- This topic has 13 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 8 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Hey guys, i wonder… are versions in these machines parallels??
i mean
is an inferno 6.5 pretty much the same as flame 6.5 as well as flint 6.5?… i mean keeping the distances from one to each other obviously…tt
cheers
i vaguely remember inferno 3.6 flame 5.x or 6.x, but i could be totally wrong i mean we are talking like 1998! but now its all the same.
As far as I know:
basically inferno v4.xxx was flame/flint 7.xxx
so 6 should be 9 and afterwards inferno and flame both had the 200x numers.Still there are and have been differences in the toolkit mainly the modular keyer and in the past motion estimation….
I’m actually working with Inferno 2008 and also with Flame 2008. To be honest… both are identical. I could not find any difference on the “toolkit”
Yeah, the year releases are identical now.
Even back in the 9.5/6.5 days the software was effectively the same. Inferno action had “multi sampling” which is an effectively “free” 4x AA, or at least that’s how it was explained to me.
Flint’s got a few things missing from what I’ve read/heard: missing the modular keyer, action doesn’t have gaussian blurs and probably some other stuff.
yah, i mean i asked about an older version because i found a very cheap flint 6.5 or close to that, and i wanted to know how close to an inferno / flame 6.5 it would have been..
thanks all u guys!..
i guess for $9000 it’s not even worth it…flint 6.5 = Flame 6.5 = Inferno 3.5
@electronicpulse 27624 wrote:
i guess for $9000 it’s not even worth it…
dont buy. way too old and way too expensive. The old flint on O2 was so slow. Great for learning the basics and a little rotoscoping but compared to any PC System nowadays it is slow and just annoying. And don´t go for version 6.5…
@andy_dill 27619 wrote:
Yeah, the year releases are identical now.
Even back in the 9.5/6.5 days the software was effectively the same. Inferno action had “multi sampling” which is an effectively “free” 4x AA, or at least that’s how it was explained to me.
Flint’s got a few things missing from what I’ve read/heard: missing the modular keyer, action doesn’t have gaussian blurs and probably some other stuff.
if i remember correctly on inferno [ onyxxxx] if multisample was enabled in prefs it wud use hardware
@electronicpulse 27612 wrote:
Hey guys, i wonder… are versions in these machines parallels??
i mean
is an inferno 6.5 pretty much the same as flame 6.5 as well as flint 6.5?… i mean keeping the distances from one to each other obviously…tt
cheers
Hi luciano, I received your mail today. Check your message,
Mathieu
@rohit 27638 wrote:
if i remember correctly on inferno [ onyxxxx] if multisample was enabled in prefs it wud use hardware
flame also had multisample when it was still on onyx (before the move to octane)
yes it was an onyx thingy i think
Thanks Mathieu, i just read it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.