I am strongly opposed to the rebranding from ShotGrid to Flow Production Tracking. Here are my reasons:
Simply too long
I had no resistance to the transition from what was once called Shotgun to ShotGrid, partly because the initials ‘SG’ were consistent, making it easy for me to accept.
However, the change to Flow Production Tracking seems entirely unrelated to ShotGrid and is unnecessarily long. We will have to keep saying ‘Flow Production Tracking, Flow Production Tracking, Flow Production Tracking…’ This is nothing but a pain.
The task of renaming config files is a waste.
This is a problem we also faced when it changed from Shotgun to ShotGrid. Am I supposed to just replace ‘ShotGrid’ with ‘Flow Production Tracking’ in all my .yml files? Absolutely not! I have to go through all yaml files managed on GitHub, ensure their changes are correct, and debug to confirm everything works. This is a waste of time, effort, and money.
There are issues with the development directory as well. Initially, the ShotGrid Desktop, excuse me, now ‘Flow Production Tracking Desktop’ application, is still using the Shotgun directory. Changing the name means we have to rewrite paths and debug tools we developed. I sincerely wish they would not change names so lightly.
Like the previous change from Shotgun to ShotGrid, this is merely a name change. We still have an opportunity to address this. Why not join together to encourage Autodesk to reconsider this name change in a constructive manner? Your voice is important now more than ever. Let’s use it to suggest they think again about this decision.
I don’t understand what you are saying here?
There is no need to rewrite any yaml files as far as I know.
Pretty sure this is not changing as it did also not change with Shotgun → ShotGrid.
However I would also always aim to not hardcode any paths in your tools, or at least make them configurable.
The docs have now become absurdly difficult to read. This is a very bad idea.
All google searches will have a harder time to find information. Good luck searching for “Flow” or “Production” or “Tracking”.
This is a generic and imminently forgettable name. One’s eyes glaze over just reading it. Six syllables compared to 2. Nobody who is competent could’ve conceived of this. It’s the hallmark of someone who doesn’t understand how information works.
People will call it FPT. Imagine the fun insults you can give when stuff breaks. F***ed Production Tracking. This stuff writes itself.
An artist I serve actually said his reaciton to the change looked like the initials – pfft. Everyone feels this way.
pfft (from dictionary): Used to express a contemptuous or dismissive attitude.
If I wanted to undermine a product, this is what I’d do to ruin its branding.
I appreciate your understanding and cooperation. While it may seem unnecessary to update yaml files, in practice, certain configurations need to be modified to reflect the new branding.
For instance, in the tk-multi-workfiles2.yml file, I’ve previously experienced the need to change ‘Publish to Shotgun’ to ‘Publish to ShotGrid’. Although this may appear to be a minor adjustment, it plays a crucial role in maintaining consistency and clarity for our internal users.
Therefore, I believe it’s essential to update these configurations whenever branding changes occur to ensure that all references reflect the updated branding accurately. Thank you for your understanding and support.
I completely agree with your sentiments. For instance, I’ve experienced similar frustration when the names of DCC tools overlapped with those of well-known gaming consoles, making it difficult to find relevant information through search engines.
It’s worth questioning whether this rebranding truly serves the interests of us, the paying users. Will we continue to face similar changes in the future?
I think we are a lot to feel this way. I heard of users in several studios keeping one tab on the old Shotgrid icon, wishing it would go all back to the previous state…
technical issues asided, my wife and other female artists had a very strong negative reaction to the term “flow” and continue to bawk at it whenever they see an email notification now. Not to mention “flow management” and “flow capture” (rip Moxion),
Were any female execs involved in this decision?
Just wondering…
We decided to just calling it Shotgun again cause nobody wants to talk about flow all day every day
The title just doesn’t make sense in many contexts… especially here as it isn’t “Flow Production Tracking” methods, it’s still referring to methods of the “Shotgun” class.
What an unnecessary mess… It’s really messing with my flow!
There was no reason to rebrand from Shotgun to ShotGrid, other than some genius in Autodesk marketing thought that it was necessary. It did not improve the user experience in any way - in fact, it degraded it, since we all had to call it something different. Also, the API is still called shotgun_api3, despite the documentation being modified to replace Shotgun with ShotGrid and now Flow.
This is a change that is just asinine, that nobody asked for or wanted, and makes the product a little less easier to work with.
We still have an opportunity to address this. Why not join together to encourage Autodesk to reconsider this name change in a constructive manner? Your voice is important now more than ever. Let’s use it to suggest they think again about this decision.
This is simply naive. Recognise gallery play for what it is. No new features? New name then!
In about 5 years Autodesk has conducted two rebrands of Shotgun, and, uh, not much else of any consequence or substance? When can we have something that really matters, like an update to the review tools to not be ancient and terrible?
