Jump to: Board index » General » Fusion

Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

Learn about 3D compositing, animation, broadcast design and VFX workflows.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Mike Bozulich

  • Posts: 24
  • Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:26 pm

Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostTue May 03, 2016 10:24 pm

Seems like it's time to start thinking about F9. For windows users F8 was a bit of a disappointment since it was primarily a minor interface tweak with few new features. Hopefully we can get a good request list together to let the Fusion team know where the user base would like to go with the program. It's too bad we can't do some polling for features to let everyone vote on what they'd like to see.

Here's my wishlist so far:

Interface:
  • Purple tool ribbon: Change to match when gray interface is selected.
  • Gamma / Gain sliders: add them to view windows. This is immensely useful in Nuke and much easier than dealing with Fusion's lut system.
  • Fix new folder / up directory buttons in file load window: At present it's near impossible to tell which is which without hovering over the buttons to get tool-tips.
  • Better keyframe visualization on time-line: A single thin green line makes it difficult to tell which frame a keyframe is actually on.
  • Improved spline editor: The ability to see X & Y coordinates in spline editor in addition to the pre-existing displacement curve.

Features:
  • Adaptive resolution: I would love to see new scripts adopt the resolution of the footage added to them (as an option of course).
  • Denoise: A better denoise tool would be nice. Perhaps the one from Resolve. If it's in Fusion Studio only, that's cool.
  • Better color tools: I find the color corrector tool to be a bear. There are buttons, panels, and tabs everywhere. One can easily get lost in it - and inheriting a comp with some crazy color correctors in it can be a real pain in butt. I'd love to see some Resolve color grading tools pollinate to the Fusion side.
  • More robust channel support: See Nuke's ability to easily add channels on the fly, swap, customize, and use them with nearly any node in the program.
  • Addmix with A/B curve support.
  • Spline warp / morph tool.
  • Improved keyers.

Other tools that would be nice to have eventually:
  • Planar tracker
  • Camera (3D) tracker
  • Spherical stereo camera (for VR projects)
Offline

Justin Jackson

  • Posts: 68
  • Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 3:50 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostWed May 04, 2016 2:10 am

Honestly, I would like to see Fusion integrated in to Resolve, as another button on the bottom. Take advantage of the nice layout of Resolve, and the coloring, etc, one tool with shared assets in memory. I see more and more of Adobe Premiere taking in After Effects features, seems to me Resolve could blow the industry out with an integrated Fusion (in addition to more features).
Offline
User avatar

Sam Biddle

  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:09 pm
  • Location: London

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostWed May 04, 2016 10:45 am

• Adaptive resolution: I would love to see new scripts adopt the resolution of the footage added to them (as an option of course).
• Denoise: A better denoise tool would be nice. Perhaps the one from Resolve. If it's in Fusion Studio only, that's cool.
• Better color tools: I find the color corrector tool to be a bear. There are buttons, panels, and tabs everywhere. One can easily get lost in it - and inheriting a comp with some crazy color correctors in it can be a real pain in butt. I'd love to see some Resolve color grading tools pollinate to the Fusion side.
• More robust channel support: See Nuke's ability to easily add channels on the fly, swap, customize, and use them with nearly any node in the program.
• Addmix with A/B curve support.
• Spline warp / morph tool.
• Improved keyers.


All on my wishlist as well. VR tools would be a plus. Also, now Resolve is starting to get links to fusion via Fusion connect it seems like tighter integration from Fusion's side would naturally follow, so hoping to see that.

Deep EXR support would be great to have also.
Sam Biddle
3D Artist@Random42
Offline

Joël Gibbs

  • Posts: 79
  • Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 9:18 pm
  • Location: Nashville

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostWed May 04, 2016 3:49 pm

Mike Bozulich wrote:
Here's my wishlist so far:

Interface:
  • Purple tool ribbon: Change to match when gray interface is selected.
  • Gamma / Gain sliders: add them to view windows. This is immensely useful in Nuke and much easier than dealing with Fusion's lut system.
  • Fix new folder / up directory buttons in file load window: At present it's near impossible to tell which is which without hovering over the buttons to get tool-tips.
  • Better keyframe visualization on time-line: A single thin green line makes it difficult to tell which frame a keyframe is actually on.
  • Improved spline editor: The ability to see X & Y coordinates in spline editor in addition to the pre-existing displacement curve.

Features:
  • Adaptive resolution: I would love to see new scripts adopt the resolution of the footage added to them (as an option of course).
  • Denoise: A better denoise tool would be nice. Perhaps the one from Resolve. If it's in Fusion Studio only, that's cool.
  • Better color tools: I find the color corrector tool to be a bear. There are buttons, panels, and tabs everywhere. One can easily get lost in it - and inheriting a comp with some crazy color correctors in it can be a real pain in butt. I'd love to see some Resolve color grading tools pollinate to the Fusion side.
  • More robust channel support: See Nuke's ability to easily add channels on the fly, swap, customize, and use them with nearly any node in the program.
  • Addmix with A/B curve support.
  • Spline warp / morph tool.
  • Improved keyers.

Other tools that would be nice to have eventually:
  • Planar tracker
  • Camera (3D) tracker
  • Spherical stereo camera (for VR projects)


Ooohh..I kinda like your wishlist overall. a good set! 8-)
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostWed May 04, 2016 7:24 pm

Mike Bozulich wrote:
Here's my wishlist so far:

Interface:
  • Purple tool ribbon: Change to match when gray interface is selected.

;) ...
Mike Bozulich wrote:
  • Better keyframe visualization on time-line: A single thin green line makes it difficult to tell which frame a keyframe is actually on.
  • Improved spline editor: The ability to see X & Y coordinates in spline editor in addition to the pre-existing displacement curve.


What would your alternative be for the single thin green line? Do you want it color coded to the timeline/spline views? Tooltips? Should temporally coincident keyframes be indicated?

For the spline editor, what would you like to see? X & Y displayed in the lower left along with displacement and slope? Read only reference X & Y curves?

Mike Bozulich wrote:Features:
  • Adaptive resolution: I would love to see new scripts adopt the resolution of the footage added to them (as an option of course).
  • Better color tools: I find the color corrector tool to be a bear. There are buttons, panels, and tabs everywhere. One can easily get lost in it - and inheriting a comp with some crazy color correctors in it can be a real pain in butt. I'd love to see some Resolve color grading tools pollinate to the Fusion side.


How would the adaptive resolution work? If you have 15 Loaders, all with different resolutions, how would it know which to pick? Unlike some other apps (cough, cough), project resolution doesn't matter much of anything in Fusion.

I wouldn't want CC touched at all (other than user/metadata definable color spaces for saturation and such). You'd break stuff if you did. Better option would be to add a "Resolve Color" tool that was 1:1 a perfect match for Resolve AND add support for copy/pasting settings between Resolve and that Fusion tool.

Ideally Resolve wouldn't need to output ANY image data to Fusion, it should only need to output settings and Fusion should be able to do ALL the rendering. I can't think of any reason why something should NEED to run in Resolve first. Sending settings is a TON faster and easier than sending footage.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Mike Bozulich

  • Posts: 24
  • Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:26 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu May 05, 2016 12:50 am

Chad Capeland wrote:
Mike Bozulich wrote:
  • Better keyframe visualization on time-line: A single thin green line makes it difficult to tell which frame a keyframe is actually on.
  • Improved spline editor: The ability to see X & Y coordinates in spline editor in addition to the pre-existing displacement curve.



What would your alternative be for the single thin green line? Do you want it color coded to the timeline/spline views? Tooltips? Should temporally coincident keyframes be indicated?

At the very least I would make the timeline change color (green) when on a keyframe. Preferrably though I'd use a block for the keyframe instead of a line...

Image

Chad Capeland wrote:For the spline editor, what would you like to see? X & Y displayed in the lower left along with displacement and slope? Read only reference X & Y curves?


Maybe something like this?
Image

Though a colleague just pointed out that one can convert a path to a XY path, which functionally pretty much does what I want.


Chad Capeland wrote:
Mike Bozulich wrote:Features:
  • Adaptive resolution: I would love to see new scripts adopt the resolution of the footage added to them (as an option of course).
  • Better color tools: I find the color corrector tool to be a bear. There are buttons, panels, and tabs everywhere. One can easily get lost in it - and inheriting a comp with some crazy color correctors in it can be a real pain in butt. I'd love to see some Resolve color grading tools pollinate to the Fusion side.


How would the adaptive resolution work? If you have 15 Loaders, all with different resolutions, how would it know which to pick? Unlike some other apps (cough, cough), project resolution doesn't matter much of anything in Fusion.


My thought is the first clip would set the resolution. When adding a new sequence that was a different resolution it would ask if you want to set the comp to that resolution. The plus is because Fusion is resolution independent (as you stated) it could adapt to these changes relatively easily. And as I said, the option to turn this functionality off for those don't want it should be included.

Chad Capeland wrote:I wouldn't want CC touched at all (other than user/metadata definable color spaces for saturation and such). You'd break stuff if you did. Better option would be to add a "Resolve Color" tool that was 1:1 a perfect match for Resolve AND add support for copy/pasting settings between Resolve and that Fusion tool.


I'm fine with keeping the CC tool as is. And I'm totally on-board with a new Resolve Color toolset. :D
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu May 05, 2016 1:49 am

Mike Bozulich wrote:
Chad Capeland wrote:What would your alternative be for the single thin green line? Do you want it color coded to the timeline/spline views? Tooltips? Should temporally coincident keyframes be indicated?

At the very least I would make the timeline change color (green) when on a keyframe. Preferrably though I'd use a block for the keyframe instead of a line...

Image


Keyframes are instantaneous. Like is that first keyframe at 16.0? 16.25? 16.875? 17.0? The cache lines indicate the valid range of the cache, but keyframes are only instantaneous.



Mike Bozulich wrote:
Chad Capeland wrote:How would the adaptive resolution work? If you have 15 Loaders, all with different resolutions, how would it know which to pick? Unlike some other apps (cough, cough), project resolution doesn't matter much of anything in Fusion.


My thought is the first clip would set the resolution. When adding a new sequence that was a different resolution it would ask if you want to set the comp to that resolution. The plus is because Fusion is resolution independent (as you stated) it could adapt to these changes relatively easily. And as I said, the option to turn this functionality off for those don't want it should be included.


A script could easily be run on any tool, not just a Loader, that evaluated the size of the output or input and modified the comp default resolution to match. Wouldn't need any dialog or preference for that and wouldn't need the act of adding a new Loader to trigger it.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline
User avatar

Sam Biddle

  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:09 pm
  • Location: London

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu May 05, 2016 11:17 am

Ideally Resolve wouldn't need to output ANY image data to Fusion, it should only need to output settings and Fusion should be able to do ALL the rendering. I can't think of any reason why something should NEED to run in Resolve first. Sending settings is a TON faster and easier than sending footage.


This is what I had in mind also. So yeah, having some of the tools from Resolve would be great for this.
Wouldn't want to see Resolve and Fusion merged as has been suggested though, different tools for different tasks. Once you've got a big enough Fusion comp, it's not going to be great in the Resolve interface, and if it's a stereo VR comp... Yeah I'd keep that in Fusion.
Sam Biddle
3D Artist@Random42
Offline

Justin Jackson

  • Posts: 68
  • Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 3:50 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu May 05, 2016 2:58 pm

I think this is why I suggested the merge of the two. I do agree that they are two different apps, but you could kinda of say that about the coloring vs editing although those are more closely related than compositing vs editing. My reason for the merge idea is that for a system with 64GB or more RAM, RAID 0 SSDs, plenty of storage, and high end graphics cards (which seems to be pretty common for those that make money doing this, given that I have most of that and this is a hobby for me)... it seems that if you are working on both it would benefit not having to go back and forth between the two and have both apps loaded at the same time. But, then again, I would also think in most professional use cases, compositors and editors/colorists are different people, so it doesnt make sense for them to be merged in that regard. In fact, I am purely being selfish in saying that as a hobbyist who uses both apps for myself, it would be beneficial to my use case to not have to load both apps up at the same time. That way I can apply 48GB of RAM to the one app, rather than 24GB to each app, and if it were merged, the two tabs (editor/compositor) would have shared access to the same media pool and changes to say a comp could be reflected immediately in the NLE timeline rather than having to deal with export/import stuff.

Now.. if there was a LINK capability where export/import were immediate to each app when both were running (even on different machines perhaps?), that would be cool too. Voids the shared memory allocation capability, but everything else would work nicely..separate apps, instant transfer of data between them.
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu May 05, 2016 8:05 pm

Justin Jackson wrote:I think this is why I suggested the merge of the two. I do agree that they are two different apps, but you could kinda of say that about the coloring vs editing although those are more closely related than compositing vs editing. My reason for the merge idea is that for a system with 64GB or more RAM, RAID 0 SSDs, plenty of storage, and high end graphics cards (which seems to be pretty common for those that make money doing this, given that I have most of that and this is a hobby for me)... it seems that if you are working on both it would benefit not having to go back and forth between the two and have both apps loaded at the same time. But, then again, I would also think in most professional use cases, compositors and editors/colorists are different people, so it doesnt make sense for them to be merged in that regard. In fact, I am purely being selfish in saying that as a hobbyist who uses both apps for myself, it would be beneficial to my use case to not have to load both apps up at the same time. That way I can apply 48GB of RAM to the one app, rather than 24GB to each app, and if it were merged, the two tabs (editor/compositor) would have shared access to the same media pool and changes to say a comp could be reflected immediately in the NLE timeline rather than having to deal with export/import stuff.


Memory management doesn't work that way though. Fusion and Resolve can't share anything unless they use the same format for things. A Resolve image and a Fusion image aren't the same thing at all in memory. And neither application reserves memory, the OS will swap out between them all of the available memory, so in your case they both have 64GB. The applications can be set to use less, but they COULD use all of it and that wouldn't be an issue.

While it would be awesome if they could use the same image in memory, I don't see that happening any time soon.

But sharing settings for a subset of tools and syncronizing timelines should be much more straightforward.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Gary Hanna

  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:36 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu May 05, 2016 10:06 pm

1. 3D camera tracking...doesn't need to be great, but feel it should be native at the very least and not require a pricey plug in.

And two tools I miss from AE

2. Rotoscoping - via rotobrush

3. Puppet warp

Rumor has it there's going to be better blender support which would be awesome.

Also the ability to talk with Resolve's nodes would be nice. IE - using Resolve's point clouds, or pulling a mask node from resolve to use as a matte instead of the final node just being sent to a fusion clip.
Offline
User avatar

Eugene Afanasiev

  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2015 2:57 pm
  • Location: Russia

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostFri May 06, 2016 7:16 am

I'd love to see more to this two tools:
Wand
Roto Assist
I feel they have a great potential to be the Rotobrush itself...
They have to be more complex and customizable and adjustable having more controls for user over region selection etc...
I already keyed out some hair with Wnd but had to create 4 of them and moved them frame by frame changing the region point.
Wand tool is great for stills but something has to be implemented for making it easier for video... Maybe it should take a patch of texture not just pixels, making it not a point but a Bezier mask region, just ideas...

I would expect roto assist to try to snap to the patches of pixels like having small planar traking masks to stick to similar areas over time..

Also Paint tool has their distructing controls of the stroke duration that can not be applied once the stroke is created, I wish I could dynamically change the duration of clones strokes and multistrokes across time.

And UI is lacking of user controls over the sliding changing shifting values, willing to be able to slide smoothly every control thing. For now It feels like you have to know the value to be ready to enter it instead of smoothly changing with trial and error, and finding the best match to an eye... I would describe such controls as ugly, compared to nuke or ae, where you grab something and it slides gradually...
you know where are the best example of a single controls I've ever seen? it's audition's fading on in and out controls: they have grabbles that you can drag and thy would easily be changing their shapes from linear to exponential to straight to inverse exponential gradually, no strict fixed math values but the user adjusted curves...
_______________________
ALIENWARE 17 R3
i7 6820HK 4.1 Ghz
16 Gb 2133 Mhz ram
GTX 980m 4 Gb
Windows 10
Offline
User avatar

Sam Biddle

  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:09 pm
  • Location: London

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostFri May 06, 2016 4:03 pm

1. 3D camera tracking...doesn't need to be great, but feel it should be native at the very least and not require a pricey plug in.

3D camera tracking would make sense, would work well with Fusion's existing 3D tools. I'd imagine that would be something that ends up in Fusion Studio.

I think this is why I suggested the merge of the two. I do agree that they are two different apps, but you could kinda of say that about the coloring vs editing although those are more closely related than compositing vs editing. My reason for the merge idea is that for a system with 64GB or more RAM, RAID 0 SSDs, plenty of storage, and high end graphics cards (which seems to be pretty common for those that make money doing this, given that I have most of that and this is a hobby for me)... it seems that if you are working on both it would benefit not having to go back and forth between the two and have both apps loaded at the same time. But, then again, I would also think in most professional use cases, compositors and editors/colorists are different people, so it doesnt make sense for them to be merged in that regard. In fact, I am purely being selfish in saying that as a hobbyist who uses both apps for myself, it would be beneficial to my use case to not have to load both apps up at the same time. That way I can apply 48GB of RAM to the one app, rather than 24GB to each app, and if it were merged, the two tabs (editor/compositor) would have shared access to the same media pool and changes to say a comp could be reflected immediately in the NLE timeline rather than having to deal with export/import stuff.


The thing is, coloring and editing can both be done together quite comfortably when you're working with prores or similar, but throwing multichannel EXR files into the mix would slow the process down no end, hence why compositing tends to be a separate affair. You couldn't change a comp and then see the changes on the timeline immediately as you'd still need to render the node graph. Obviously one day this could change with faster hardware.

Speaking of RAM though, by the time you're using something with 64GB+ it's hardly a problem swapping between programs, I'd have multiple instances of Max open with Fusion's cache full and still can happily edit also. My home machine has substantially less RAM but I still do this, just purge the Fusion cache when you don't need it.
Sam Biddle
3D Artist@Random42
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostFri May 06, 2016 4:26 pm

Sam Biddle wrote:The thing is, coloring and editing can both be done together quite comfortably when you're working with prores or similar, but throwing multichannel EXR files into the mix would slow the process down no end, hence why compositing tends to be a separate affair.


Not only that, but in Resolve you tend to do a few things to lots of clips. With Fusion you do lots of things to a few clips. There's no reason to share images between Fusion and Resolve if Fusion needs 6500 images cached for a single 50 frame shot and Resolve needs 6500 different images cached for 20 different 50 frame shots. They'd only have 50-100 images in common.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Justin Jackson

  • Posts: 68
  • Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 3:50 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostSat May 07, 2016 5:14 pm

Yup..I see all the points. My main point I guess is the speed in which you can pass clips/data between the apps. If the new Connect feature is expedient, then there really isnt a need to combine them, and the majority of people use them differently anyway.
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostSat May 07, 2016 7:15 pm

Justin Jackson wrote:Yup..I see all the points. My main point I guess is the speed in which you can pass clips/data between the apps. If the new Connect feature is expedient, then there really isnt a need to combine them, and the majority of people use them differently anyway.


There's some things I would like to see different in it. Like I dragged an EXR sequence onto the timeline and created a new Fusion connection clip and it proceeded to render out the EXR files instead of just using the original path in the .comp file.

I'd also prefer a copy/paste setting option rather than writing a .comp file and using the default application associated with that extension. That way I can add it to exisiting comps in any copy of Fusion I am running. I might want 30 clips in one comp so I can instance settings rather than have 30 comps.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Ludvik Koutny

  • Posts: 79
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:52 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostMon May 09, 2016 5:04 pm

- Zooming in flow and viewer using mousewheel without ctrl key. Seriously, how many of you guys intuitively expect mouse wheel in viewer and flow to scroll vertically instead of zoom?

- Some human-friendly keyboard/mouse navigation shortcuts for 3D views (Max/Maya style)

+ Everything mentioned above.
Website: http://raw.bluefile.cz/
Offline
User avatar

Eugene Afanasiev

  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2015 2:57 pm
  • Location: Russia

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostMon May 09, 2016 8:15 pm

Ludvik Koutny wrote:- Zooming in flow and viewer using mousewheel without ctrl key


There was the working line in fusion 7.5 when entered in the console:
Code: Select all
comp:SetPrefs("Comp.Views.Left.CtrlWheelZoom", false)


But strangely it doesn't work in 8....
who knows what was changed in the code or it was completely removed?
_______________________
ALIENWARE 17 R3
i7 6820HK 4.1 Ghz
16 Gb 2133 Mhz ram
GTX 980m 4 Gb
Windows 10
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostMon May 09, 2016 9:14 pm

It's moved under the User Interface preferences.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline
User avatar

Eugene Afanasiev

  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2015 2:57 pm
  • Location: Russia

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostMon May 09, 2016 9:20 pm

Chad Capeland wrote:It's moved under the User Interface preferences.


a-ha... Thanks!
_______________________
ALIENWARE 17 R3
i7 6820HK 4.1 Ghz
16 Gb 2133 Mhz ram
GTX 980m 4 Gb
Windows 10
Offline

Ludvik Koutny

  • Posts: 79
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:52 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostTue May 10, 2016 7:53 am

That works only for viewer AFAIK, zooming in flow is still messed up. What kind of solution is that anyway? To have some UI convention, and switch it, but only for ONE UI panel, and leave the rest using the previous state. This shows really poor judgement of whoever works on Fusion's UI design.
Website: http://raw.bluefile.cz/
Offline

Julian Baum

  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:52 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostTue May 10, 2016 8:49 am

I'd like all lights to be shadow casting, not just the spotlight.

A wider range of procedural noise generators. More choice and tweakability here would vastly expand the ability to create animated sprites for the particle system inside of Fusion.

Fusion's particle system is very powerful, but a little more control would be good on the regions: a region falloff setting would be helpful.

On particle styles, the blob variety is that catchall soft chunky blob that all particle generators seem to have. Sure, it's tweakable and there's a lot to be done with it, but if we had a blob whose shape was adjustable and to which noises could be applied, that would be great.

Further, the use of Trails and Erode/Dilate on blob particles can create some nice gaseous wifty wafty effects, but it would be very cool to have a hybrid particle style tool that offered all of this, and a much wider range too.

I'm not suggesting Fusion develop a volumetric engine, but a wider ability to fake it with the style of particles, without having to go to other apps, would be very useful and powerful, and put Fusion's particles a cut above the rest.
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostTue May 10, 2016 12:59 pm

Ludvik Koutny wrote:That works only for viewer AFAIK, zooming in flow is still messed up. What kind of solution is that anyway? To have some UI convention, and switch it, but only for ONE UI panel, and leave the rest using the previous state. This shows really poor judgement of whoever works on Fusion's UI design.


No, it works in the flow view as well.

I have to disagree about the consistency, though. By leaving the wheel to scroll in some views, as opposed to zooming in all views, you get the appropriate action for each view. Scrolling in timeline view is a lot more useful than zooming, for instance.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostTue May 10, 2016 2:12 pm

Julian Baum wrote:I'm not suggesting Fusion develop a volumetric engine, but a wider ability to fake it with the style of particles, without having to go to other apps, would be very useful and powerful, and put Fusion's particles a cut above the rest.


Have you tried Fusion's volume rendering? Setup can be a bit tricky the first time, but it's certainly easier that going to other apps.

Regarding the noise mapped per particle, would it be enough to randomly assign a noise pattern per particle?
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline
User avatar

Sam Biddle

  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:09 pm
  • Location: London

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostTue May 10, 2016 4:43 pm

- Zooming in flow and viewer using mousewheel without ctrl key. Seriously, how many of you guys intuitively expect mouse wheel in viewer and flow to scroll vertically instead of zoom?


Left mouse button + middle mouse button enables you to zoom in both the flow and the viewer without the ctrl key.

OR

Changing the user interface settings make it possible to scroll wheel zoom in both the viewer and the flow, all you need do is change the settings to make ctrl the pan shortcut instead of zoom:

Image
Sam Biddle
3D Artist@Random42
Offline

Julian Baum

  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:52 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostTue May 10, 2016 5:37 pm

Chad Capeland wrote:
Julian Baum wrote:I'm not suggesting Fusion develop a volumetric engine, but a wider ability to fake it with the style of particles, without having to go to other apps, would be very useful and powerful, and put Fusion's particles a cut above the rest.


Have you tried Fusion's volume rendering? Setup can be a bit tricky the first time, but it's certainly easier that going to other apps.

Regarding the noise mapped per particle, would it be enough to randomly assign a noise pattern per particle?


Yes, I'm working with the volume rendering at the moment - am new to it, but it's good, tricky as you suggest, but I'm liking it.

And yes, randomly assigning a noise pattern per particle is enough. Given choices on what that noise pattern can be is all I would like, but I do believe that would make those blobs all the more powerful, and arguably give us a means to trim away some of that blobby look. Lightwave's hypervoxels technology, which is now years old, offers this with its sprite particle style; that's an enormous choice of procedural noises and scaling, and the ability to adjust the intensity of the effect. I quite often render animated sequences of these for use with Fusion particles.
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostTue May 10, 2016 6:02 pm

Julian Baum wrote:I quite often render animated sequences of these for use with Fusion particles.


How do you use them? Aren't you restricted to age based mapping?
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Ludvik Koutny

  • Posts: 79
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:52 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostWed May 11, 2016 10:23 am

Chad Capeland wrote:
Ludvik Koutny wrote:That works only for viewer AFAIK, zooming in flow is still messed up. What kind of solution is that anyway? To have some UI convention, and switch it, but only for ONE UI panel, and leave the rest using the previous state. This shows really poor judgement of whoever works on Fusion's UI design.


No, it works in the flow view as well.

I have to disagree about the consistency, though. By leaving the wheel to scroll in some views, as opposed to zooming in all views, you get the appropriate action for each view. Scrolling in timeline view is a lot more useful than zooming, for instance.


Whoa, they really fixed it! I had no idea... Well, I take back what I said. Non the less, this is why we need changelogs dammit :x
Website: http://raw.bluefile.cz/
Offline

Jeff Ha

  • Posts: 80
  • Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 10:38 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu May 12, 2016 8:47 am

Justin Jackson wrote:Honestly, I would like to see Fusion integrated in to Resolve, as another button on the bottom. Take advantage of the nice layout of Resolve, and the coloring, etc, one tool with shared assets in memory. I see more and more of Adobe Premiere taking in After Effects features, seems to me Resolve could blow the industry out with an integrated Fusion (in addition to more features).



So kind of like Nuke Studio? I'd rather see them continue to flesh out new features instead of worrying about a full on integration with Resolve. There is so much more for them to work on now there is a unifying release w/8.0.
Offline

Theodor Groeneboom

  • Posts: 55
  • Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:51 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu May 12, 2016 11:30 am

Justin Jackson wrote:Honestly, I would like to see Fusion integrated in to Resolve, as another button on the bottom.


Just no. Focus on script-ability for Resolve and bridge it that way. Lets not mix the two applications....
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu May 12, 2016 9:21 pm

Theodor Groeneboom wrote:
Justin Jackson wrote:Honestly, I would like to see Fusion integrated in to Resolve, as another button on the bottom.


Just no. Focus on script-ability for Resolve and bridge it that way. Lets not mix the two applications....


Yeah, run FuScript across Fusion, Generation, and Resolve with common functions, naming, patterns, etc..

I already don't like how Resolve 12.5 sends to Fusion, but too bad, I can't do a damn thing about it.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Julian Baum

  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:52 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostFri May 13, 2016 7:58 am

Chad Capeland wrote:
Julian Baum wrote:I quite often render animated sequences of these for use with Fusion particles.


How do you use them? Aren't you restricted to age based mapping?


Nothing out of the ordinary with my sprites, beyond what's on many tuts, not least the original Eyeon ones, but I do render long sprite runs out of Lightwave: 500 frames or more, for shots that are half that length. This not only allows offsetting but also increases the latitude with age based mapping - if the sprite clip is long enough, it's not so much a problem.

That said, if it's possible to have procedural noises that can cycle, that would be great. One of the third party shader tools for Lightwave has that with some procedurals, I think, but it's not common.
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostFri May 13, 2016 4:01 pm

Yes, it would be a plugin, so Studio only, just want to know what the usage would be. Like right now you emit particles, assign an animated noise to them, then use pChangeStyle to apply, say, 4 other animated noises, each assigned to 20% of the particles. and those billboard particles then appear to form somewhat natural looking smoke.

But you can't currently assign a worldspace procedural noise that respects anything about the particles other than just blending the two materials together. You can't have the noise blend from one particle to another.

Sorry, just trying to think aloud about what you might want to have happen and thinking what is possible now and could be with a couple simple plugins.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Julian Baum

  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:52 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostFri May 13, 2016 7:15 pm

Blending from one particle to another would be superb, if it were possible. A greater choice of procedurals would be welcome, although I guess I would argue that most folk have access to sprite billboard generation in some form, and therefore would it be a waste of dev resources; I don't know - just wondering out loud from the sidelines.

I'll admit I am using the standard edition of Fusion right now, but I'll be getting a Studio license as soon as I can. If such things become available as plugins, then fine. I still see the standard version as an incredible generosity, business model or not, but I can see the need and worth of a Studio license.
Offline

Dima Fedotof

  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu Jun 09, 2016 3:33 pm

3d tracking
Octan render integration
LUT presets
thoughtful volumetric effects such as smoke with wpp
more presets in bins like fire,smoke,water etc.
MORE MONEY FOR PR!!!!!!
Offline
User avatar

Blazej Floch

  • Posts: 154
  • Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 12:48 am
  • Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu Jun 09, 2016 11:41 pm

Not a biggie, just a thought:
Now with the tabs it would make sense to drag and drop tools from one comp to the other with the tab.
So if you hold your dragged stuff with mouse over the comp it could open the tab under the mouse.
Offline

nick cremers

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 9:20 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostFri Jun 10, 2016 7:36 am

I am so glad this program is here for us to use but there are some things I would like to be in there.

Decent shortcuts:D without having to use the shift-spacebar
Tab function like nuke would also be appreciated for the quick access instead of the shift-spacebar.
A normal 3d navigation so it can also be used correct and makes it better for a laptop, its no good now.
3d tracker
planar tracker
better defocus in 3d space
bringing back the ability to use the after effects plugins..

Cheers
Offline

Nathaniel Westveer

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 9:51 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu Jul 21, 2016 7:35 pm

Just make The Paint as good as Combustion's was. That's all I ask of any compositor, and I've been let down time and time again.
Offline

Vladimir LaFortune

  • Posts: 80
  • Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 3:37 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostFri Jul 22, 2016 3:50 pm

nick cremers wrote:3d tracker
planar tracker


Cheers


I would agree but no matter what they do it won't be good as Mocha or Matchit so you would still be making a roundtrip for everything but a basic shot.
Offline
User avatar

Bruno Vincent

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 8:12 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostFri Jul 22, 2016 11:08 pm

For me an interesting feature will be a marking system to mark your tool for example "animated".
When i make motion designs i often have to move a bunch of animation keys form several tools to add or remove some parts and the "animated" filter of the timeline didn't display some keys like the stroke animation in the paint tool.
So, i change the color of the text of the tool to see directly which ones are animated and select them all to move all the keys at the same time and avoid loosing the timing of the animation.
So a way to mark the tools will be interesting for me and a way to select all the marked tools of the same category.
Offline
User avatar

michael vorberg

  • Posts: 602
  • Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 8:47 pm
  • Location: stuttgart, germany

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostSat Jul 23, 2016 10:53 am

Bruno Vincent wrote:So a way to mark the tools will be interesting for me and a way to select all the marked tools of the same category.


for this there is maybe a solution/workaround. but it needs some scripting:
you could add a comment or a metadata "tag" to the nodes and then use second script to select all the tools with that "tag"
Offline
User avatar

michael vorberg

  • Posts: 602
  • Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 8:47 pm
  • Location: stuttgart, germany

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostSat Jul 23, 2016 10:55 am

Dima Fedotof wrote:Octan render integration


ask OTOY for it, if they see a market they will deliver a plugin
Offline

Lucjan Hirszmajer

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 12:14 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostSat Jul 23, 2016 8:54 pm

I'd love to see instancing/referencing for comps/modules.

I know there are macros etc.
But this would make live easier and comps cleaner if instead copying whole branch and pasting to main comp I could save it as module and just link to it.

Cheers
Lucjan
Offline

Blake LaFarm

  • Posts: 199
  • Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 8:48 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostSat Jul 23, 2016 9:51 pm

Vladimir LaFortune wrote:
nick cremers wrote:3d tracker
planar tracker


Cheers


I would agree but no matter what they do it won't be good as Mocha or Matchit so you would still be making a roundtrip for everything but a basic shot.
As Mocha is built into the Boris CC OpenFX plugin, aside from the cost, is this not an adequate solution -- especially when one factors in all of the other useful tools in that product?
HP Z840 | Dual 10-Core Xeon 2.3GHz | Dual TITAN X Pascal | 64GB RAM | PCIe SSD 2GB/s
DeckLink 4K Ext 12G | Pocket UltraScope | Avid Artist Color | CalMAN Studio/C6-HDR
Resolve Studio 12.5.4.019 | Fusion Studio 8.2.1 | Avid MC Symph 8.7 | Win10 Pro 1607
Offline

Kel Philm

  • Posts: 38
  • Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2016 6:21 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostThu Jan 12, 2017 9:47 pm

Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...
Post by Mike Bozulich » Wed May 04, 2016 8:24 am

Seems like it's time to start thinking about F9. For windows users F8 was a bit of a disappointment since it was primarily a minor interface tweak with few new features. Hopefully we can get a good request list together to let the Fusion team know where the user base would like to go with the program. It's too bad we can't do some polling for features to let everyone vote on what they'd like to see.

Here's my wishlist so far:

Interface:
Purple tool ribbon: Change to match when gray interface is selected.
Gamma / Gain sliders: add them to view windows. This is immensely useful in Nuke and much easier than dealing with Fusion's lut system.
Fix new folder / up directory buttons in file load window: At present it's near impossible to tell which is which without hovering over the buttons to get tool-tips.
Better keyframe visualization on time-line: A single thin green line makes it difficult to tell which frame a keyframe is actually on.
Improved spline editor: The ability to see X & Y coordinates in spline editor in addition to the pre-existing displacement curve.

Features:
Adaptive resolution: I would love to see new scripts adopt the resolution of the footage added to them (as an option of course).
Denoise: A better denoise tool would be nice. Perhaps the one from Resolve. If it's in Fusion Studio only, that's cool.
Better color tools: I find the color corrector tool to be a bear. There are buttons, panels, and tabs everywhere. One can easily get lost in it - and inheriting a comp with some crazy color correctors in it can be a real pain in butt. I'd love to see some Resolve color grading tools pollinate to the Fusion side.
More robust channel support: See Nuke's ability to easily add channels on the fly, swap, customize, and use them with nearly any node in the program.
Addmix with A/B curve support.
Spline warp / morph tool.
Improved keyers.

Other tools that would be nice to have eventually:
Planar tracker
Camera (3D) tracker
Spherical stereo camera (for VR projects)


Thoroughly agree with this list, though am happy with the CC node. VR and 3D tracking are essential for me.
Offline

Rick van den Berg

  • Posts: 51
  • Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:47 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostFri Jan 13, 2017 9:19 am

i would like to see some more ''artist-friendly'' features to make motion graphic stuff easier like in the most 3d apps. for example:

- a simple option for locking the camera focus plane to an object. or the camera to a path. there are workarounds but it can be easier i guess. i would use this alot.

- more vector shapes. i have to go ''back'' to after effects when i want some rounded rectangles for example.

no deal-breakers, but these options might come in handy :)
Offline

Rick van den Berg

  • Posts: 51
  • Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:47 am

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostFri Jan 13, 2017 9:52 am

oh and furthermore, i would like to see:

a 3d tracker
planar trackers
3d modelling interface
3d printer options
4d printer options
snapchat filters
automatic make-skinny filters
face-recognition
auto-tune
smell simulation
laser-powered hoverboards
free candy

all voice-controlled ofcourse.
Offline

Peter Cordes

  • Posts: 124
  • Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2014 8:04 am
  • Location: Germany

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostSun Jan 15, 2017 6:33 am

Hi,

Network Rendering should be massively improved.

It's way to unstable and needs to much direct file-access all over the network.
Also that every plugin needs to be installed on every network-rendernode is IMHO a no-go.

Thanks
Peter
Offline

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 1209
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostSun Jan 15, 2017 8:51 pm

Peter Cordes wrote:It's way to unstable and needs to much direct file-access all over the network.
Also that every plugin needs to be installed on every network-rendernode is IMHO a no-go.


Why does every plugin need to be installed on every network-rendernode? Why not just load them off the network?
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline
User avatar

Noel Sterrett

  • Posts: 236
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Fusion 9 interface/feature requests...

PostMon Jan 16, 2017 3:41 pm

RAW file import for Sony F5/55/65 is at the top of my list.

Cheers.
Noel Sterrett
Admit One Pictures
Next

Return to Fusion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher and 5 guests