1 May 15:20
Interesting Video: "Why Linux Desktop Linux Sucks"
This video is quite interesting to watch - he talks a lot about Linux Video Editing and Ardour, http://video.linuxfoundation.org/video/1375
1 May 20:15
Re: Interesting Video: "Why Linux Desktop Linux Sucks"
Joel, Going back to the previous topic of spec docs for the Lumiera gui, I do think that the previous articles you linked to show the need for a solid roadmap and specifications for the application GUI and front end features. I'd be happy to do the write-up for it, in collaboration with you and the other developers and to take the public input for the gui and help sift through the good and bad ideas and integrate them into the overall gui specifications. I have to agree with the speaker in this video that although there are several different editing apps for linux, none of them are up to snuff for professional (or even hobbyist) editing work, so I'd personally like to see something that can fulfill that need. I think (or at least hope) that Lumiera has potential to achieve this, but it is hard to tell without clearly defined design specs for the gui. I think the ideal would be to have a set of wiki pages which act as the specifications document which start with the big picture and drill down into individual components. The structure would look something like this: Overall GUI --> Menu Options --> Individual Panels --> Panel Components (icons, menus, etc) --> Individual Component Features (if separate page is called for) ...with interlinked pages showing relationships between different features and components. As new features enter the planning stage, we could simply add new pages in the relevant location for the new feature, allowing the spec document to be an easily modified, growing,(Continue reading)
1 May 21:14
Re: GUI comments and suggestions
> Now that I have the GUI up and running, I'll open up some comments and > suggestions for discussion. Many of the suggestions are based on > standard editing workflows in other professional editing applications > and having done quite a bit of editing myself. Good we need this - because a lot of the design must avoid looking crazy to a potential user. Though we will add our own unique touch. This is the problem with KDENLive, LiVeS, Cinellera, et al - they all have crazy UIs. > My stance on GUI design for video editing applications is to be as > minimalistic as absolutely possible. Anyone who has ever edited > anything - especially on a single monitor - understands that every > square centimeter of screen space is valuable, and as little as > possible should be wasted by buttons, menus, etc. Yes I broadly agree - space is valuable. Really it's about spending space wisely. I think a good target resolution is 1280x1024. That gives you a budget of 1.3 mega pixels minus task bars and title bars for the default non-fullscreen mode. So there's our budget, and the challenge is to spend the space wisely. If you have too few or too tiny first class widgets the UI is bare. You run into problems of discoverability - users can't figure out how to do things, and have to dig through hidden menus to find things. If you have too many or too large first class widgets the UI becomes cluttered. You have buttons that are never used, and tiny cramped space left over for the workspace. In the extreme case discoverablity begins to drop off, but in this case because of options overload.(Continue reading)
1 May 23:24
Re: GUI comments and suggestions
> Yes I broadly agree - space is valuable. Really it's about spending > space wisely. I think a good target resolution is 1280x1024. That gives > you a budget of 1.3 mega pixels minus task bars and title bars for the > default non-fullscreen mode. So there's our budget, and the challenge is > to spend the space wisely. > This sounds like a good target for the basic layout. Most editors use dual monitor configurations, but many people do also use single monitor layouts and I agree that should be the default resolution to support. >> 1. Play controls (Play, FF, FR, Stop, etc) should be attached to the >> viewer window, not the timeline. Also, each viewer window should (as >> a result) have its own set of play control buttons which control that >> specific viewer. This is standard design in all editing applications. > > Yes I've been hearing this. I guess we should adopt that. I'm still > unsure because it would mean that for N viewers you end up with N sets > of playback controls. But that would use a lot of space on duplicated > widgets that could be shared if they were attached to a timeline, or > detached in their own panel of transport controls. Any thoughts about > this. > It does result in duplicated controls, but at the same time it keeps things manageable for the user. I would be open to discussion on how the play controls should be placed and operate, but the current location on the timeline panel is definitely not an appropriate place for them. I also see several potential issues with the use of a(Continue reading)
1 May 23:40
Re: GUI comments and suggestions
> This sounds like a good target for the basic layout. Most editors use > dual monitor configurations, but many people do also use single > monitor layouts and I agree that should be the default resolution > support. > Unless I misundersrtood your point... I disagree... if you are using a calibrated monitor (and one should), it is unlikely to be your desktop monitor. For say I am using 2 screens with cinelerra, one calibrated where the compositor stays, and the main desktop screen where all gamma, histogram, etc.... happen. I could not work other way. This is very efficient. However one can always config X with gamma and color adjustement for 2 different screens but the possibility to move the screen result (compositor with cinelerra) independantly should be a priority. Just my 2 cents. Cheers E
1 May 23:43
Re: Interesting Video: "Why Linux Desktop Linux Sucks"
Hmmm, I really hated that video. Everything seems to go towards converting Linux into Mac OS X. Well, I'm a designer, I run a design studio and I can use linux and free software for the task. I'm not saying that is perfect and it doesn't need improvements, but I left Microsoft and Adobe for something else than money. I think this video completely misses the point and focuses only in a pragmatic view over the subject. I really find annoying when the guys repeats that he wants software "whatever is open source or closed source". Fortunately some people in the audience brings some balanceI don't want to start a flame war, but I find these kind of utilitary points of view to be very dangerous for the linux desktop. Gez
2 May 00:21
Re: Interesting Video: "Why Linux Desktop Linux Sucks"
Ho ... good I am not alone then.... :-D Cheers E Guillermo Espertino wrote: > Hmmm, I really hated that video. > Everything seems to go towards converting Linux into Mac OS X. > > Well, I'm a designer, I run a design studio and I can use linux and free software for the task. > I'm not saying that is perfect and it doesn't need improvements, but I left Microsoft and Adobe for something else than money. > I think this video completely misses the point and focuses only in a pragmatic view over the subject. > I really find annoying when the guys repeats that he wants software "whatever is open source or closed source". > > Fortunately some people in the audience brings some balance
2 May 00:28
Re: GUI comments and suggestions
On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 09:40 +1200, E Chalaron wrote: > > This sounds like a good target for the basic layout. Most editors use > > dual monitor configurations, but many people do also use single > > monitor layouts and I agree that should be the default resolution > > support. > > > Unless I misundersrtood your point... I disagree... if you are using a > calibrated monitor (and one should), it is unlikely to be your desktop > monitor. > For say I am using 2 screens with cinelerra, one calibrated where the > compositor stays, and the main desktop screen where all gamma, > histogram, etc.... happen. > I could not work other way. This is very efficient. > However one can always config X with gamma and color adjustement for 2 > different screens but the possibility to move the screen result > (compositor with cinelerra) independantly should be a priority. > Just my 2 cents. > Cheers > E Dual screen is supported - but of course you can't assume that in your default layout. So you have to make the GUI work on single screen, and allow it to optionally expand out to dual screen.
2 May 00:32
Re: Interesting Video: "Why Linux Desktop Linux Sucks"
No I don't agree with many of his solutions, but I think his assessment of some of the problems are quite fair. On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 18:43 -0300, Guillermo Espertino wrote: > Hmmm, I really hated that video. > Everything seems to go towards converting Linux into Mac OS X. > > Well, I'm a designer, I run a design studio and I can use linux and free software for the task. > I'm not saying that is perfect and it doesn't need improvements, but I left Microsoft and Adobe for something else than money. > I think this video completely misses the point and focuses only in a pragmatic view over the subject. > I really find annoying when the guys repeats that he wants software "whatever is open source or closed source". > > Fortunately some people in the audience brings some balance
2 May 00:36
Re: Interesting Video: "Why Linux Desktop Linux Sucks"
On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 12:21 AM, E Chalaron <e.chalaron@...> wrote: > Ho ... good I am not alone then.... :-D > Cheers All of us here agree with the libre/freedom bit. If not, we'd been churning out using our Final Cut Pro HD's with no problem. I want to get away from this rig as soon as possible, that's why I follow Lumiera closelyBUT! That is not to say that critique should not be bombarded down, because it touches real issues that real people face. Although I'm very against this «free software, or proprietary, as long as it works»-way of thinking. I've been there and done that. Now I want my freedom goddamnit! Anyway, this doesn't look like a fruitful discussion, so I'll end here.
RSS Feed