Flame and Combustion

[markosDV]

Dear All,

I´ve been using Combustion for quite sometime.And a lot of goodies have been added to Combustion derrived from Flame.So how close really are they?I have heard opinions ranging from "Combustion moving ever closer to Flame" to "Combustion is nothing like Flame".One explanation could be the cost difference.Combustion is a desktop compositor while Flame comes with Autodesk Systems.And since I can´t get my hands on Flame can anybody please take some time and answer the following:

The cost difference is due to the hardware you have to purchase with Flame?I can´t imagine any software alone costing 200.000 Dollars.
How much better in features is Flame than Combustion?I imagine Flame is much more powerful as performance but what happens with features?
Everybody advices a move to Fusion for cost reasons.Is Flame all that better than Fusion too?
Ultimately is it wrong to insist on working with Combustion?Will it help me at all if moving to Flame or is it Flame quite a different story?Should I move to Fusion before Flame?
Could you provide sites for Flame training.

Thank you for your time and effort.Any answer is trully going to be appreciated.

[jimbullard]

Depends what you want to end up doing. If you want to work on commercials then Flame is a good move. If you want to do films then you're better off learning fusion. I wouldn't recommend learning Fusion as a route to get to Flame.

Flame costs more because it has a bunch of features combustion lacks and also runs on a system that allows very fast interactivity. It's aimed mainly towards the commercials market where the sessions generally have lots of clients in that want to see a lot of versioning in a short space of time - something that isn't practical on a desktop system with longer render times.

Some extra features you get (over combustion) include some nice keyers (the master keyer and modular keyer), Batch (which is essentially the Autodesk version of a node tree like Fusion), a fully 3D working environment inside action that allows you to use camera's, 3D object and textures and import/export data between many 3D applications. The list goes on...

[faridzadeh]

The two are actually very different. Just because you are familiar with combustion doesn't necessary mean you can jump right into a Flame.
Although I'm making a general statement here, and could be very wrong (please correct me if I am), but Toxic seems closer to Flame and Combustion does.
Then again Toxic hasn't really gotten a warm reception as of yet.

[sgr]

Then again Toxic hasn't really gotten a warm reception as of yet.

Not that I want to side track the topic - but where is Toxik in the compositing world - is it wildly used or just kept alive because Autodesk can afford it?!

[aaron zander]

From what I've seen, i work at an all autodesk facility that runs on flames, has the largest burn farm on the west coast, and has a few infernos and smokes. Flame can definitely fit in the feature world (not that you guys said it doesn't) but it's ultra-fast work flow helps cut down time which on a long enough timeline allows for it to be more than worth it.

Combustion looks and feels nothing like flame, but it does have some things that transfer, some nodes and the way node settings look.

just an fyi

edit about toxic

it is heavily used in the commercial world and with some feature film facilities. it works really well for going from maya to other compositors as well as working really wel with server and 3rd party renderers.

[jimbullard]

Thats true... ILM use a modified version of FFI on their features.

It's more a money thing - if you could buy one Flame and have one (probably quite expensive) artist working on it or you could get 10 guys on Shake for around the same cost it makes sense to go for ten guys. Of course once you start using combustion etc as a support tool it takes a lot of time out of your Flame suites and they become more efficient blah blah blah.
(Oh and I am basing those numbers on nothing whatsoever so please don't flame me people )

Which facility do you work at amz370?

[aaron zander]

once i sign my contract on friday i'll let you know

here's a hint, fxguide did a profile on them for 300 and 1 other movie done in 2007 (which was a kind of flop but had good vfx)

[jimbullard]

aaaahhhhh nice one.

Well congratulations! That's a fantastic place to be working!

I assume you use FFI?

P.S Sorry for hijacking the thread MarkosDV

[aaron zander]

i sit in a dark room using combustion

[jimbullard]

It's a good facility you'll be sitting in

[markosDV]

What a flow of info!Thank you all people.And I also enjoy the Toxic thing...So no worries Jim and sgr...!!!I also thank you for your exact Flame features info.Also a big thanks to faridzadeh too for giving me an initiative to stat considering Toxic as a next learning step.The good thing is that I can get my hands on Toxic 2008 easily.My big dream still is film effects but I believe I will have to do commercials first.But after what amz370 said Flame is fit for film pipelines as well-how couldn´t it? (Thanks amz370).Does anybody really know an approximate cost for a Flame with LInux?I´ve been guessing all that time.Learnig it should really be possible only if working in a studio using it, right?Are there any other ways?
Patience to all of us Combustioners...!
Thank you all once again!

[aaron zander]

i think there is an msrp and than there is what eveyr one pays, as they are all sold face to face pretty much so there is a bit og haggling, from what I've heard base flame is 120k USD but it may be more or less hard to say.

Also flames are often used in facilites that do use other software, they are often there as the saftey net or as (as I like to say) the Oh Shit button, when everything starts to go wrong, or you're like "why has no one touched this shot in 3 months...it's do in 2 days) toss it to the flame artist, the realtime and near realtime work it can do will really speed up the review proccess...plus every flame suite has a couch to sit on and watch the artist. I think it's the law.

[jimbullard]

my couch rocks

[markosDV]

Thanks amz370!Good to know this price estimation.I get me some crazy ideas of buying a Flame for personal use sometime in the future if plans work OK...I still have only a fraction of the money required and I will need to totally investigate ROI before any final move is made.OK...that´s my crazy ideas.In the meantime I hope I can find some good learning material and VFXTalk sounds like a great starting point with all you guys here.
Once again thanks!

[quantum mechanic]

But after what amz370 said Flame is fit for film pipelines as well-how couldn´t it?

It's all about fitting it to the pipe and not the project. FFI doesn't integrate with pipelines as well as other systems but as a standalone unit it rocks. That's why commercials work so well for FFI, they are smaller projects. A feature on the other hand can have a huge amount of work to manage and because of that a compositor that speaks to the rest of the pipe can save a huge amount of man power. But yes, if workflow is well thought out FFI can do features just fine, like they did before the advent of desktop options

And don't blow all your money on a flame, you'll need to save some for the suite decor and that awesome couch. Mine was brushed leather, soft as a babies bottom.