[patdawg]

rohit wrote:

i also wish one could hook up a viper directly to toxik..if they put in proper i/o in the first place 🙂

I would think that if you have the budget to shoot on Viper, then you have the budget to do a proper solour session with the Viper footage before it gets to Toxik, flame, or whatever else you’re doing your comps on. Why would you directly import raw Viper data?

[patdawg]

nanuk wrote:

rohit wrote:

maybe discreet should also include scenarios of where toxik should be used on their webpage….a lotta people think its a replacement fer flame or combustion but its not.

They do. Toxik was developed for filmpipelines. Studios with a large amount of people working together. This is the collaborative thing. And this is also the reason, why they want to sell it only in bundles of 5. And it is for DI. But I heard rumors, that they are thinking of supporting an I/O. Because many customers are asking for it. We will see. Perhaps the NAB will reveal more. Hopefully!

Greetz Nanuk

Actually, I could see it being very useful in a commercial post-production environment. We do vfx shots all the time where the collaborative workflow would be VERY useful even in small 3-5 person workgroups. Not to mention all the other nice stuff…the TouchUI, floating point, etc etc… I can’t wait to see the new stuff at NAB.

[patdawg]

joni wrote:

we have all three machines…

nitris on hp v7
quad fcp v5
linux smoke v7

Ya, we have all three, as well as flame, and I’d pretty much agree with everything you said.

[patdawg]

mseymour7 wrote:

Just so you guys know we will be providing a bunch of Toxik training stuff in a month or so.

Mike 😆

That’ll be awesome Mike. I’ve been using Toxik for close to a month now, and think the interface/workflow is great. Though, it’s missing some pretty important tools at this stage. Autodesk does have some pretty good free video training on their website, but any additional stuff would be great.

[patdawg]

Iggs wrote:

Hey all,

just to add a few things to consider when thinking about Avid|DS:

You forgot to mention that if you have ANY kind of complex composite containers, and/or trees you will wait for-FRIGGIN-ever for your timelines to load. I’m doing about half my work on a DS now(a very new V7.6 one)…unhappily, and it takes anywhere from 20-seconds to ten minutes to load a sequence. It also plays horribly with Avid Unity. If you restart a DS that is connected to a Unity with very much media on it you’ll wait a good half-hour for it to re-index the media…EVERY SINGLE TIME. This is the slowest damned machine I’ve ever worked on. Slower than the Media Composer I used to edit on.

[patdawg]

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.

[patdawg]

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]

dapeter wrote:

I have no idea what a FFI artists get per hour, but I’m sure it can be profitable.

If you’re good, and you own your own system you can get a heck of a lot more than $150/hr…alot more.

[patdawg]

Mrloafbot wrote:

Thanks for the link. I was more wondering about what sort of stuff a 3d person would do to be working in broadcast color. Like what kind of files should I be rendering out? What bit depth? At what Gamma? How do I make my monitor display such images properly?

The most important thing to know, in my opinion, is that broadcast will never look quite as nice as your print, or web work. The range of legal colors is significantly smaller, as is the resolution (assuming you work in SD for television). It may be worth getting a calibration probe if your broadcast monitor supports it, the same with your computers, but you are never, never going to get them to match exactly. Learn to live with it, and do the best you can within the limitations given you by NTSC.

[patdawg]

Jersy wrote:

Hey!

I’m thinking about buying the Flame CMIVFX DVD tutorials cause I’m an FX trainee at a company which got an older version of inferno (4.7 R2) and I want to practice using it. I want to ask you, whether the tutorials are worth buying them or not and does it make sense to buy these Flame tutorials and practice them on an older inferno? Thanks a lot!

Greetings,

Jersy

I bought them awhile ago, and I think that they’re totally worth it. CMI needs to update the DVDs to cover some of the new features in 9/9.5, but they will go a long way towards getting you comfortable with the interface. The DVDs contain hours and hours of training, taught by Kuban Altan, a veteran FFI artist. Only drawback I can see is Kuban has a sometimes difficult to understand Turkish(I believe) accent, but I don’t think it’s enough of a problem to not recommend the DVDs.

[patdawg]

raj_reddy wrote:

hi thanx for your support

now what i am trying to do is, accessing stonefs of discreet smoke in COMBUSTION 4 using wiretap. i added the wiretap server in browse menu, then it’s showing the smoke projects, clips. but

when i try to import the clip from stonefs to combustion nothing is happening…

can anyone help on this? whether any settings that to be done either in combustion or smoke ???

thanx
raj

Last I checked your clip needs to be 8-bit, though there was supposed to be 10-bit support coming. If it’s 8-bit and still won’t import then maybe commit the entire clip to one layer with no cuts…making sure it ends up 8-bit. Also, make sure you are using the latest version of wiretap server with the latest build of combustion. They’ve fixed alot of stability issues in the latest patches. It was almost unusable before.

[patdawg]

eltopo wrote:

And if I was one of your operator I would leave if you traded my mac for a pc

😀

Gotta love the elitism of the Mac camp. Don’t really get it. Can’t even play Doom III on one of those cute little aluminum boxes.

[patdawg]

malu05 wrote:

Well, they use Shake to many (i really think all) shots…
Ive seen alot of behind the compositing on LOTR and King Kong, and i only saw Shake….

So, im not shure that they use Flame or Inferno?
And if you have like 3000+ shots… you def. need a most cost effective outcome which is Shake…

No doubt they used Shake for the vast majority of the shots, but there’s also not much debate about whether they used flame and inferno for some stuff. There are still alot of shots that can be done more efficiently on a discreet box.

[patdawg]

robc wrote:

hi,

ok, i just checked myself; theres still one small issue:
– or rather … it seems f*ed up again ….

anyways, i can mail you a .tar file with a working version of those if you want.

ciao
robert

Can you tell us what you did to get them working?

[patdawg]

thelibran wrote:

patdawg wrote:

Huh? Read the manual man. This is happening because you are in the OverlayUI mode for the CC/CW. It does this so that you can manipulate the controls and view an entire HD frame at the same time. If you want to go back to the normal UI behaviour change the button that says “OverlayUI” to “Player”.

Thanks a lot dude… Sorry to bother you with such a silly thing… I guess I freaked out when I saw that…. ooooppppss…. sorry and thanks

No prob…it’s actually quite a handy feature if you’re working in HD, or film res.

[Author]

Posts