[maxx]

@Jabar 25304 wrote:

Hi guys,

We have an old 3.5 licence and I’d like to upgrade but out reseller tells me there is no upgrade option. Can anybody confirm this?
Also how does maintenance with Shake work? Is there a maintenance option or does one simply buy the new version when it comes out?

Shake has been discontinued and is not being developed any further, 4.1 is the current and final version.

http://www.fxguide.com/article359.html

So, there’s no maintenance and no further upgrade costs. For $50k, though, they’ll sell you the source code for your own use and throw in 5000 licenses, though.

And yeah, no upgrade, just $500. Unless you’re on Linux, which is still $3000 I believe.

[maxx]

Where is the position located?

[maxx]

Combustion is not getting replaced by Toxik, they’re working on a new version (heard this from a very reliable source over in the fxphd forums).

And, to respond to Ajax’s post about Fusion running under Bootcamp… well every Windows program out there runs under Bootcamp. But try using it in production… nothing like rebooting constantly to go from one program to another.

Bootcamp’s a great idea but can be a real pain in the ass, expecially with software vendors who make Windows and OSX versions of their products but you have to choose which one you want since you can’t have both (Adobe anyone?).

[maxx]

Hmm… tough one. If you’re on Windows I’d say figure out your needs – Nuke and Fusion have an overall similar toolset, but it seems to me that Nuke is more interactive… that said Fusion has the full-blown 3D particle system and greater plugin compatibility.

OSX makes it an easy decision, since Nuke’s the only one available for that (other than Shake).

[maxx]

@scottmbusa 23676 wrote:

Will the people who make Fusion support a copy purchased like that?

Yes, the license is transferrable for a transfer fee. Most of the time single-license owners have the license tied to a dongle, so the dongle comes with the sale.

[maxx]

@scottmbusa 23674 wrote:

I know these questions are subjective, but I would like opinions, if you had a choice would you use Nuke or Fusion for fx, compositing, integrating CGI/3D, particle effects?

I asked this also in the Nuke forum.

I see here that there are folks selling copies of Fusion. Is this an indication that it sounds usefull, but after purchase there are issues that would lead one to prefer another solution?

Thank you.

No, sometimes it’s just because they don’t need it anymore. I might be selling my copy in the next month or so, not because it doesn’t work but because I’m moving my work over to OSX and there still isn’t an OSX version of Fusion available.

[maxx]

Plus, if you can wait for a month or so Eyeon will be showing Fusion 5.1 at Siggraph with some new features, probably the most likely one will be camera mapping as this seems to be the most requested feature.

[maxx]

It will be demo’ed at Siggraph this year, and from what I’ve seen they’re hoping to release it soon after.

[maxx]

Anyone know if the Linux pricing has changed?

Ahh – from the FAQ:

s Shake still available on Linux?

Yes, Shake 4.1 for Linux is available through [email protected]. Pricing has not changed for Linux.

Can you say loss leader? Of course it probably will work, once the workstations are out and can dual / triple boot I’ll probably get one.

[maxx]

The CC nodes won’t concatenate unless directly feeding into one another (same with Shake):

“Fusion’s workspace will take into account adjacent transforms and concatenate values whenever possible. As in Shake, its important to keep in mind that processing nodes in-between transforms break this capability. “Whenever I start out teaching Fusion — or even with experienced artists,” says Eyeon’s Isaac Guenard, “I emphasize that it is best to do your color corrections in a row and then apply transformations.” ( http://www.fxguide.com/article315.html )

So, the merge node breaks the concatenation. Logically with multiple CC’s on different layers the CC cannot concatenate since you’re performing totally seperate color math on different parts of the image.

[maxx]

Well, since I’m assuming you’re using Fusion, it’s really simple. Fusion is node based, where the images flow from one node to the next. So, put loaders for all your CG items. Add a CC after each one and adjust to your heart’s content. Then after merging all the layers, add a CC node to correct the overall comp.

[maxx]

purecharisma wrote:

First I want to make an image dissolve like in X-men 2 (night crawler) using particles. Does anyone have any ideas how I can do this.

For the first part, just use a particle image emitter – this is exactly what it’s designed to do. Add some particle forces to make them swirl or whatever you want them to do.

The flow would be:

(image) –> pImageEmitter –> (pdirectional force / pturbulence / etc) –> pRender

[maxx]

loops wrote:

There are a good few. I don’t know which ones will handle disappearing points for corner-pins off the top of my head, and well, I don’t have any particular opinions about which is best other than that SynthEyes is said to be really good for the price.

Syntheyes, Boujou, 3d Equalizer, PFTrack, and Matchmover are probably the main 3d tracking programs.

If you’re looking for an inexpensive one, Syntheyes is great (and resolution independent). If you only need to do SD, pixelcorps.com sells an SD-only version of Boujou Bullet that also works great.

[Author]

Posts