Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
edrhine

Nuke or Eyeon Fusion

Recommended Posts

Hey there.... we are looking for a new higher end compositing package to take over where AE lacks. We are considering Nuke right now, but I have also heard great things about Eyeon Fusion. It seems after reviewing the sites, that Fusion has a bit more to offer in terms of creating motion graphics and compositing. I also know that Nuke seems to be the industry standard for that work. Any thoughts (or even ridiculous comments) about this would be great. For those of you that have used it, what are the pros/cons. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both will have a steep learning curve if you've never used a node-based compositor. I use Nuke for about half of my compositing work and it performs well. It has a tendency to be somewhat buggy but that has improved greatly in version 6. Unfortunately it is still 32bit only for OSX, but nevertheless still speedy. It's hard for me to describe because I feel like I only use it to 10% of its capability. However, in the hands of a skilled compositor it can do amazing things. Plus, The Foundry is a great company with excellent technical support (you're required to purchase a year of support with Nuke by default).

 

I haven't used Fusion but I've heard good things about it. Whichever way you end up going just know that either will require a serious time investment on your part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a big fan of nuke and force behind their software development. As a 3D artist, I use nuke constantly to polish my render passes. I think the biggest reason I started using it was how it handled EXR's. Got sick of waiting for after effects to scrub through 30frames of 5 layered EXR passes. Not sure how CS5 handles them now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For actually creating motion graphics I don't know that I would really use either. On paper it sounds like Fusion has more to offer in that realm than Nuke. I like Nuke for straight up compositing projects and some of its more potent features, like the 3d compositing, has really come in handy on a few projects. It's also my understanding that for highend comping work Nuke is the industry favorite. My recommendation would be talking to whoever is going to be doing most of the compositing, seeing if they can check out a demo of each, and then getting their feedback on what they feel most comfortable using.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey there.... we are looking for a new higher end compositing package to take over where AE lacks. We are considering Nuke right now, but I have also heard great things about Eyeon Fusion. It seems after reviewing the sites, that Fusion has a bit more to offer in terms of creating motion graphics and compositing. I also know that Nuke seems to be the industry standard for that work. Any thoughts (or even ridiculous comments) about this would be great. For those of you that have used it, what are the pros/cons. Thanks!

 

Don't worry about "industry standard"... If you need Fusion's particle systems or any of its advanced 3D features for mograph work, then get that. Nuke is really quite VFX centric and in these areas has less features or none at all. However, you can bet your ass on it that they are working hard on it. They haven't bought/ licensed Sony's Katana for nothing... In many other areas the apps are similar, so it wouldn't matter much which one you get. I would however consider, that Fusion's development is pretty slow while Nuke is evolving at breathtaking speed. This will clearly shift the market even more toward Nuke in the future. Technologically Nuke is based on more modern principles and offers better customization and expandability, anyway, but that scripting and custom channels stuff is mostly relevant for integrated workflows at larger facilities only, of course. They both have their pros and cons and as usual it depends a lot on what work you actually do...

 

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a lot more faith in The Foundry's Nuke, than in Fusion. They are really shaping Nuke into a great product. (Really great updates and features being added, Sony Imageworks Katana technology will no doubt find it's way in there at some point too.)

 

I've worked on some pretty big scripts with lots of 3d nodes, and it does slow down a bit, but I couldn't imagine working on a project like this particular one in AE. Maybe it's just node-based comping in general, but it is extremely fast to find what you want in your comp and tweak it. Very easy and natural to jump back and forth from the 2d world to 3d in Nuke.

 

All in all, it's MUCH faster at dealing with 3d objects/layers than AE. And it can handle actual 3d geometry, which AE fakes. With interactive lighting and textures, and it does it fast. Plus it handles multiple 32bit float EXR's in ways AE could never do.

Edited by theta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either of them will pick up where AE leaves off in terms of compositing. That's really due to working in a node based environment; much more efficient in all regards. AE will still be a better choice for Mograph, the keyframe/timeline implementation makes it a lot quicker. (quicker workflow that is)

Between Nuke and Fusion, I'd give the upper hand to Fusion with regards to working in that space between comp & mograph. Great for a small shop or one man show(not to say that it's not hard-core film comping capable). It can do so much under the hood. The particles are excellent. Video out capabilities are also useful. Eyeon's only mistake was not implementing a OSX version. Nuke was able to grab almost all of the displaced Shake users and has continued amazing development.

VFX and Film work goes to Nuke hands down. (Eyeon is an excellent company to deal with as well). You'll find no shortage of Nuke users out there dumping on Fusion without ever having used the program. In that regard, maybe it suffers a perception problem. I've used both programs extensively and would also give the upper hand to Nuke, however it's getting quite expensive. (even if you're not going for the "X" version, which has some tools which once you've started using them, you can't live without.)

-mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having used Fusion for 7+ years and coming from an After Effects background, I have to say that going from AE to Nuke would be a lot bigger of a learning curve than going from AE to Fusion. Fusion is a little bit easier to ease into than Nuke. Nuke's nodes are broken out into little building blocks, and with Fusion, the individual nodes have a lot more functionality built into each node... So, to achieve some effect, might take one node in Fusion and 3 in Nuke. Also, Fusion has a really awesome 3D particle system that isn't available in Nuke.

 

Personally, the way I work, is i'll do all my animation in AE (I sort of treat AE like Maya or a 3D app) and I'll take all those animation passes and comp them in Fusion. I've got some examples on my blog if you want to check it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Resurrecting this thread and wondering how many people use Nuke in the mograph industry these days. I've done minimal stuff in there (tracking/stabilizing, converting render passes, etc.) and find myself occasionally working in AE on a project thinking "ugh this would be such an easy fix in a node compositor". Ram preview was also a big incentive in the v7 update.

 

I know it's great for working on single shots in vfx but how do people deal w/ longer projects (2-4 mins)? I like that AE can sort of be a quick and dirty NLE for multiple shots. Are there any plugins/scripts that makes the transition from AE to Nuke easier?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no compositor but here at DK we use Fusion and everyone loves it. Much of the 3D team came from a Nuke background and they all really enjoy working with Fusion.

 

The only downfall I can think of would be that in the past when needing freelancers it is much easier to find Nuke artists than it is Fusion artists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At Sequence we're 95% After Effects, 5% Nuke, but the only reason we've gone with Nuke over Fusion is because our sister company, Faction, is a Nuke-based VFX company. I'm not sure anyone here has ever opened Fusion. Though now I want to give it a try...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...