To digress; overall it would be good if NukeX would pursue a best-in-class goal - like the new Vector tools.
Currently it appears that if it reaches 3/4 then it's finished, i.e. camera tracker performance is better in Nuke10 with caching but SynthEyes solves more robustly, the roto tools could do with soft selections as in 3d packages to move a bunch of vertices with weighting , planar tracker should compete with mocha 90% of the time, denoise should compete with Neat, RayTracer is still far behind AtomKraft from 4 years ago, the 3d viewport is death just viewing normals. On 26 May 2016 at 23:17, Igor Majdandzic <subscripti...@badgerfx.com> wrote: > Is it still the "planar" implementation of the cameratracker, or does it > track textures by now? That was always the big annoying difference to mocha. > > > > Am 26.05.2016 um 01:00 schrieb Randy Little: > > Dito Andrew. > > Randy S. Little > http://reel.rslittle.com > http://imdb.com/name/nm2325729/ > > > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 6:45 PM, Andrew Mumford <a_mumf...@mac.com> wrote: > >> 1. Nuke Planar bails on tracks that Mocha handles easily. >> 2. Mocha is faster. >> 3. Nuke's implementation of B-Splines sucks so using Planar Tracker to >> help with Roto is less useful than it should be - I refuse to use Nuke >> Beziers for a lot of roto - terrible results IMO and Nuke Bezier never >> really got as good as Shake had them. >> 4. Cannot Ctrl Drag select more than one corner select multiple corner >> point for the Planar Surface itself, (yet you can just fine in a regular >> corner pin ?!). >> 5. UI is really hard to work in especially again with Planar Surfaces >> since you can only grab the corner points and they are just dots like every >> other point in the Viewer - somehow just making them yellow is not exactly >> cutting it ... try this in Mocha - you can easily drag edges as well - why >> doesn't Nuke have this and more for the money you pay for it ? >> 6. and on and on and on >> >> ... back to sleep now ... >> >> --- >> Andrew Mumford >> >> >> On May 24, 2016, at 08:56 AM, Mads Lund < <madshl...@gmail.com> >> madshl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I know quite a few people who was not too pleased with the departure of >> the old Nuke Planartracker, but I was thinking about, what you guys are >> missing from the current Nuke Planartracker / Planartracker workflow? >> And likes/dislikes... >> >> >> -- >> Best regards. >> Mads Hagbarth Lund >> _______________________________________________ >> Nuke-users mailing list >> Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Nuke-users mailing list >> Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Nuke-users mailing listnuke-us...@support.thefoundry.co.uk, > http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > Nuke-users mailing list > Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >
_______________________________________________ Nuke-users mailing list Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
