general perception of toxik

Home Page forums Autodesk/Discreet Toxik general perception of toxik

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #202855
    nanuk
    Participant

    hi everybody,

    i would like to ask you guys how your general perception of toxik is? what do you think about the product? is the tool doing what you expect it to do? what do you think about its standing in compositing community? what about autodesk´s pr/marketing for the product.

    thanks for your thoughts!

    curious nanuk

    #217843
    philnolan3d
    Participant

    @nanuk 28022 wrote:

    hi everybody,

    i would like to ask you guys how your general perception of toxik is? what do you think about the product? is the tool doing what you expect it to do? what do you think about its standing in compositing community? what about autodesk´s pr/marketing for the product.

    thanks for your thoughts!

    curious nanuk

    Hi Nanuk,

    I’ve been using Toxik for a little over 2 years now. I first got introduced to it through the classes they used to have on FXPHD for it. At the same time I had also started to check out Fusion and Nuke. The first thing that got my attention with Toxik was how fast it was. It just killed Nuke and Fusion. Although at the time some of the tool admittedly were lacking… which they’re long since fixed. The integration with Maya is a massive time saver!! And of course there’s the great autodesk interface. Shortly after taking the classes I started doing jobs with it. I had been doing all my work in Flame prior to this. Within a couple months I was doing all my comp work in Toxik. I couldn’t be happier with it.

    Its standing in the community I think is hurting pretty bad. I think Autodesk burned themselves pretty bad, at least here in LA by showing it off at a lot of the studios before it had a robust toolset. The first thing I always hear from people when I ask them if they’re tried it, is that they haven’t because they don’t think it has good toolset. Even though the toolset is great!! Sapphire and Tinderbox are even out for it. It still seems to be carrying the bad rep from years ago. The other problem they seem to be facing is the lack of companies using it. I keep trying to get freelancers that I hire to spend the time to learn it however they say they won’t because no other companies are using it and it would be a waste of their time when they think it would be better spent learning something like Nuke of Fusion. I’m starting to hear that especially from Combustion users now that it seems like Combustion is heading towards being a dead app. So far out here in LA I’ve only come across one other person that uses Toxik. If they’re any Toxik freelancers out there from LA hit me up! Its this total lack of users that keeps me from buying more copies of Toxik. If Autodesk was smart they would offer to swap copies of Combustion for Toxik… if at least to preserve and build a user base. PR? What PR? They don’t really seem to do any for Toxik. I can’t remember the last time I saw a article on this site or any other fx website.

    All around though I love it! Its pretty amazing what they’ve done with it over the past few years and I can’t wait to see what they do with it in the future.

    Michael
    http://www.giantsteps.us

    #217846
    Kelley Muro
    Participant

    @kryptic 28037 wrote:

    If Autodesk was smart they would offer to swap copies of Combustion for Toxik… if at least to preserve and build a user base.

    Toxik doesn’t serve the needs of the Combustion user base that works primarily with video. Toxik lacks Combustion’s frame buffer support, vector paint tools, robust text operator and particle system. I would gladly upgrade to Toxik if it had the tools I’ve come to rely on in Combustion, but it doesn’t. For video work, Toxik is currently not as broad or as versatile a tool as Combustion. Instead, it has a comparatively narrow focus, which is high end film compositing.

    Toxik’s handling of high-resolution images, floating-point image processing pipeline and Touch UI are all very attractive features. Unfortunately, without Combustion’s toolset, Toxik isn’t yet versatile enough to replace Combustion in the video market.

    #217853

    Hi Nanuk.

    As kryptic clearly outlined it, there isn’t much marketing or pr being done for this product, which is never a good sign.

    In its multiple declinations, Toxik has suffered too many unseccussful market launches.

    But the sad part is that Toxik is finally a good product, but as far as I am concerned, it is too late to the party.

    If I were you, and in order to re-ensure yourself, especially if you want to invest in this product, I would attempt to contact the Toxik product manager in Montreal, Cda.

    Once you have your chat with him, you’ll be able to make up your mind.

    PS: Do not try your reseller, nor a sales person, go to the source on this one.

    Krawken.

    #217850
    Bilawal Sidhu
    Participant

    This market space (basic EDL conform, compositing and finishing) will end up being addressed by realtime or GPU assisted opensource software… where the barrier (price) to entry is VERY low. The problem I saw with Toxic, as a Combustion user, was a useability shift and high price for entry…. But that is just me…. I am a linear compositor…. I light once, and comp once, maybe twice.. with minimal set of passes (beauty, Zdepth, and fore/mid/backgnd passes). Good lighting is rewarded in comp.

    I sincerely hope that a programmer out there addresses this. These guys need to get a reality check.

    Check one – http://www.vimeo.com/4515904

    #217847
    Kelley Muro
    Participant

    @mmoses00 28048 wrote:

    This market space will end up being addressed by realtime or GPU assisted opensource software…

    That’s a nice thought, but I don’t think it will gain any traction in the commercial market. Jahshaka hasn’t exactly taken the post industry by storm…

    #217849
    summerJ
    Participant

    hi guys,
    thanks for your thoughts. i just wanted to check the perception of that tool in general. i´m with toxik since beta 1.0 so i saw that coming a loooong way. at the moment, with 2009 and 2010 on its way where you can say the tool does what we need, but cause of lack in perception it is hard to commit to the tool. as michael said, freelancers are hard to get cause they think they waste time on learning it, cause nobody is using it. for now i see it more as an “inhouse tool”. lets hope autodesk does something about pr/marketing to gain market. i think it is a good tool, otherwise i would be with it after all that time. but it looks like my feelings and doubts about it are shared.

    thanks, nanuk

    #217845
    prajjwal
    Participant

    Well, if Toxik is to gain any traction, they have to “steal” users from other packages.

    Now my question for Toxik users: what are the top 5 reasons for switching from Nuke to Toxik?

    — Xavier

    #217852
    ray ng
    Participant

    in my opinion Toxik is at a strange place.

    Autodesk literally spent years developing a workgroup functionality that was nearly wholly rejected by the industry as far as I can tell….so that caused two problems…low adoption rate of the initial releases, and the inability to train on it or use it as a freelancer as a standalone product….at least until FXPHD came along.

    It took super long amount of time for them to add paint of any kind, which is nearly a necessity in the market they expect it to play in.

    What remains now is, as was stated above, a really future proof tool in terms of it scalability of performance and it’s ability to handle the richest media available in terms of bit depth.

    I think autodesk is taking the right steps in terms of making it a stand alone tool and lifting it off the database, and partnering up with FXPHD to get ppl access to it and to learn it.

    From what I understand, as an architecture of its design, it should be easy for them to develop tools for it now to plug in and extend feature set. So I think it’s a matter of them seeing the demand for the product, to apply resources to it…the economy being what it is, its much more likley that they will respond to demand, rather then spend a lot to generate demand. which, of course, will likely dictate the speed of development.

    The problem, as stated previously, is that it probably has a bit of an PR problem from all those previous false starts, and still hangs on to a perception that its a database centric heavy workgroup tool.

    #217854
    tony stack
    Participant

    Actually we’ve been using it at my work for about 2 years now on a range of broadcast and film projects. Toxik has some real strengths over some of the competing packages, for example, it really rocks at the Stereoscopic workflow.

    In fact, we had a project for an auto-stereoscopic display where we had 8 camera views, and it was easy to add an unlimited number of “streams” and then have our composite work across all eight camera views and have them look like a single input. Most compositors aren’t smart enough to take into account the fact that you may need more than two camera views for a “stereoscopic” composite. This works in regular node compositor, as well as the Re-Action module (similar to action in Flame)

    Over the past couple of years Autodesk has done an excellent job of rebuilding the package from the ground-up to make it a real competitor in the market.

    I recently did a review of Toxik 2009 for Post Magazine where I went through some of the stronger features of the package:

    http://www.postmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=7181E1FF912B476287C654CA183A7F1E

    #217844
    philnolan3d
    Participant

    @Xavier 28066 wrote:

    Well, if Toxik is to gain any traction, they have to “steal” users from other packages.

    Now my question for Toxik users: what are the top 5 reasons for switching from Nuke to Toxik?

    — Xavier

    I don’t think they would have to “steal” users at all. Autodesk has a huge base of Combustion users. They could probably get most of them to switch over to Toxik by giving anyone with a Combustion license a license of Toxik and then only charge them the yearly subscription. That would give them a pretty big user base and more money from all the new people paying the subscription fee without costing them anything.

    Also I think getting new Toxik classes back on FXPHD would help them. Without the classes that John and Sebastien did I would probably think what most people think about Toxik.

    As for your question… speed, speed, speed, prettier interface, awesome intergration with maya.

    #217851
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Like Xavier, I’d also like to know what advantages Toxik has over Nuke. I can’t imaging it’s quicker in 32-bit float calculations than Nuke…

    Thanks!

    #217848
    Scott
    Participant

    what got me into toxik was performance.. coming from combustion and a little flame all felt natural… making the 64bit versions of linux & win64 demo versions available will let users test real performance on a desktop app.
    also coming out first with the (very cool in my opinion) database and then taking it out dosen’t help , being labled as an application killer is also bad rep.
    today toxik is very stable and fast with full float images, it has “everyday” tools… I dont see why not use it.
    esteban

    #217855
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    At first I have to point out that I don’t use Toxik. I just took a really quick look at it today, just because I have it with Maya. I’m quite familiar with Nuke and Fusion.
    And I find Nuke and Fusion much more complete packages – Toxik is like a small subset of those. It’s like comparing Silo to Maya. I’m quite sure that if Toxik could compete with Nuke, Autodesk wouldn’t give it for free (if it’s not free, I want my money back)
    Someone asked about advantages of Toxik over Nuke/Fusion. I don’t know about that, but I can tell you about things I haven’t found in Toxik.
    -3d composition
    -particles
    -some keyer
    -defocus
    If these features are hidden somewhere, then I’m sorry. I admit I haven’t tested every node Toxik has.
    I lied that I don’t know about any advantage of Toxik. It has one big advantage. You get it for free (kind of).
    That doesn’t mean it’s not good at what it can do. It’s just no replacement for Nuke/Fusion in my opinion.

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap