CineMontage

Q1 2018

Issue link: https://digital.copcomm.com/i/942009

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 58 of 71

57 Q1 2018 / CINEMONTAGE 57 Q1 2018 / CINEMONTAGE TECH TIPS of the latter, compositing a scene is done by stacking layers up in a timeline (like a sandwich). That is how it's done in Adobe After Effects. It's an entirely different story with nodes. Rather than stack elements atop of each, a node-based composite looks more like a flowchart of interconnected nodes, each of which can have multiple inputs and outputs that pipe into each other. Every node is designed to perform a specific function. For example: Load footage, add effects, color-correct, work in 3D, and make particles. Fusion and Nuke both use nodes. Nodes or layers? It all really depends on who you are and the kind of work you do. If you're involved in motion graphics design and your work largely consists of creating graphics and typography, After Effects' layer-based approach is straightforward and easy to understand. After Effects also works well with other Adobe Apps such as Photoshop, Illustrator and Premiere. When it comes to complex visual effects shots, such as those found in movies like Gravity or The Matrix Revolutions, it's a different story. The more complex a shot is, the more issues can arrive when working with layers. To begin with, the timeline stack is prone to getting awfully deep with tons of layers, making things confusing. While some of the madness can be tamed by nested pre-comps, trying to locate a certain layer or effect can feel like a wild goose chase. Nodes, on the other hand, make the process simpler. To begin with, a comp is entirely represented in a single flowchart view without anything hidden away. And due to its visual nature, a node flow is easy to understand and self-explanatory. Contrast that with a giant wall of layers, which doesn't tell you much of anything. In addition, a node's output can be piped into inputs of multiple nodes. You would have to duplicate a layer or effect to do that in a layer-based system, further adding to the confusion and clutter. Therefore, while VFX-heavy shots are possible with layers, many visual effects artists agree that nodes are a better solution. Both Fusion and Nuke are sophisticated, advanced compositing programs that feature a 3D compositing environment and have been used on an impressive roster of VFX-heavy blockbuster films. While Fusion has a strong and growing following of enthusiastic users, Nuke has the edge right now as far as which compositor is used most often in feature film production (see Figure 2). However, I wouldn't be surprised if the balance starts shifting due to several important developments. A few years ago, eyeon Software, the developer of Fusion, was acquired by Blackmagic Design and the software joined its new stepbrother, DaVinci Resolve — another highly esteemed and powerful color-grading, editing and audio post-production application also acquired by Blackmagic. Just as they did with DaVinci Resolve, Blackmagic proceeded to release a remarkably full-featured free version of Fusion, along with a pro version, Fusion Studio (with some extra features), for around $1,000. That's not a lot when you consider that Nuke costs around $8,000, plus about $1,500 per year to keep the software current. Fusion 8 was shortly released, and with it came Mac compatibility. Personally, I use Windows machines, specifically HP workstations, to do my production work. However, many compositors use Macs, a platform obviously important enough to Blackmagic Design to port Fusion to it. With a free version of Fusion available that was not resolution-restricted for anyone to use (commercially or not), and a reasonably priced pro version an eighth of the cost of Nuke, plus free upgrades, Blackmagic caused many a compositor to raise her or his eyebrows. Fusion is a highly regarded and elegant node-based compositing solution with an impressive track record of movies, and while there are differences, Fusion and Nuke are similar in look, feel and capability. However, while this dramatic turn of events was reason enough to embrace Fusion, some people bemoaned a few important features they felt were missing to justify switching from Nuke — such as the lack of a 3D camera tracker. Not only did Nuke have a 3D Figure 2: In addition to 2D compositing, Fusion 9 has a comprehensive 3D environment that allows for 3D objects, cameras and lighting tools. Figure 3: The new 3D camera tracker in Fusion 9 is a critical new feature that offers hundreds of possibilities when compositing, such as this image from the upcoming film Stolen. Courtesy of Atomic Imaging.

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of CineMontage - Q1 2018