- This topic has 24 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 6 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Who else thinks that this new version is rubbish. They (discreet) seem to have filled it up with junk that I personally will never use. I don’t want to reanimate a Maya script – Maya and the maya artist is really good at that sort of thing – not me. How did the EQ on the audio get so bad in the first place – sack the audio guy or use a different post house – don’t ask me to Re EQ it – I’m a compositor not Vangelis. Multi REZ – far enough – nice adition. Drag and Select more than one axis and then edit – Bravo! – best feature so far. BUT for heavens sake – you people stop asking for crap features that mean I have to re-learn how do do all the old stuff whilst probably never getting round to use/need some of the new features. For instance, I don’t need to edit in Batch – the editor on the job is the directors favourite and would be really miffed if I went changed everything – any how – the desktop worked perfectly fine – swap shot – bosh – done – how long did that take.
It would however be nice to have a button that answered the phone or made the Coffees so that we can sack the reception staff and the runners – maybe the next feature in version 6 – there will be an accounts package – and Microsoft word built into Batch so I can do scheduling and prodution tasks whilst I “Background Render”. I suppose now that I have all these new features we can get rid of a few departments and I can get on with doing everybody else job in a very mediocre fashion – rather than sticking to what I did best.
By the way did the “tracking Backwards” and adding a new marker bug get fixed. How bout the aspect ratio thing in Paint – maybe the warper has been improved – they definately will have looked at that – won’t they??
Right, I have to get on – have to re-learn how to use action – now wheres that “Load” button got to……. javascript:emoticon(‘:roll:’)
Re: batch timeline
Actually, I find the batch timeline to be quite useful….I presented a section at fxguide live at NAB last year regarding this. There are tons of different types who work on inferno, as well as different types of projects being worked on. I do mainly TVC work, so there are times I’m loading EDLs and capturing footage. The next step is to confirm that everything matches with the avid work picture. In batch, it is so easy to set things up to allow you to interactively monitor (mix/wipe) the work picture and slip the assembly. I’ve gotten used to making adjustments in batch since it is so much easier to do at times than using the edit reel.
The editing in batch is also useful for interactively editing clips which are used in nodes and not having to exit batch. Its wonderful to be able to slip and slide edits which are layers without having to leave action/batch. Or adjust timewarps on clips.
It would be cool to pipe batch outputs into soft edits so that a edit is made up of scenes which are actually batch setups. Maybe the clip history which was shown at NAB can fit in with this.
There are certainly issues with editing in batch (such as the idea of local time in a shot and overall time) which could be improved. And there is also a bit of management that needs to be done when working with clips in batch. Hopefully this stuff can be improved in future releases.
Hmmm…maybe a feature/tutorial about batch timeline editing is needed…
ANON I think you are right, but I think you have fallen short. Come on, DIscreet interface and workings are 10 years old without any sognificant changes. They are pretty lousy. And their improvements have been the commonplace for some years in other programmes. I just hope Apple buys the whole thing so you can learn what a real interface looks like in AQUA starting with that awful gray and that stupid interface which is by far the worst I have ever seen in a pro application (and despite what you say is quite dumb)
eltopo wrote:ANON I think you are right, but I think you have fallen short. Come on, DIscreet interface and workings are 10 years old without any sognificant changes. They are pretty lousy. And their improvements have been the commonplace for some years in other programmes. I just hope Apple buys the whole thing so you can learn what a real interface looks like in AQUA starting with that awful gray and that stupid interface which is by far the worst I have ever seen in a pro application (and despite what you say is quite dumb)I couldn’t disagree with you more concerning the discreet interface. One of the reasons that FFI’s interface has remained so consistent is that it places functionality over visual bells and whistles. If it works well, why change it? Is it really that important to you to have pretty, colorful antialiased icons and widgets in your compositing application? Even though combustion is a fairly new discreet application, it shares the FFI GUI design because it’s been proven over time. Every After Effects user I know who has seen combustion’s interface has been very impressed with its uncluttered, context-sensitive interface. Using a tablet with the discreet interface, one can get in “the zone,” and everything just flows. Granted, UI design is personal preference, but I think most users would disagree with you about the discreet interface being “lousy.” It’s fast and simple. Who cares how pretty it looks? It’s meant to aid workflow, not impress your friends or tax the resources of your graphics hardware.
I own a dual G5 and an Octane. I really like OS X, but I couldn’t care less about Aqua. It looks great, but I still prefer the simplicity and effectiveness of the IRIX GUI. OS X doesn’t have anything nearly as sophisticated as IRIX’s Software Manager. And Aqua definitely has overhead, Quartz Extreme or not. Obvioulsy OS X is much further ahead in terms of supporting modern video codecs, but it’s no IRIX killer. That it kills Windows is obvious, but then again, what doesn’t?
From your recent posts I can see that you’re a big fan of Apple and the G5. So am I, but try to keep some perspective. No one has released the killer app yet on the desktop that rivals FFI. Perhaps that’s what Toxic will be (if it’s ever released), but for now there’s no integrated solution that is as flexible. I’d like to see combustion (or some new discreet desktop product) eventually have the full flame toolset, and I think it’s technically possible. Even if combustion just added realtime disk IO, it would be a huge step in the right direction.
Who knows, maybe discreet is currently working on a desktop product that gives you flame on a G5 (Toxic?), but somehow I doubt it. Their profit margin would have to be much lower, but they could possibly make up for it in sales volume. I’d much rather see discreet do it themselves than see someone else steal the market out from under them. Obviously they need to adapt. Look what happened to SGI. Although a quad processor Tezro stomps all over a dual G5, few people can afford one. Discreet could keep their name and pedigree intact if they were the first to develop a flame-like product for desktop systems. I hope they see the opportunity and potential of this very lucrative market instead of hiding their head in the sand.
Dude, Not trying to flame you.
Thou, I have been working towards becoming an Inferno Compositor for the last couple of years. hmm (since about age 16). And I couldnt belive what I read. You just gave shit to a piece of software that created an industry and started it all. (As far as I remember.) Shame on you.
Try working as a Sysadmin using MicroCrap. You would be in tears..
Anyways peace.
Ps.. Please feel free to put me forward for you job. :>
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.