I'm contemplating the following workflow for Shotgun and Renders. Has anyone tried something similar or have any comments on shotgun which I should think about differently?
Instead of using Assets to track renders I'm thinking about using assets purely as source files (3D Scenes, Compositing Scripts/Workspaces, Edit Timelines, 3D Models, Textures, etc).
Elements on the other hand would be plates and render passes. Beauty, Spec, Data, Cleanplate etc....
Every time a render completes it would be tagged in the render management software with:
Sequence -> Shot -> Element.
The render management software would create the proxy quicktime and thumbnail. Create a new version for the element and link the file path of the render output to the new version.
It would also create a link to the render's source asset version. (BigSceneElement -> Beauty -> Version 1) LINKED TO (BigSceneFile -> Version 10). This way an artist would know where the render came from.
In Nuke for example now you would read node which let you chooose:
Project: Big Project
Version: version 1
If the render management software adds a version 2 (say linked to big scene asset version 11) then an alert would be pushed to the artist that an element has a newer version available.
Is splitting up source files and renders as assets and elements respectively a sensible strategy or should I keep everything in assets? Is this a good way to lay out Shotgun projects in general? Is anyone else currently tracking versions via shotgun and have any comments they would be willing to share on how they approached it? Any feedback would be appreciated.