Discreet Difference

[Aruna]

Take a look at this thread (http://www.vfxtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=762) for comparisons between inferno*, flame*, and flint*.

To answer your other questions, I'd have to say that at the price point flame* is at, you'd be hard pressed to find a comparable product. Quantel has some good software that is similar, as does Avid. However, for a realtime/near-realtime 3D compositing package, I don't think anything comes close to flame*. Of course I'm biased, since I really enjoy working on it. :)

I have no idea what is up with the backburner requirement for burn. I was under the impression that you don't need backburner at all, and burn runs on your linux farm in the background, and inferno* or flame* will do a background render on those boxes, with inferno or flame being the server, which the linux boxes are clients.

Shake can't really touch all the capabilities that the FFI products have, even though both packages have their advantages.

I am hesitant to comment on Mistika.. It sounds too much like Sony's failed entry into the market, the Socratto. As well, I don't have experience in Amazon+Pirahna to give a valid point on that package.

Hope that helps.. And when you win the lottery, you might as well pick up an inferno* or two instead. :)

[Aruna]

Well, that's just silly. Burn requirements and overview (http://www.fxguide.com/article146.html) at fxguide.com. It's a shame companies can't just go all IRIX and linux, they must have a windows box on their burn farm.. Oh well.

[Jamo3D]

Hey there!

Thanks, Aruna. That was brilliant stuff! I've been reading all the discreet PDF's and wow. Think of the flying logos you can make with that baby =).

I was very surprised to find out that it was Inferno that was the top end system and not Flame - I thought Inferno's price was based on it's storage. I guess Flame is their do it all box and Inferno is the one that can do it all and more.

Burn looks very interesting. It could mean that discreet might consider adding a nice GUI to that render node and power it up with the Nvidia FX card that can do 128 bit. Combustion for Linux, if you will. SGI might not like that idea, tho'. And discreet might not have enough pyrotechnic names to give it.

Thanks for that insight on Backburner being required, too. I thought there was some big secret thing in FX houses that made it sensible to do that. I guess there isn't. An odd oversight. I'd be greatly disappointed if it weren't for that fact that I don't use it (yet).

I guess after spending US$80k on 20 render nodes and about 20k plus for the plug-ins, what's a few thousand more? Look as I did on their site however, there was no sign of a network render tool for rendering on SGI boxes.

That would make sense because companies who bought new Tezros would want to make use of the Octane 2's they replaced. Another oversight? Or is there something I missed?

But from all the comments I've read and more, it looks like Flame and in fact FFI really are at the top of the heap. I guess it'll be a while before Apple make an AppleShake system. They'll most likely reach for lower-end price point before aiming higher (they can't even get 256MB cards yet).

Anyways, much obliged!

Jamo
+BIL

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.