Re: [CinCVS] comparison with main actor

2006-08-06 Thread mark stavar
For mine, the main issues with Cinelerra are not the interface.  A power tool needs a power interface.  The Cinelerra interface is not unmanageable by any stretch of the imagination.  It may not be as sexy as some, but IMHO the Avid interface is no better.
Where I think Cinelerra is weak is in things like:Reliability of render optionsSome of the micro operations such as, say, wanting to adjust a clip by one frame in and one frame outfader handling (everyone's favourite)
workflow issues, like media managementGenerally, the interface is sufficient.  What is lacking is the confidence that the application will do what it is supposed to do.  I think that this is the indicator of a good/great interface, one that reliably allows you to do the things that you want/need to do to achieve the effect you want.  I don't think that anyone in this list believes that it is trustworthy for a medium to large, critical project.
I am not suggesting that it is up to the CinCVS developer group to fix this.  This does not come from just adding extra patches, especially when in truth you are working somewhat at cross purposes with the upstream developers who are really working from the perspective of putting in what they need, and if anyone else finds it useful, great.  
I think what gets done in this group is fantastic, but it is going to be very hard or even impossible  (think pushing sh*t uphill) to achieve a general purpose, high-end NLE for video.  I guess, wanting to have that belief that "it just works".  Hard when you don't have the resources behind Avid, Adobe Premiere or Sony Vegas.
Not a whinge, just an observation.  I have had a look around in the Cinelerra source, and frankly, it frightens me.  More power to you all.marksOn 8/6/06, 
Ichthyostega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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___Cinelerra mailing listCinelerra@skolelinux.no
https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra-- Mark StavarSwan Dancer ProductionsEmail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mobile: 0410 638 671http://www.the-writers-retreat.com/


Re: [CinCVS] comparison with main actor

2006-08-05 Thread Ichthyostega

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


___
Cinelerra mailing list
Cinelerra@skolelinux.no
https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra


[CinCVS] comparison with main actor

2006-08-05 Thread reuben firmin
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/