Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement Integrator to allow attaching reviewables to other products easily #1143

Draft
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

BigRoy
Copy link
Collaborator

@BigRoy BigRoy commented Feb 12, 2025

Changelog Description

Allow attaching reviewables to other products directly from within the publisher UI.

image

Additional info

Draft implementation for: #1142

Testing notes:

  1. Set up dedicated review instance, yet attach it to another instance:

image

  1. Publish.
  2. The reviewables should now be on the 'attached instances' and the review instance should not be published separately.

image

@BigRoy BigRoy added the type: enhancement Improvement of existing functionality or minor addition label Feb 12, 2025
@BigRoy BigRoy self-assigned this Feb 12, 2025
@ynbot ynbot added the size/XS label Feb 12, 2025
@iLLiCiTiT
Copy link
Member

iLLiCiTiT commented Feb 12, 2025

I don't understand what it solves, and where? Because this looks like issue of Maya, where we have instance with review product type, which probably should not exists, instead each instance should have review camera enumerator, or? Because what is purpose of the review instance with this change?

And if there are instances without review that should be re-used in other instances, then only the host integragration knows how they are interconnected and should fill it.

This also affects all other hosts that have render product types which isn't really expected behavior.

@BigRoy
Copy link
Collaborator Author

BigRoy commented Feb 13, 2025

I don't understand what it solves, and where? Because this looks like issue of Maya, where we have instance with review product type, which probably should not exists, instead each instance should have review camera enumerator, or? Because what is purpose of the review instance with this change?

The review itself is heavily configurable and hence, having a singular place (like the review instance) is totally valid in my opinion. Similarly, it's also totally valid to generate just a reviewable without also requiring to publishing a model, or have it attached. Like being able to just generate a video of the scene (a playblast in maya, opengl render in houdini, etc.)

This also affects all other hosts that have render product types which isn't really expected behavior.

Correct - the biggest downside of this feature is filtering to finding the right instance of what is actually generating a reviewable. However, if those render instances, generate media that is a render or reviewable then it is actually correctly listed. This feature could e.g. even work in tray publisher if there you'd publish a rendered sequence + an alembic, then attach the render to the alembic.

But I think it's likely best to discuss in a call @mkolar @philippe-ynput @iLLiCiTiT to see whether this is even worth a further pursuit at this point.

It's basically an equivalent of what we're doing in Maya but then supports attaching a review to multiple products and the logic would work across any host that generates the reviewable representations during Extraction.

@iLLiCiTiT
Copy link
Member

iLLiCiTiT commented Feb 13, 2025

It's basically an equivalent of what we're doing in Maya but then supports attaching a review to multiple products and the logic would work across any host that generates the reviewable representations during Extraction.

Even tho that is true, it is also something you might want to prevent of doing it. Imagine artist adding review of instane A to instance B in Nuke, with this it is possible, but not something you want to allow in production. Don't get me wrong I think it does resolve the issues, but I think it should be much more targeted to host and the host products workflow, instead of being able to set review of any render/review instance to any render/review instance. But I might also be wrong and agree that the call would help.

@mkolar
Copy link
Member

mkolar commented Feb 13, 2025

Even tho that is true, it is also something you might want to prevent of doing it. Imagine artist adding review of instance A to instance B in Nuke, with this it is possible, but not something you want to allow in production.

This is a good general solution to problem we have at the moment I'd say. It would certainly be nice to do it per host with specific solutions to each, it does require some thinking from the artists potentially, but ultimately unblock a lot of things

@LiborBatek
Copy link
Member

Im all for it!
In fact we are completely lacking this option in e.g. blender and 3dsmax atm ....this should solve it nicely! If I get it correctly, when not choosing any entities to Attach the Review to, then it should behave as atm aka separate Review product to integrate.

Im already lovin' it!! Slick.... and also the fact it might unify the workflow across all host in fact! (No more weird middle mouse dragNdrop actions in maya outliner!)

Copy link
Member

@LiborBatek LiborBatek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Been tested inside Blender and Maya hosts and all working nicely!

There is one small issue as when the Review been attached to some publish instance the actual review instance itself does not have anything to integrate so there is a warning of that...

Maybe could be also useful to have a option in the Review instance to integrate a review as well (as a side product) too
Screenshot 2025-02-14 103106

@LiborBatek
Copy link
Member

also worth mentioning that when in maya and attaching the review to the workfile besides model ...I didnt get any reviewable for workfile also checked publish folder and there is just the maya work file nothing else.

Screenshot 2025-02-14 104144

Worked well for the model product and also when not attaching any publish instances to the review > resulting into disctinct product Review which is correct.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
size/XS type: enhancement Improvement of existing functionality or minor addition
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants