OT: Fusion Studio

[Eric Santiago]

My workflow would be the same as it was back in my SGI days and when it was packaged with Maya.
No different really from AE as far as the use of the software.
Sure some form of Dynamic Linking would be nice but then Id welcome that with AE first.

[Walter Soyka]

Honestly, I think that Fusion’s learning curve will be a turnoff for a lot of people accustomed to the intuitiveness of FCP X and the high-floor/low-ceiling of Motion.

One of the comments we see over and over here (which I will attempt to paraphrase here without comment) is that Apple tools are for artists, not technicians, and that they let the user focus on creating without worrying about what’s happening under-the-hood, almost as if that part is immaterial.

In other words, Apple tools are high-level abstraction layers.

Nodal compositors are the exact opposite of this.

Nodal compositors are low level, direct expressions of image processing. They expect you to manipulate your imagery by combining highly specific tools, in a user-defined chain of virtually unlimited complexity, without the guidance of a fixed render pipeline, all in order to achieve your goal.

If you don’t care to pop open the hood, you’re not going to like nodal compositors. If you can’t abide track tetris, you’re probably not going to like premultiplication poker.

Of course, I believe the artist/technician dichotomy is false (I guess I didn’t entirely let it go without comment), but the fact remains that the power of a tool like Fusion is expressed very differently than the power of a tool like FCP X.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Eric Santiago]

I think it depends on how you approach it.

To me, FCPX as the an editorial tool requires it to be simple.

But when it comes to intricate compositing and grading, then apps such as Fusion and Resolve are welcome in my workflow since Ive had the experience with both and all the other head hurting apps from my 3D days 🙂

[Walter Soyka]

[Eric Santiago] “To me, FCPX as the an editorial tool requires it to be simple. But when it comes to intricate compositing and grading, then apps such as Fusion and Resolve are welcome in my workflow since Ive had the experience with both and all the other head hurting apps from my 3D days :)”

Eric, maybe I was unclear above. I absolutely agree with this. I think the approach that each of the tools we’re discussing takes toward their intended use is not just valid, but very valuable to their users. There is a real need for a mix of high-abstraction and low-abstraction tools.

I am just saying that there’s a quantum leap in complexity and prerequisite knowledge between effective use of Apple-style effects/compositing a la FCPX/M5 (or likewise Adobe-style effects/compositing a la Pr/Ae) and effective use of nodal compositing. Any user looking at Fusion will quickly discover that their layer-based compositing software has been making an awful lot of decisions on their behalf.

I don’t say this to deter people from Fusion, but rather to prepare them for it. The first step is a doozy.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Oliver Peters]

Considering that the vast majority of FCP editors never touched Color or even Motion and most still don’t really understand Resolve, I just don’t see much traction with Fusion and the average FCP X editor. Leitch ran into this problem in marketing DPS Velocity, which came bundled with a version of Fusion back then. To get around the issue, they created a number of easy editorial presets to get you started and to deal with simple tasks. Autodesk has done a bit of the same with nodes in Smoke 2015.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Steve Connor]

As powerful as it is, I really can’t see significant numbers of AE or Motion users converting to Fusion, just as I can’t see many Editors using Resolve as their main NLE, even if they do manage to add more features and tackle the speed issues. Especially if Adobe manage to make significant speed improvements with AE

[Helge Tjelta]

Well, I’m for one very keen on going down this route.

I miss Shake, loved the nodes. So I’m really looking forward for this. In fact I’ve setup an old PC (GTX580 gfx card), just to be able to learn it better.

It will fit perfectly into the workflow.

I use: FCPX for editing, Resolve for grading, Nuendo for audio, and motion/AE for animation work.
Fusion will be great for more advanced GFX work, as it has some really nice tools inside.

And I don’t really like layers and preComp…. I love behaviors in motion.

But Fusion is of another leage. Difficult, yes, but it is fun.

Remember details take time.

[Eric Santiago]

See thats a good attitude Helge on learning.

I did the same thinking when I saw FCPX at NAB 2011 for the first time.

I knew it was going to be fun to learn something different.

Not all of us have that luxury but ever since my days from EIAS/formZ to Lightwave, Softimage etc…I always forced myself to learn new things so that I dont get so jaded with one app.

I hope to find time to get acquainted with Fusion, I kinda gave up on Smoke since it felt so slow for me compared to AE.

[Walter Soyka]

[Eric Santiago] “I hope to find time to get acquainted with Fusion, I kinda gave up on Smoke since it felt so slow for me compared to AE.”

Fusion is pretty speedy and interactive. You’ll like it!

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Helge Tjelta]

Me to started with Smoke. But that route is dead. I bought a full lisence, and now I’m out of the loop because I don’t rent it. So now I’m stuck with a support deal, which in essence gives me nothing for 1/2 a year.

And Smoke always had so many workarounds for problems, which flame had an easy tool for…. to bad.