- This topic has 16 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 8 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Hi mihearties!
I’d like some feedback from you about batch. I work mostly on commercials and sometimes it’s a real hell *because of the client wanting to change so many things in one step*. So i kindof trained myself to use batch a lot, reeeealy a lot.
I’v reached the point where i don’t use “real” action anymore, it all gets done in batch.Is this more or less your workflow too ?
thanx.
Seems to be pretty much where Flame is headed 🙂 Lots of new things only work in Batch – Tracer, motion estimation Timewarp, Distort, layered Paint…
thats one nice point where history can be useful:
you do your work in the modules as usual, then take the final into batch & expand, so you can do versions & stuff…
depending on the complexity of the setups it might be wise though to get rif of the history later …
as mentioned already, ffi is heading more&more into batch, many of the issues & bugs of older versions are gone, so its more fun & comfortable to work with…
ciao
roberti use batch all the time … now with history and the timeline it makes really sence. I don’t know why … but i’m still using the editdesk for editing changes – even though i could do it in the timeline.
I really hope Autodesk will focus on this workflow for improvements and stability.
With Burn batch is the only way – and I can’t imagine working without Burn.
Jeff
between Batch’s autosave feature and the freeform way it lets you experiment i find it is the only way to go’
plus when you are working in a collaborative environment it makes finding setups easier…everything is in batch. personally i like to keep things in batch even if i’m pre-rendering branches…it lets me follow my train of though better when i pick up the comp again later. one thing that i’d really like to see in future versions of batch is some type of background-note tool (likey they have in nuke)
the only frustrations come in when the batch version of a desktop tool is slower or buggy.
neonmarg wrote:With Burn batch is the only way – and I can’t imagine working without Burn.Jeff
I could not agree more. I think with all the nice PCs and G5s and apps such as Shake & Nuke etc. FFI really start to look a bit old. I think the very least Discreet (AME) should do is to implement Burn for FREE!!!
Its a hell of an improvement, and works way better than any other network renderer I’ve seen. Where else can you watch unfinished clips, edit them, copy audio to them put them in your edit, etc…. ?
Burn is just great. But way too expensive, especially with sparks.-k
I thought that Burn was expensive too, before I used it. Now you have to ask yourself how much would you pay to have no local render time and renders that go lots faster than can be done locally? It’s almost like having another seat in terms of uptime!
The sparks costs have come down some I believe.
Jeff
neonmarg wrote:I thought that Burn was expensive too, before I used it. Now you have to ask yourself how much would you pay to have no local render time and renders that go lots faster than can be done locally? It’s almost like having another seat in terms of uptime!The sparks costs have come down some I believe.
Jeff
They still need to start giving Burn licenses away for free. FFI can’t compete in terms of render speed with a seat of AE, or shake with a render farm behind it. The interactivity argument is fading as well as PCs get faster. Even the consumer-level OpenGL cards are lightyears beyond SGI hardware in terms of speed.
patdawg wrote:neonmarg wrote:I thought that Burn was expensive too, before I used it. Now you have to ask yourself how much would you pay to have no local render time and renders that go lots faster than can be done locally? It’s almost like having another seat in terms of uptime!The sparks costs have come down some I believe.
Jeff
They still need to start giving Burn licenses away for free. FFI can’t compete in terms of render speed with a seat of AE, or shake with a render farm behind it. The interactivity argument is fading as well as PCs get faster. Even the consumer-level OpenGL cards are lightyears beyond SGI hardware in terms of speed.
I dont agree … ofcourse free burn license would be great! … however you don’t get your beers for free either 😉
Remember what you pay for is the great software, which is tested, designed and build for client attended production. That is why Flame is now on a “normal” ibm pc , but still cost the same! … My opinion is that Discreet should drop having 3 products … why do we still have flint flame inferno with almost the same tools but diffrents in price. Sell One software (the flint price is realistic to the market) with no limitations, and support the same hardware, with option for numbers of processors, discarrays etc. but SAME software price – this would be a lot more fair!!!!
jonas
i think discreet (AME) is asking themselves some serious questions right now about that very thing. keep in mind that inferno was the platform where cutting-edge technoligies first made their debut, then they rippled down thru the other products. my guess is that between their scattered expansion into other arenas (DI, desktop, etc) and the complete overhaul that multires took (v5/8) they sorta allowed the product lines to merge and inferno lost some of its luster.
the technology demos at NAB showcased some really sexy stuff that has yet to make it into a release. i wouldn’t be too surprised to see inferno become the place where we first see those technolgies appear exclusively (for at least a year or so).
Jonas wrote:I dont agree … ofcourse free burn license would be great! … however you don’t get your beers for free either 😉jonas
That’s a silly argument. After Effects/Shake may not be as pleasurable to use as FFI, and they may not have all of the tools that FFI has, but they can now do 90% of the work that previously could only be done on FFI. The only real decision to be made in alot of these cases is cost. For the same price as a flame box on an SGI or Linux, I can get an insane After Effects/Shake workstation with a large render farm behind it. You don’t have to pay a dime for the render node licenses, except for maybe a plugin here or there. I’m not making the argument that After Effects or Shake are better at what they do than FFI. I’m just saying that Autodesk is making it VERY difficult to justify the cost behind these systems…ESPECIALLY Burn. I can’t even begin to imagine how many more systems they would sell if they just started giving Burn licenses away for free. Building a render farm wouldn’t be any more expensive than the desktop compositing apps, and you’d have the awesome discreet tools to work with.
kalthans wrote:one thing that i’d really like to see in future versions of batch is some type of background-note tool (likey they have in nuke)There’s the Note node in 9.5… it would be nice to have them attached to specific nodes rather than just floating about perhaps.
loops wrote:There’s the Note node in 9.5… it would be nice to have them attached to specific nodes rather than just floating about perhaps.There are attached notes… CTRL V over the node.
Jeff
Oh yeah. Duh 🙂
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.