing inside Flame.
In the outer circle, you may have a batch in Flame that you’re working on, but there may be a branch of that batch were you rountrip through Nuke for a CopyCat cleanup, or some InfillPaint processing.
I assume some of this (especially in facilities) is a matter of getting licenses and having software installed.
In my case, I’m definitely in the outer circle camp. Recent job in December was colored in TL-FX, had a batch for most of the cleanup, but several clips had round-trips to Nuke for various extras that just work better there.
How much of that choice is driven by personal style, cost considerations, or external rules?
For today’s jobs, how realistic / efficient is a pure approach?