Creative COW SIGN IN :: SPONSORS :: ABOUT US :: CONTACT US
AUTODESK COMBUSTION: Autodesk Combustion ForumAutodesk Combustion TutorialsAutodesk CombustionAutodesk

Re: Why does AD bother with desktop Compositors?

Cow Forums : Autodesk Combustion
VIEW POSTS   •   ADD A NEW POST   •   SEARCH   •   CHANGE FORUM
Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread


Re: Why does AD bother with desktop Compositors?
by Don Nash on Jan 31, 2009 at 9:03:14 am

I just remember a while back, in a similar discussion, Bones talking about Toxic being Combustion's replacement. I went to AD's website and checked out it's features and watched some of the demo videos to get an idea of it's workflow. While I thought the UI was very elegant and more modern than Combustion's, it was obvious that its focus was STRICTLY on the film side of things.
If I saw the same features that Combustion had, combined with the newness of Toxic and all its added capabilities, I would have been very excited to consider Toxic as such.

Alas, it is not...and it doesn't even pretend to be. That's why I am confounded when folks more informed than myself say that Combustion won't be developed because of Toxic.

That's like saying the Ford F-150 won't be re-designed in any future models because of the F-350's (PowerStroke Diesel engines). They are both trucks, but they cater to slightly different markets.

Fusion also uses some AE plugins via an adaptor, as well as Saphire plugins(AE SDK?)...so, if AD wanted to develop Combustion, to include 64/32bit I don't see why 3rd party dev's wouldn't work with AD...even if it meant going to a new standard (OpenFX). If they receive licensing fees for every Combustion seat, why would Trapcode's dev. not want to re-write his plugins to the OpenFX standard, and to where it's available to the whole market? During a re-write, I don't think AD would need to resort to using ReFlex anyway...they have morphing tools in Toxic, so I'd imagine they'd want to use those tools instead (the same way many of CB's best tools are handed down from FFI).

Imagine Toxic and Combustion with Particular, and perhaps 3D Stroke and Shine built-in.
After such a re-write, why not put CB right in the sweet spot between AE and Nuke/Toxic...something like $1995. It would be well worth it.

No one is asking it to match Toxic feature for feature, but keep them on separate paths and give Combustion the love it deserves...it's Max integration features are a real keeper.



Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread


Current Message Thread:




Note: If you are a registered user please click here to login before posting.

Your post will not be accepted if your name and email address are not registered in our database. Click here if you do not have an account.

Name
E-Mail Address
Subject
E-Mail me when someone responds
Just This Message   Entire Thread   None  

Message:



Note: The following are HTML characters and may cause parts of your post to disappear if not used correctly: < > &
To include any portion of the post in your response, highlight the desired text and hit the "Q" key. Read more...



Add your message signature


 


Note: By clicking "Post Direct" button above, you are agreeing to the Creative Cow's Code of Conduct.



FORUMSTUTORIALSMAGAZINETRAININGVIDEOS - REELSPODCASTSEVENTSSERVICESNEWSLETTERNEWSBLOGS

© CreativeCOW.net All rights are reserved.

[Top]