2 Likes
What the fuck flame?
There’s a whole beta testing user group, right? These issues didn’t get discovered in the process but I bunch of issues did. I’ll add, everyone gets frustrated, that’s a given, this is a tough job and deadlines always seem to get closer together. I have to ask, though, is this level of aggression really necessary?
I’d say that aggressive words are a sign of frustration.
@ALan doesn’t explicitly say but I presume this is version 2023.1.
If this was a beta version you could say that his frustration was unjustified.
2 Likes
True.
Heya Allen!
I remember running into something very similar with the Flame UI getting burned into renders with an action node and I narrowed my issue down to extra outputs in the action node. In the short term if you want to try to work out a bandaid, this worked for me.
I see you’re using your action with just a comp and matte output; maybe try duplicating the action and use one action for the comp and one action for the matte.
Just a thought— no idea if we had the same issue. Hope that helps, and sorry it’s happening.
I’ve been having this issue on and off for the last year and a half. Its been discussed a few times here on the forum. Its known to Autodesk and they’ve claimed its resolved in 2022.3.
It’s still happening on 2022.3 just with greatly reduced frequency.
My personal feeling is that the fact this problem has persisted through mutliple releases of Flame is egregious. I was also particularly insulted by the “solution” that Autodesk lists in the above link. Prior to the release of 2022.3, all it said was
A workaround is to select the Action node to view the output first before selecting the downstream node.
If all I was doing was one layer cleanup this might be an acceptable proposition, but if you want to actually do any heavy compositing then you’re fucked. I frequently have comps with between 10 and 15 non-default action outputs. If I were to step through and view every output of every action each time I wanted to see the result of my batch then I could easily spend 20 minutes every hour just viewing action outputs. Unfortunately, I’ve wasted several days of my life doing just this over the last year.
My most successful workaround has been to select every node in the entire batch and bypass them all, then unbypass all of them, then immediately render without viewing anything first. Its not a panacea but I’ve been moderately succesful in mitigating the issue using this approach.
3 Likes
What utter insanity this is even a thing.
Should have issued a trigger warning.
I’ve heard back from ADSK about this… It was due to having Motion Blur in Action active.
Just a small clarification. Yes Motion Blur is part of the problem, but you also need a surface going from completely transparent (0.0%) to not (>0.0%) in your setup for the problem to occur. So you may want to try to set the transparency to 0.001% to see if it avoids the problem and give you a satisfactory result.
1 Like
I don’t see what the problem is. Having the UI overlaid proves that you’re actually working on Flame and not After Effects. Score.
Seriously though guys. This is actually a thing in a commercially released product? How quickly will this be fixed? @fredwarren
Why is this still a thing. Are there like only two coders chasing down bugs in Montreal? Insanity like this makes me question my life and career choices.
A precision about @Ryland mention that we claimed it was fixed in 2022.3 but he still has the issue on and off: we indeed fixed a gui corruption problem similar to the one Alan is reporting as soon as we were able to reproduce it earlier this year. But fixing that one doesn’t mean that we fixed all possible gui corruptions.
@GPM Now onto the good news about this specific problem: we are able to reproduce it internally which means we were able to identify the source of the problem. We are hopeful we will be able to deliver a fix sooner than later. We will notify you here when the fix will be available.
Okay Handsome, there is a new rule at Logik. Everyone gets to complain once about bugs. After that, every time you complain I’m going to message you here, text you, call you, email you, Facebook Messenger you, Tweet you, Tinder you, Instagram you and Only Fans you and send you a post card reminding you to join the Beta program. For the love of god, if I have to create an account on Gluten Free Singles to hunt you down I will.
I mean you’re the PERFECT customer. You’re passionate, organized, a strong communicator, highly creative AND you get a free license of 
.
2 Likes
I would love said free license of Flame, but I am not aware of it, so for the moment I’ll keep paying $580 per month for each of my Flames.
Randy, I’m grateful for everything that you do for this community. It’s transformational.
But you are not the speech police. I can bitch about bugs all day, as many do. Please stay in your lane.
As the site operator, you can edit or delete my posts as you wish. But you should be cautious about telling people what they can and cannot say. History tells us that people will simply find another channel.
Your voice is no more and no less important and relevant than anyone else’s here. This is not the first time you’ve inserted yourself into conversations and tried to lay down some law. My bitching right now is a culmination, and I’m not the only one that has the concern about a personality dominating and controlling a public forum.
I’m happy to continue paying to Logik every month - it is very valuable. But it becomes less so when someone arbitrarily tries to be daddy or whatever.
You are one of many thousands of Flame artists. Please inhabit that role. Please calm down and allow conversation to flourish. Thank you.
4 Likes
“Be in Beta” is not a solid solution to paying customers who just want a product that does not have show-stopper bugs. I was in Beta for many years. I might do it again. But that is not the solution.
3 Likes
This forum and this community will diminish if people feel that there is some overlord trying to police speech.
5 Likes
Just want to give some insight on why these problems can happen and what we can do to avoid it. I know that some of the things I’ll say may sound defensive but it is not my objective to defend us. I simply want to explain what can happen while being as transparent as possible…
There are many different things that can explain why this problem was introduced in a released version:
- As you know, we are going through a major re-architecture of the code and need to make changes to the very core of Flame. The amount of issues we found internally is significant but we can’t catch them all.
- Again, you know that Flame is a massive piece of code that is 30 years old. Modernizing this is quite a challenge. Not an excuse, but certainly a reality we need to deal with.
- Now you could say that these are not excuses to actually release a problem like this and I would mainly agree. The problem we have with something like Action (and Flame as whole) is that the possibilities are basically infinite which makes it also a challenge to test.
So what can we do when something like this happens?
- Memorize it and try to incorporate that use case in our testing routine.
- Create an automated test that will test that use case every day.
- Fix it as soon as possible when we are made aware of it. That specific problem (motion blur applied on a transparent object) has been in the field for more than a year and we just heard about it for the first time last week. We will always make our best effort to fix important issues like these once we can identify what is the source of the problem and yes fixing these issues have priority over introducing new features.
2 Likes