Jump to: Board index » General » Fusion

Fusion 18 feature requests

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

Pieter Van Houte

  • Posts: 631
  • Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2014 1:04 am

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostWed Jan 05, 2022 6:32 pm

Jeff Ha wrote:I can't see them doing much with Fusion. They're essentially giving it away in Resolve and the Studio version is dirt cheap with no follow on maintenance or paid upgrades. It's tricky to pay developers and having them add a lot of meaningful features when little revenue is coming in from your department (software: Resolve/Fusion). This is how Pixologic got in trouble with Zbrush...


Pixologic is not a hardware company so that comparison doesn't fly.

Fusion is the first compositor to run natively on Mac M1 and they're transitioning to Metal and Vulcan. Not that that is meaningful or even visible to you as an end user, but those are huge developments. The notion that Fusion is stagnant is simply not true.

That said, I would also happily pay a maintenance premium for proper support.
Support We Suck Less on Patreon -> https://www.patreon.com/wesuckless

https://www.steakunderwater.com/wesuckless
Offline
User avatar

Pieter Van Houte

  • Posts: 631
  • Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2014 1:04 am

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostWed Jan 05, 2022 6:36 pm

And a say in what an efficient comp UI is.
Support We Suck Less on Patreon -> https://www.patreon.com/wesuckless

https://www.steakunderwater.com/wesuckless
Offline
User avatar

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 3017
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostFri Jan 07, 2022 5:11 pm

Pieter Van Houte wrote:Not that that is meaningful or even visible to you as an end user, but those are huge developments.


Blackmagic doesn't make M1 hardware, though. They don't have any benefit to those changes other than expanding the user base.

I'm surprised that BMD hasn't made Fusion more capable for driving graphics for ATEM or Ultimatte. Or made cameras that use Fusion more. Seems like there's been enough time for hardware and software roadmaps to harmonize.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline
User avatar

Pieter Van Houte

  • Posts: 631
  • Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2014 1:04 am

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostFri Jan 07, 2022 5:36 pm

I certainly agree with you there.

As an example, BMD could have made a kickass lightfield camera with Fusion/Resolve - and their established and very experienced userbase - being the perfect vehicles to process the data and open up creative possibilities.
Support We Suck Less on Patreon -> https://www.patreon.com/wesuckless

https://www.steakunderwater.com/wesuckless
Offline

Blazso

  • Posts: 44
  • Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2019 6:31 am
  • Real Name: Ryan Blazso

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostFri Jan 07, 2022 11:05 pm

OH DEAR GOD! update to the particle system[s] and tracker functionalities.

Lets talk particles... First let's get a dedicated 2d and 3d particle emitter (and maybe renderer too) that way the current pEmitter can stop trying to live in both worlds and doing so badly. Once this is done update and change how "randomness" is generated because it's not great for 2d particles atm and eyeons original solution of using more emitters with a different random seed set to fill in the blank areas and then using pMerge just doesnt feel great and its a pain when making adjustments.

Next make sure that each emitter (the new 2d and 3d ones) have full options of blur, glows, and blend modes!! particles blend mode'ing with themselves should be a thing and its different than how you'd want to adjust the blend mode of your particles over your scene. So the emitter itself probably needs a blend mode option to handle particles blending with themselves and then the prender should have a blend mode option for how they go over the whole scene (Currently with 2d particles this is done when you use a merge node to add them to your scene but, with 3d particles there is no way to adjust their blend mode without a lot of extra work and headache).

I'm also thinking that by dividing the 2 particle systems out it should be alot easier to code parts of the system and make them function better and more efficient, like all of the 2.5d options that should be in a 2d particle system but aren't applicable in a 3d one. or like how a 3d particle system needs a really good camera depth occlusion option that isn't needed in a 2d system. (the current 3d system has the option but it doesn't seem to work very well, even when plugging the 3d camera into it).

Also in the pRender node (when working in 2d) there needs to be a way for the user to define the DOD or the DOD should just naturally adjust/grow to match the pEmitter's region and particle area/lifespan. Currently, trying to matchmove a particle effect like rain to a scene is a huge headache that requires way too many work arounds for a program that calls it's a professional solution.

Someone already mentioned how the pEmitter doesn't do lines and points well and they can only be used with certain render options like open GL (unlike how many other modern particle systems work) so yeah lets get those fixed.

TRACKERS: More ways to get data out of the trackers and just onto it's own node like an after effects null object would be. Like, I really should be able to track a feature, set the operation to matchmove, export it. and then attach as many elements as I'd like to that track data and be able to run expressions on each element. (And yes, with modifiers and the right click menu, connect to option, this can all be done but this doesnt give a good sense of flow and god forbid someone accidentally delete the tracker node later because they think they are cleaning up the scene and it's not doing anything and tracker nodes are resources hogs...

Same thing with the planer tracker, more options to export its data and functions to nodes of their own.

Okay so this one is kind of a stretch with the planer tracker / corner pin operation but it'd be really cool if we were able to convert planer track data to a simulated 3d plane that is using rotation and position at its center to move an imagine plane around and shift its perspective instead of using the four point corner pin data. This would allow the replacement image plane to always be at the same "aspect ratio" only skewed in space like how the imagine plane of a phone screen on camera is always the same aspect ratio only skewed by its perspective to the lens and viewer. and this way if 1, 2, or 3 of your corner pin replacements points were outside the frame of the shot you wouldn't have to guess where those corners should be because you'd be working with a 3d image plane that keeps the aspect ratio true and you'd just have to change its starting orientation and scale to match your need.

Okay last one, the Merge node! (I know, how dare I go after this fan favorite). In the operation menu I'd really like an "under" or "behind" option that does just that and puts the FG under the BG, because sometimes that's just what you need. My current way to get this is to just use the "enable depth merge" option in the channels tab and then set the foreground offset to any negative number... Yeah I know this isn't the right use of this but, it works for now.
Offline
User avatar

bluetoohfi

  • Posts: 31
  • Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2021 5:12 pm
  • Real Name: Bruno Henrique

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostThu Jan 20, 2022 6:17 am

Guide lines, alignment and spacing of objects, copy and paths in the viewer.
Last edited by bluetoohfi on Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

sepu66

  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2019 5:35 pm
  • Location: San Francisco, CA
  • Real Name: Hernan Santander

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostFri Jan 21, 2022 11:28 pm

A lot of these are some great suggestions.

For me, the biggest is also proper support for USD - Which could open some other possibilities for Fusion as well.

Def an updated 3D system will be a killer
Handling of channels aka Nuke would be lovely.
UI is always welcome.

Hopefully, 18 gets the love that we are all hoping for.

Cheers
http://www.hernansantander.com/
Offline

paultwyman

  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2022 1:25 am
  • Real Name: Paul Twyman

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostSun Jan 30, 2022 1:44 am

Hello,

Another request for better multilayer exr support please although my main issue is with having to update multiple nodes when source footage changes.

From what I have been reading there seems to be core issues with fusion in its way of processing and splitting things but I have no problem with how it currently works especially with the newer layer drop down.

Can we not at least have some form of source override, so that one Loader/MediaIn node could control the source of other ones? This way once you have setup a comp you don’t have to manually go through every media in node to update source footage.

Could the loader / media in node have a new source override input or something so that you could plug in another (parent) media in or new source control node or something so you can globally control the source of multiple nodes.

Does anyone think this is possible?
Offline

Alaz Soytemiz

  • Posts: 135
  • Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 8:26 am

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostTue Apr 19, 2022 10:17 am

So Fusion 18 Studio is out with some improvements but I think it is not enough to change the version from 17 to 18.
I really appreciate all the work about apple m1 and cloud support but I guess Fusion dev team is much more smaller compared to Fairlight team.
Windows 10 Pro 64Bit
Processor: Intel i7-6800K 3.40GHz
Ram: 128GB
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
Disks: Samsung SSD 970 PRO, Intel® SSD 750 Series (400GB, 1/2 Height PCIe 3.0, 20nm, MLC)
Offline

ivanSantiago

  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2021 12:47 am
  • Location: Paraguay
  • Real Name: Jorgevan Santiago

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostTue Apr 19, 2022 12:53 pm

First of all congratulations to the entire team at Blackmagic for the fantastic work and development. In my view, it is a fact that Blackmagic only made an "Upgrade from summer 17 to 18" of the software where the company stands to profit. For example: the new filters of Surface tracker, Depth Map and others should also be in fusion, not only that, we placed a great expectation on Fusio in more than 1 years and I didn't see anything, it went unnoticed without significance, considering, that there are so many points to be improved as for example: tools like "Shapes" that until now I haven't seen much use. It should be added "pen too" to draw customizable shapes and a consumable "stroke" and it would also be interesting to have an "extrude" tool for shapes, poly, png and a more flexible way to reflect 3D :idea: objects that would change the game in favor only fusion among various requirements requested on the Forum. I also expected a customizable interface in davinci resolve to work with 9x16 video formats.... Maybe because fusion still doesn't have much return on equipment it hasn't been prioritized. Fairlight has been improved for almost the entire year of 2021. I love fusion and I was hoping that it would come as a stronger competitor to After Effects. In my opinion, fusion has everything to be the number - \ 1 / - VFX and Motion software in the world, just look at it. Sorry if my text is confusing, but I'm also glad that everything is moving towards significant improvements. We know that this will have a great return because the community can only grow. Health and Peace to all.
A hug!
Offline
User avatar

Dhaylen

  • Posts: 141
  • Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:02 pm
  • Location: Hungary
  • Real Name: Dalen Johnson

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostTue Apr 19, 2022 3:58 pm

Alaz Soytemiz wrote:So Fusion 18 Studio is out with some improvements but I think it is not enough to change the version from 17 to 18.
I really appreciate all the work about apple m1 and cloud support but I guess Fusion dev team is much more smaller compared to Fairlight team.


Yeah - the Apple bit... could care less. (PC - would prefer uber Linux or Nvidia support)
... good for those who use Apple, but seeing that as a key feature when you download the Beta - underwhelming. :)

As for fusion, ton of fusion features that rock... in the Color Tab. ;)
The whole color tab update was Fusion features... take one second in color now to do what takes hours to rotoscope in Fusion. (And you cant even go from the color page to Fusion... go figure) :P
Offline

Frank Engel

  • Posts: 912
  • Joined: Thu May 17, 2018 11:09 pm
  • Real Name: Frank Engel

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostFri Apr 22, 2022 8:52 am

Pieter Van Houte wrote:
Jeff Ha wrote:they're transitioning to Metal and Vulcan.


This is the first I'm seeing this. If true, that really is a big deal - if they are actually going through to optimize and review the code that is using these APIs.

While the switch in the API in and of itself might not do that much, if they are modernizing code while they are going through to change this, it could lead to significant performance and resource utilization benefits when this effort wraps up, maybe even result in fixing a few bugs while they are at it.

Hoping for the best from this.

However, it does not in and of itself do anything about the terrible UI decisions that we are still stuck with.
Offline

mytrees

  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2022 9:50 am
  • Real Name: Tell Hensel

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostFri Apr 22, 2022 3:36 pm

Keyframes for Fairlights Effects would be awesome! Also speedramping as we know it for the video would be cool for the audio...
Offline
User avatar

Apaps1970

  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2019 9:02 pm
  • Real Name: Alex PApadopoulos

Re: Fusion 18 feature requests

PostMon Aug 21, 2023 2:12 pm

I think Rulers in Fusion (like after effects) is something that people have been asking for ages now.
Alexander Papadopoulos
Previous

Return to Fusion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BMDR User 9201 and 38 guests