Shawn Miller
1
COW Coin
Forum Replies Created
-
[David Mathis] “I think what could be potentially disruptive to the pro market is if Blackmagic bundles Fusion with their cinema cameras and URSA cameras much like they do with Resolve and Ultrascope. Could a Lite version be in the works with free updates? That could change the landscape. What if they have a Lite version as well? Very interested in what others think.”
I have to be honest, I really have mixed feelings about this. It’s great to have an inexpensive, deep color pipeline from capture to output. But it kills me to see high-end software at fire sale prices. Are we starting to see the end of pure software companies that can offer perpetual licenses? Is the future of post production software, buy an Nvidia product to get Maxwell, or subscribe to NextLimit Cloud to get Realflow?
Shawn
-
[David Mathis] “Oh boy! There goes the neighborhood out with the bath water. 🙂
If they– Apple, decides to deep six Motion and FCP X as we know it I will move over to Linux and keep a close watch on what BMD does with Fusion and Resolve. I doubt though that this will happen.”
Ha ha, I don’t think Apple will EOL Motion or FCPX anytime soon either… but I do wish they would sell Shake to someone who’s interested in reviving it for Windows, Linux and OSX. If BMD wants to be the new Autodesk, they’ll need more than one compositing application, just sayin’. 🙂
Shawn
-
[Scott Witthaus] “[Shawn Miller] “I’m really interested to see what integration will look like between Resolve and Fusion.”
That’s an simple one. It was called Avid|DS. And Avid foolishly refused to support it, develop it and market it. Instead they decided to stay firmly in the middle-ground of post. Baffling.”
That is baffling. I sort of remember the %50 discount on Fusion licenses for DS owners after it was EOL’d (to replace the compositing functionality), but I didn’t know that Avid fell down on the development and marketing side. Hopefully, other application vendors will have better foresight. Looks like it might be a new day for Fusion.
Shawn
-
[Tim Wilson] “[Shawn Miller] ” I agree with you. :-)”
I should have mentioned that I was speaking rhetorically, and not thinking I was refuting any of your points. Not at all. I agree with you. Whatever this story ISN’T, what it IS is still amazing.”
Touché Mr. Wilson, touché. I should have seen that. It looks like we’re agreed on all points then. 🙂
Shawn
-
[Tim Wilson] “[Shawn Miller] “I’m really interested to see what integration will look like between Resolve and Fusion.”
Integration, yes. Merging, I can’t imagine even a little.
Although the list of things BMD has done that I wouldn’t have imagined is pretty long.
For one, the two products are from different companies. It takes a lot longer than you’d think to sort that sort of thing out. More important though, despite the fact that are some people who need multiple tasks, Media Composer is never going to have Pro Tools “inside,” any more than FCP had Motion “inside” or Premiere jas After Effects “inside.” Merging codebases is hard enough. Merging interfaces is impossible. You’d have to bury things so deep that a modal interface would be the only solution, at which point you sacrifice flexibility and efficiency on all kinds of levels.”
Yes, I agree. I was thinking more along the lines of interchange. Something more akin to Cinema 4D/After Effects (pre-Cineware of course). 🙂
[Tim Wilson] “I know that there’s a lot of excitement about anything free, and BMD’s aggression in general, but node-based compositing has nothing to do with motion graphics. Even if it works as your new greenscreen tool of choice, it’s not going to be useful for much of anything else related to mainstream non-keying After Effects work that editors are doing.”
Yes, again I completely agree. I see Fusion/Resolve as (possibly) being better suited to finishing. I didn’t mean to suggest that Resolve could be a motion graphics front end to Fusion, the way Premiere is to AE. In fact, I almost wrote that Fusion is on one hand, WAY overpowered for the types of compositing tasks that most editors need, while probably being less than ideal as a motion graphics tool (at the same time).
[Tim Wilson] “….unless you’re betting on fusion or even Nuke as a realistic long-term alternative for motion graphics or most editors’ current approach to compositing and effects. In which case, I’ll happily take that bet, and I’ll spot you the points. Easy money. The reefs are rich with the bones of those who thought they could plunder the good ship After Effects, which indeed Fusion has never tried to do.”
Not for editors, no. For high-end MoGraph work, possibly. I’m referring to the kind of work where the lines between MoGraph and VFX are so blurred that even the most seasoned pros have a tough time telling which is which… maybe it’s time for a new catergory – MoFX, maybe? I’ve been saying for years that AE occupies an interestingly hard niche to compete in… that intersection between VFX and motion graphics where advanced animation, industrial strength project sizes, scripting and advanced compositing have to live in the same application. To your point, there hasn’t been a serious competitor to AE’S MoFX ™ capabilities since the fall of Commotion and Combustion, and it doesn’t look like there’s one on the horizon.
BTW, if you can find someone to take that bet, put me in for the price of a lifetime subscription to CC, because I agree with you. 🙂
Shawn
-
This is very exciting news, though I doubt there will be a Mac version anytime soon. Walter’s wise caveats aside (which I completely agree with), I think this could be a very good thing, as BMD is looking to expand support and engineering resources for Fusion (see Grant Petty’s video off the BMD homepage at about the 22 min. mark). I think a wider user base (newly added Mac users) could give Autodesk and The Foundry some much needed pressure to delight the market (assuming Resolve continues to evolve its editing capabilities). I’m really interested to see what integration will look like between Resolve and Fusion.
Shawn
-
[Bret Williams] “What is it about Red Giant that everyone likes? I don’t see anything that interesting for those prices. I find just as useful stuff at fcpeffects where I can buy half their catalog for a couple hundred. Motionvfx is a but more useful too. Mlooks, mflare, mObject, all great stuff for next to nothing, especially when they have their sales. But to each their own of course.”
Aside from the effects, RGU supports more applications, runs on two platforms and allows you to vote on plugin development. Red Giant support is also incredibly good. IMO, the combined products and services are a steal. There’s also the licensing model – having subscription and buyout as options is the way to go. At least, that’s why I like RGU.
Shawn
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I’m sure it’s 4 bit x2.
Displays are full gamut sRGB, though!
They also do 1080p60 regular motion.”
Pretty impressive!
-
[Steve Connor] “and HDR video!”
So… is that 8 bit “HDR”, or true 16 bit video?
Shawn
-
[David Cherniack] “I could be wrong but I expect that Adobe’s growing clout in the post world, and the overall quality of Cineform, will see it increasingly being used as an acquisition codec by camera manufacturers.”
Man I want this to be true. ProRes is a great recording format, but Cineform would make my life just that much easier. It’s one of the reasons I’m keeping an eye on the Kinefinity cameras. Would also love to see BlackMagic adopt Cineform.
Shawn