OpenFX plugins in Fusion Studio?

Hi folks,

I just started using the paid version, so am dipping my toe in Fusion Studio for the first time.

One thing that's immediately apparent is that in Fusion Studio there don't seem to be any OpenFX plugins available.

For example ResolveFX Stylize > EdgeDetect is a plugin i'd very much like to use in Studio.

I don't see anywhere in the Studio prefs to set a plugin location path, and even if i did, i wouldn't know what location to aim it at.

Are OpenFX actually available in Studio? And if so, any ideas what i can do to make the accessible?

Thanks! .......... D

If you have OFX plugins installed they will appear (e.g., Mocha Pro or BCC). To access them, <SHIFT> + <SPACE> and then type the name of the effect (or access them any other way you would get at nodes in Fusion).

Having said this, perhaps you are talking about Resolve FX specifically - I don’t believe those are available but I may be wrong. Hopefully someone with more experience with Fusion Studio will be able to answer that.

The ResolveFX plug-ins will not appear in Fusion, no. And third-party OFX plug-ins that work in Resolve (even in the Fusion page) may or may not work in Fusion standalone.

Does Resolve's edge detect give better or different results than using the Filter node in Sobel or Laplacian mode?

Thanks again Bryan,

I think i'll stay in Resolve for now as i'm really liking some of those Resolve FX!

The EdgeDetect seems to have many more tweakable controls then the normal filter node.

Are there any features of Fusion Studio that you think are really a deal breaker that prevent you from switching to Resolve? (i'm curious to know what i'm missing!)

The UI.

Resolve and Fusion 16's UI is unusable, in my opinion. I can't even bring myself to properly evaluate the betas because the environment is so hostile to doing any actual work.

Aside from that, Fusion standalone is faster to launch, more stable, easier to automate and integrate into a pipeline, and can use distributed rendering.

Fusion in Resolve is fine for quick-and-dirty mograph associated with an edit, but RealFusion is designed for the work I do: Feature film quality compositing.

If you can quantify what you're missing from the edge detect you like, it might be possible to build the same features for Fusion. For instance, here's a hefty thread at WSL that resulted in at least two macros that improve Sobel:
https://www.steakunderwater.com/wesuckl ... f=6&t=2206

I remember building another improved edge detect macro, too, but a quick search didn't turn it up.

Ah, i see........ i'm just a hobbyist who never touched video edit software til a couple of months ago, but i'll take that on board and also use Fusion Studio now and again to see what it can offer me!

Cheers!

Hi folks,

Just another question on this:

I'm really missing some of these killer Resolve OpenFX that are not available in Fusion 16.

For example, EdgeDetect & LightRays.

But my suspicion is that these are actually just combinations of the basic building block FX in Fusion, packaged together in a nice combination.

So could anyone confirm this?: that all these effects are achievable in Fusion if i just use the right combination of available nodes?

image (1).png (68.1 KiB) Viewed 7425 times

image.png (53.06 KiB) Viewed 7425 times

I tried it because it looks interesting.
For example, how about such a combination for LightRays?

光線.jpg (316.97 KiB) Viewed 7345 times

For the initial value of EdgeDetection, the Sobel type of the Filter node is close as you know.
However, I tried and found that Filter was a little noisy.
Noise may be solved by various corrections of the original material, but EdgeDetection that can set denoising is more convenient, and Filter also has a problem of frame edge processing as discussed earlier.

I hope ResolveFX will be integrated into Fusion as soon as possible.

Some more killer plugins in Resolve Fusion that aren't available in FS16:

JPEG Damage
Grid

I don't get it! FS16 is where you want to be for heavyweight composting, but there's more creativity available in Resolve Fusion??!!

Resolve is very slow to start up and seems more buggy in the Fusion window than standalone.

What might be the logic to this situation?

It may be ironic, but heavyweight compositing in general uses less 'canned effects' than your average user, so the lack of these effects only emphasizes the need to be creative yourself.

OK!

So how do you create the JPG Damage effect live in FS16?

It may be ironic, but heavyweight compositing in general uses less 'canned effects' than your average user, so the lack of these effects only emphasizes the need to be creative yourself.

You must work with very relaxed deadlines and very large budgets!

Yeah, let's not get too purist about this, whatever gets the job done!

Goddamit i'm having fun with this stuff, just put this jam together:

You must work with very relaxed deadlines and very large budgets!

I can assure you I don't. I was just referring to the remark 'there's more creativity available in Resolve'.
A canned effect isn't *more creativity* in my opinion. It gives you an extra tool, but the creativity still needs to be within yourself. It's all semantics of course, but I consider the fact that you can bend a program to your will to be more of a sign of creativity than a big plugin suite that makes all showreels look the same

But yes... by all means, do what gets the job done on time and inside of your budget. That's what we all strive for.

There's a bit of a paradigm difference. You can have 5,000 pre-built effects and spend your time sifting through them for the exact one you need for a given situation, or you can be have a more low-level toolset from which you can build a bespoke solution for the problem at hand. The time and money spent in each case might be identical.

The advantage to the preconstructed route is that you can get results while only barely understanding your tools. This is good for people who dip into mograph only occasionally and spent the bulk of their time doing something else, like editing.

The advantage to the tool-based approach is that you'll seldom run across a problem you can't engineer your way out of. This good for people that spend most of their time doing motion graphics or compositing. It requires a bigger investment in learning, which pays off in flexibility.

At the moment, Fusion is much friendlier to the second paradigm. There is no Hiveworks or Video Copilot for Fusion. Even the stuff in Reactor tends to focus more on tool extension than templates. I think those things will come, but they're still pretty thin on the ground right now.