Jonas Wulff | 4 Aug 14:50 2006
Picon
Picon

Re: Effects order.

On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 20:09 +0200, Herman Robak wrote:

> You may get almost the desired result by crossfading the effects, using
> keyframes, if the transition is a crossfade.  Otherwise, you have to
> use two tracks.
> 

Wouldn't it be helpful then to enable transitions to blend between two
tracks, not just two edits?

Just a thought...
 Jonas
mark stavar | 4 Aug 15:06 2006
Picon

Re: Effects order.

I believe that this approach was used in the past by Adobe Premiere.  I think they were known as A and B tracks, reminicent of the the old A and B rolls when editing was done on film.  To my knowledge all commercial editors have since moved away from this approach.

On 8/4/06, Jonas Wulff <dasypus-hi6Y0CQ0nG0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 20:09 +0200, Herman Robak wrote:

> You may get almost the desired result by crossfading the effects, using
> keyframes, if the transition is a crossfade.  Otherwise, you have to
> use two tracks.
>

Wouldn't it be helpful then to enable transitions to blend between two
tracks, not just two edits?

Just a thought...
Jonas


_______________________________________________
Cinelerra mailing list
Cinelerra-0LiWvn2yMWjUKW2QJMybhA@public.gmane.org
https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra



--
Mark Stavar

Swan Dancer Productions

Email:  mark.stavar-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
Mobile: 0410 638 671

http://www.the-writers-retreat.com/
Jonas Wulff | 4 Aug 16:04 2006
Picon
Picon

Re: Effects order.

But in recent Premiere versions you can still use transitions between two different tracks (but you are not
limited to A and B tracks, of course, and you can blend between edits aswell...)

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Datum: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 23:06:00 +1000
Von: "mark stavar" <mark.stavar@...>
An: cinelerra@...
Betreff: Re: [CinCVS] Effects order.

> I believe that this approach was used in the past by Adobe Premiere.  I
> think they were known as A and B tracks, reminicent of the the old A and B
> rolls when editing was done on film.  To my knowledge all commercial
> editors
> have since moved away from this approach.
> 
> On 8/4/06, Jonas Wulff <dasypus@...> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 20:09 +0200, Herman Robak wrote:
> >
> > > You may get almost the desired result by crossfading the effects,
> using
> > > keyframes, if the transition is a crossfade.  Otherwise, you have to
> > > use two tracks.
> > >
> >
> > Wouldn't it be helpful then to enable transitions to blend between two
> > tracks, not just two edits?
> >
> > Just a thought...
> > Jonas
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cinelerra mailing list
> > Cinelerra@...
> > https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mark Stavar
> 
> Swan Dancer Productions
> 
> Email:  mark.stavar@...
> Mobile: 0410 638 671
> 
> http://www.the-writers-retreat.com/

--

-- 

Echte DSL-Flatrate dauerhaft für 0,- Euro*. Nur noch kurze Zeit!
"Feel free" mit GMX DSL: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
Greg Mekkes | 4 Aug 16:47 2006
Picon

Re: Missing rule for chromakey.C

Is there an svn tag for r836, or is there another way to get svn
to grab only r836 rather than latest-greatest?

Greg

--- Ichthyostega <prg@...> wrote:

> > Aaron Newcomb wrote:
> >> My compile of the svn version of cinelerra is failing with
> ...
> Pierre Dumuid wrote:
> > Check the svn_log.php page and checkout the svn version prior to when the
> merge commenced.
> > 
> 
> the last release prior to the start of the merge is r836
> in Subversion.
> 
> Hermann
> 
> 
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
Ichthyostega | 5 Aug 01:34 2006
Picon

Re: Missing rule for chromakey.C

Greg Mekkes wrote:
> Is there an svn tag for r836, or is there another way to get svn to grab only r836 rather than
> latest-greatest?
> 

svn checkout -r 836

or on a alredy existing working copy

svn update -r 836

Hermann

PS: and allways, if uncertain: try "svn help"  or esp. "svn help checkout" ....

Dan Streetman | 5 Aug 16:52 2006
Picon

Re: Effects order.

I've had the same problem, but my opinion is all the transitions
should be also added as effects.  To me, it makes more sense to have
effects than transitions.  They do the same thing, but transitions do
not (to me) do what I expect - they pull data from past the end of the
previous edit, i.e. they pull data from a part of the edit which is no
longer shown!  Plus, they aren't usable with effects - they always do
their thing before the effect.  To me, using a (for example) flash
effect is much easier and more intuitive than a flash transtion.  I
also think copying the transitions into effects would be much easier
than trying to change the transition model...

On 8/3/06, Hermann Vosseler <prg@...> wrote:
> Marcin Kostur wrote:
> > Suppose i have two video tracks which i would like to join with a transition. Additionally i need
> > to corret colors (e.g. histogram) on those tracks,
> ...
> > If i apply effect to each track, then the transition will use uncorrected part  in overlapping
> > moment (is it a bug?).
> ...
> > The way i did  it was "correct a track and render" but it introduced unecessary DV-reencoding.
>
> Andraž Tori wrote:
> > you probably want to say that two edits overlap. just render them first with all the corrections
> > you want and then use the new media files.
>
> Hello Andraž,
> Hello Marcin,
>
> quite often, I got struck by this behaviour. I consider it -- not quite
> a bug, but rather a shortcomming of the design, i.e. the way transitions
> are implemented and controlled in cinelerra.
> Basicalliy, it forces me to render the parts withl plugins to a lossles format
> before setting up the transitions. (Rendering to dv or mjpeg of course is
> not an option because of the quality loss introduced by re-encoding).
> This approach works, but really can't be called a "solution":
>
>   - it is destructive, wheras all editing should be non-destructive
>   - it forces me into using a huge amount of disk space (which can
>     get a nightmare in large projects)
>   - it's against the natural workflow: normally, we first select the
>     takes and try to cut, and later on, if all cuts are OK and the
>     whole "flow" of the movie is working, we do the fine tuning.
>     With this problem we either can't use transitions while cutting
>     (if we need the effects, e.g. slow motion), or we can't use a
>     preliminary version of the effects later on to be enhanced.
>
> So I think, we should open a enhancement ticket on this. What's
> your oppinion?
>
> Cheers,
> Hermann
>
>
>
>
>
Ichthyostega | 5 Aug 17:04 2006
Picon

Re: Effects order.

Dan Streetman wrote:
> I've had the same problem, but my opinion is all the transitions should be also added as effects.
> To me, it makes more sense to have effects than transitions.  They do the same thing,
....

Hi Dan,

...the problem is: from a technical viewpoint, they don't do the same thing,
because they are pulling video data out of two sources wheras effects
pull out of one source (the predecessor in the effects chain).
While I agree with you that it would be much more intuitive to have transitions
behave like effects this would imply a generalisation of the effects
infrastructure and there are good chances this would mean touching and adapting
every existing effect as well.....

Cheers,
Hermann

Ichthyostega | 5 Aug 17:06 2006
Picon

Fade not CLAMPed, why?


Hello,

A well known problem is with the fades:
if the fade automation value goes beyond 100 or below 0 this causes
a wraparound visible as flicker of the image in many cases.

Question to the code gurus:
In VirtualVNode::render_fade(..) there is a CLAMP()-call
which would force the value of the fade to be between 0 and 100
but this call is commented out. If I activate this, the fades
behave as one would expect.

Does anyone know of a good reason, why this call was commented out?
Was ist performance?

Cheers,
Hermann Vosseler

PS: I'm talking of the "old" Cinelerra 2.0 codebase...
reuben firmin | 5 Aug 18:57 2006

comparison with main actor

Perhaps relevant to the usability discussion, I've been writing a series of articles comparing Cinelerra to Main Actor; if anyone is compiling a list of potential UI/usability improvements, you may find them useful. So far I've gotten as far as a simple side-by-side editing exercise, but I hope to compare some of the more advanced features in the next few weeks. If anybody would like to take on writing the cinelerra side of one or more of the advanced editing comparisons, please drop me a line. Also, if you see any inaccuracies, let me know.

Here are three of my posts:

"Joe User's first impressions of each app"
http://flavor8.com/index.php/2006/07/21/mainactor-vs-cinelerra-ui-first-impressions/

"Simple editing, Main Actor"
http://flavor8.com/index.php/2006/07/30/mainactor-vs-cinelerra-simple-editing-part-1/

"Simple editing, Cinelerra"
http://flavor8.com/index.php/2006/08/05/mainactor-vs-cinelerra-simple-editing-part-2/




Ichthyostega | 6 Aug 01:20 2006
Picon

Re: comparison with main actor

reuben firmin wrote:
> Perhaps relevant to the usability discussion, I've been writing a series of articles comparing
> Cinelerra to Main Actor;
....

just read your articles -- nicely put and valid observations!

So now -- what are cinelerra's "true values" (besides being open software)?
The compositing engine? The ability to mix different frame rates?
The effects chain? The ability to output to pipe?

Hermann

Gmane