You know RenderGarden is just a GUI wrapper for the AE native command line rendering right? Adobe is already doing it. That's a very different ask than threading everything in the app. And also, I would argue, why waste resources on doing something that's already handled quite well by a third party? People complain about the need for scripts and plugins for AE but every single time I open the app I'm doing something different, with a different workflow... I'm not sure I'd want a core app that could do everything all the current scripts and plugins do, but internally. It would be more unstable than Maya, which was essentially its path of development. And impossible to support. From what I understand the AE team is not very big as these things go. Do I think there's room for speed improvement? Absolutely. Do I want another re-write of the core to break an app I use every day in production, again, for modest speed gains? Not really.

Um . . . I don’t get it. If RenderGarden can do it – and I’m a devoted fan – why can’t Adobe? So perhaps it’s not integrated as well as one might like, but you don’t have to leave AE to use it and the result is seamless. It runs in the background, uses as many cores as you like, can work across machines, and can save huge amounts of time.

 

What am I missing?

 

 

Jonathan Penzner

Sundance/Realtime

 

On Oct 18, 2018, at 1:11 PM, Gordon Mah <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

 

Part of the rationale for going to a subscription model was that it would loosen the rules publicly traded companies need to adhere to.  You can’t use that excuse any more, Adobe.

 

Break plugins?  We can run a previous version in parallel, no?  Sure multi-threaded is tough, but I’d venture that 32-to-64 bit was tougher.  I’d gladly wait 2 yrs w/out new features if we knew major core updates were coming.