Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
On 10/16/07, Frank Barknecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hallo, Mathieu Bouchard hat gesagt: // Mathieu Bouchard wrote: On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Frank Barknecht wrote: I believe, the choice between a 1-dimensional language like SC and a 2-dimensional one like Pd is a state of mind thing. I do my fair share of 1-dim programming, Non-graphical languages are still 2-dimensional as they are written, because people use lines (rows) as logical units of code. The compiler makes a largely 1-dimensional interpretation of it, but this is not how people write and read code. Similarly, Pd almost completely ignores the actual position of the objects (except [inlet] and [outlet]) when interpreting a patch. In usual text based languages like C, Lisp, Forth, Python, Java, ... the second dimension is largely irrelevant, because every identifier only is concerned with what's left or right of it, not what's on top From the point of view of the compiler, perhaps, but I think most programmers are very concerned with vertical arrangement, in the sense of how they think, no? A .c file with line breaks removed looks like gibberish to a human, though it may compile fine. In either text-based or dataflow languages, actual program flow can vary, whatever the order of elements, so methinks there is always some kind of temporal and conditional thought going on. If time is another dimension, then perhaps the debate is 2 vs. 3 dimensions? -Chuckk -- http://www.badmuthahubbard.com ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
Hallo, Chuckk Hubbard hat gesagt: // Chuckk Hubbard wrote: From the point of view of the compiler, perhaps, but I think most programmers are very concerned with vertical arrangement, in the sense of how they think, no? A .c file with line breaks removed looks like gibberish to a human, though it may compile fine. Well, a novel also is hard to read it it would just have one loong line on one page. But it would have the same meaning. In fact, I think, in the old times books even were just one looong page. But it's different, if spatial layout is tied to the meaning of a text. Comic books are an example: Here spatial arrangement (like order and size of panels) is an important tool to express different meanings. In programming, a spreadsheet application would be an example for a tool, where spatial arrangements may carry meaning. The fact that even with inherently 1-dimensional languages humans tend to organize the words neatly on the page by properly indenting logical blocks etc. although technically it wouldn't matter, is a hint, that thinking about algorithms,... may work better in two dimensions. Sutherland's thesis has some more things to say about this issue, IIRC. Sutherland's main focus is discussing how to make a computer understand spatial meaning, and some issues with that. In Pd the actual spatial layout, as Matju wrote, is not important. What's important are the connection cords. They define the meaning. But it would be possible to just take distance as defining meaning. IIRC Guenther Geiger developed a dataflow music language which gets rid of patch cords and just uses distance and size of objects to convey meaning. The reacTable uses a similar idea: Just bring two objects close to each other, and they magically get connected. Pd here is in the middle: Distance doesn't matter technically, but to the Pd programmer managing spatial layout is as important as indenting is to the 1-dim programmer as far as readability is concerned. (Personally I'm quite sensitive in this regard and for example I try to avoid using abstractions, that *look* messy, have to many crossing wires and are generally carelessly laid out. It's hard to read such patches so it's more likely that they contain bugs. I won't point fingers, as many of my older patches are like this as well [don't look into originator.pd].) In either text-based or dataflow languages, actual program flow can vary, whatever the order of elements, so methinks there is always some kind of temporal and conditional thought going on. If time is another dimension, then perhaps the debate is 2 vs. 3 dimensions? Actually especially for music, (real) time is a very important dimension, maybe the single most important one, and logical time is important in every program. The generally right-to-left execution order of in/outlets expresses a notion of logical time in patch space. By putting objects, that act at the same time, next to each other, or objects, that act after each other, in different rows/colums one can express some time relationships manually as well. Ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ __footils.org__ ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
Hi David, What is your goal, ie what would you like to DO, exactly? The reason I ask is PD and Max, technically, are programming languages (sort of *furrows brow*). Your mention of Pro Tools and Final Cut and such makes me think that you may be on the wrong track with something like PD/Max. I don't know though, so I asked what exactly you'll be wanting to do :) -- Aaron - Original Message - From: marius schebella [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: David Schaffer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: pd list pd-list@iem.at Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 10:59 PM Subject: Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else? Hi David, It depends very much on what you want to do with the program and what the people around you know and use. My first reflex was to write max is the better solution because it hase more users and better support. but I think max is not so reliable and known to crash sometimes and a lot of people in theatre and stage situations don't want to use it. (well, pd can crash too). max has a nicer interface. if you want to look into the sourcecode then you have to use Pd. I think you should start with Pd, it is similar to max and if you ever think you miss something, then you can change to max later. I switched between both programs, but now I am back to Pd. m. David Schaffer wrote: Hi everybody, I'm a stage/audiovisual technician willing to make a move into digital arts. I've been using pd for quite some time know and I was wondering if it would be useful for me to learn Max: according to you guys, which of the two programs seems to be most widely used, most popular, most promising in terms of future devellopements? Is it worth to be good in both or to become excellent (whatever that means...) in one of them? Is there another platform out there that would be worth giving a look (outside of the established stuff like pro tools, final cut, photoshop etc...) Thank you for your answers. D.S ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
Hi David, it also depends upon who you are working with. I tend to work with PD for a number of reasons, however most of my colleagues are Max people who, for a number of reasons, will not be learning a second language any time soon. This is not really a problem as both systems can do most things. Mixing them using OpenSoundControl (OSC) for communication is also no problem. From there it is easy to then mix in almost any language that has an OSC interface; , Python, C, perl, etc. tm On 15/10/2007, at 6:59 AM, marius schebella wrote: Hi David, It depends very much on what you want to do with the program and what the people around you know and use. My first reflex was to write max is the better solution because it hase more users and better support. but I think max is not so reliable and known to crash sometimes and a lot of people in theatre and stage situations don't want to use it. (well, pd can crash too). max has a nicer interface. if you want to look into the sourcecode then you have to use Pd. I think you should start with Pd, it is similar to max and if you ever think you miss something, then you can change to max later. I switched between both programs, but now I am back to Pd. m. David Schaffer wrote: Hi everybody, I'm a stage/audiovisual technician willing to make a move into digital arts. I've been using pd for quite some time know and I was wondering if it would be useful for me to learn Max: according to you guys, which of the two programs seems to be most widely used, most popular, most promising in terms of future devellopements? Is it worth to be good in both or to become excellent (whatever that means...) in one of them? Is there another platform out there that would be worth giving a look (outside of the established stuff like pro tools, final cut, photoshop etc...) Thank you for your answers. D.S - --- ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
Hi. The documentation for Pd says that it started from the desire to make something similar to Max BUT with a facility for user-customizable scoring, what is now Pd's data structure system. IMO this is the single most useful aspect of Pd. The only other software I know of that would allow similar functioning would be toolkits (like the one used for Pd) or graphics libraries for adding into programming languages. I guess Java is another possibility. AFAIK Max still doesn't have anything like Pd's data structures (there is something in the documentation about data structures but it don't work the same). I personally never spent much time with Max simply because I like to share my programs with non-programmers. I'm also very fond of FOSS for all the usual reasons. I also like to use Linux; I have Windows XP and Linux running on my laptop, and Mac OSX on my wife's, so even if I wanted to put Max on my Windows system I'd have to buy it twice to use it on both comps. I already have Pd on all 3 OS's, and if I work on a university computer it only takes a few minutes to put Pd on it, and I can work on the same patches. At one point I had Pd installers for several OS's on my flash drive, so I didn't even need net access to use it on any computer I came across. Maybe these aren't reasons for you, but they're my experience. In general terms, I'd say one un-trumpable advantage of Pd is that, if there are any features Max might have that Pd doesn't, they can be added to Pd by anyone who knows how (or wants to learn). I don't know if Max has any video control or not, but if you haven't already checked out Pd's GEM, you can easily spend days exploring it without eating. If you are interested in hardcore digital audio control, I'd also suggest Csound and SuperCollider (PsyCollider on Windows). I know Csound better than Pd at this point, but I try to balance myself between those two. There is also something called Nyquist that I haven't explored. Blue is a very useful free front-end for Csound, written in Java and so cross-platform. There's also a Pd object called csoundapi~ that comes with Csound, allowing one to use the data structures of Pd with the huge library of opcodes of Csound. The guy who created it is very open to requests and questions, not surprisingly. The GIMP is a great free almost-Photoshop. I believe there is documentation somewhere actually delineating what it doesn't have that PS does, I don't think it's much. Blender is a free 3d-modeling app with a crazy, efficient interface. I think it's cool, but I'm no expert. -Chuckk On 10/14/07, David Schaffer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everybody, I'm a stage/audiovisual technician willing to make a move into digital arts. I've been using pd for quite some time know and I was wondering if it would be useful for me to learn Max: according to you guys, which of the two programs seems to be most widely used, most popular, most promising in terms of future devellopements? Is it worth to be good in both or to become excellent (whatever that means...) in one of them? Is there another platform out there that would be worth giving a look (outside of the established stuff like pro tools, final cut, photoshop etc...) Thank you for your answers. D.S ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list -- http://www.badmuthahubbard.com ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
Hallo, David Schaffer hat gesagt: // David Schaffer wrote: I'm a stage/audiovisual technician willing to make a move into digital arts. I've been using pd for quite some time know and I was wondering if it would be useful for me to learn Max: according to you guys, which of the two programs seems to be most widely used, most popular, most promising in terms of future devellopements? Is it worth to be good in both or to become excellent (whatever that means...) in one of them? Is there another platform out there that would be worth giving a look (outside of the established stuff like pro tools, final cut, photoshop etc...) Thank you for your answers. I once took a workshop in Max/MSP and it was very boring: I already knew everything except that [osc~] is called [cycle~] in Max. The nice thing about both Max and Pd is that the programmes themselves are very simple tools. What you *really* learn when you learn one of them are things like algorithms, DSP techniques, composition theory, computer graphics, geometry etc. or more generally: ideas, and these aren't tied to a specific software or language. I think it's good for a Pd user to also know a bit about Max, but IMO you don't need ot buy a copy of it, instead you should have the documentation pdfs (Max/MSP reference etc.) on your disk and maybe even read them from time to time. Ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ __footils.org__ ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
Take a look in SuperCollider. I used Max/MSP and CSound before, IMO you can do more with less effort once you learn this programming language (yes, it is a true programming language) Once you finished your patch it is also easy to modify and change comparing to max/msp. I like it. http://supercollider.sourceforge.net/ http://www.audiosynth.com/ 2007/10/15, Frank Barknecht [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hallo, David Schaffer hat gesagt: // David Schaffer wrote: I'm a stage/audiovisual technician willing to make a move into digital arts. I've been using pd for quite some time know and I was wondering if it would be useful for me to learn Max: according to you guys, which of the two programs seems to be most widely used, most popular, most promising in terms of future devellopements? Is it worth to be good in both or to become excellent (whatever that means...) in one of them? Is there another platform out there that would be worth giving a look (outside of the established stuff like pro tools, final cut, photoshop etc...) Thank you for your answers. I once took a workshop in Max/MSP and it was very boring: I already knew everything except that [osc~] is called [cycle~] in Max. The nice thing about both Max and Pd is that the programmes themselves are very simple tools. What you *really* learn when you learn one of them are things like algorithms, DSP techniques, composition theory, computer graphics, geometry etc. or more generally: ideas, and these aren't tied to a specific software or language. I think it's good for a Pd user to also know a bit about Max, but IMO you don't need ot buy a copy of it, instead you should have the documentation pdfs (Max/MSP reference etc.) on your disk and maybe even read them from time to time. Ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ __footils.org__ ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
I came to Pd from SuperCollider. SC is very powerful and can sound amazing. Its power lies in the fact it is a object orientated language - if you want 500 oscillators you can just change a variable, rather than having to patch it by hand. I found I could do algorithmic stuff very easily as the system lended itself to do this.. What it is not imo, is user friendly, which is why I picked up Pd. It became a headache when i wanted to use a gui to construct a sequencer of somethingthat in itself requires a different mind set to lay it out. Pd or Max is fairly intuitive in this regard and thus quicker to knock up new ideas. I guess I lost patience with it because i would reach a brick wall and not finish ideas which is very unconstructive. It was more- time head buried in documentation and not enough results..I felt life was too short!! (sorry). Also not coming from a programming background i guess didn't help/ I f there was a bridge for SC like the csound one, that would be very nice. Using Pd for data structure and using some of SCs ugens.. S On 15 Oct 2007, at 13:11, bbarros wrote: Take a look in SuperCollider. I used Max/MSP and CSound before, IMO you can do more with less effort once you learn this programming language (yes, it is a true programming language) Once you finished your patch it is also easy to modify and change comparing to max/msp. I like it. http://supercollider.sourceforge.net/ http://www.audiosynth.com/ 2007/10/15, Frank Barknecht [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hallo, David Schaffer hat gesagt: // David Schaffer wrote: I'm a stage/audiovisual technician willing to make a move into digital arts. I've been using pd for quite some time know and I was wondering if it would be useful for me to learn Max: according to you guys, which of the two programs seems to be most widely used, most popular, most promising in terms of future devellopements? Is it worth to be good in both or to become excellent (whatever that means...) in one of them? Is there another platform out there that would be worth giving a look (outside of the established stuff like pro tools, final cut, photoshop etc...) Thank you for your answers. I once took a workshop in Max/MSP and it was very boring: I already knew everything except that [osc~] is called [cycle~] in Max. The nice thing about both Max and Pd is that the programmes themselves are very simple tools. What you *really* learn when you learn one of them are things like algorithms, DSP techniques, composition theory, computer graphics, geometry etc. or more generally: ideas, and these aren't tied to a specific software or language. I think it's good for a Pd user to also know a bit about Max, but IMO you don't need ot buy a copy of it, instead you should have the documentation pdfs (Max/MSP reference etc.) on your disk and maybe even read them from time to time. Ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ __footils.org__ ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
Hallo, bbarros hat gesagt: // bbarros wrote: Take a look in SuperCollider. I used Max/MSP and CSound before, IMO you can do more with less effort once you learn this programming language (yes, it is a true programming language) Once you finished your patch it is also easy to modify and change comparing to max/msp. I like it. I believe, the choice between a 1-dimensional language like SC and a 2-dimensional one like Pd is a state of mind thing. I do my fair share of 1-dim programming, even used CSound in the past, but now it's mostly in other areas. I feel that for thinking about music or art, I always come back to Pd. Somehow Pd's way of laying out processes in two dimensions is more inspiring to me than the sequential, left-to-right programming of SC etc. when doing art. Of course some things are tedious to do in Pd and easier or faster to program in 1-dim languages, but then it's possible to embed a 1-dim language like lua, python, C etc. into Pd or go with a dual-app approach and OSC. Ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ __footils.org__ ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
Hi, for visuals i also suggest processing http://www.processing.org/ http://cnx.org/content/m12968/latest/ http://www.trsp.net/teaching/gamemod/ bye j --- David Schaffer [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto: Hi everybody, I'm a stage/audiovisual technician willing to make a move into digital arts. I've been using pd for quite some time know and I was wondering if it would be useful for me to learn Max: according to you guys, which of the two programs seems to be most widely used, most popular, most promising in terms of future devellopements? Is it worth to be good in both or to become excellent (whatever that means...) in one of them? Is there another platform out there that would be worth giving a look (outside of the established stuff like pro tools, final cut, photoshop etc...) Thank you for your answers. D.S ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ___ L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la Nuova Yahoo! Mail: http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Si Mills wrote: I came to Pd from SuperCollider. SC is very powerful and can sound amazing. Its power lies in the fact it is a object orientated language - if you want 500 oscillators you can just change a variable, rather than having to patch it by hand. Pd is also quite object-oriented, but in another way. There are features that have been confused with OOP because they tended to appear together, especially when the marketing focuses on OOP. Things like how the variables operate in the language, and how objects are constructed, are not really part of OOP proper, though they may be part of many or even most OOP languages. With Pd, you have to use dynamic patching, if you want to create a variable number of objects. This is more difficult than just changing a constant or variable, but it's still OOP. The less OOP part of the story, is that Pd lacks inheritance (but it's unrelated to the problem you are talking about) _ _ __ ___ _ _ _ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801, Montréal QC Canada___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Frank Barknecht wrote: I believe, the choice between a 1-dimensional language like SC and a 2-dimensional one like Pd is a state of mind thing. I do my fair share of 1-dim programming, Non-graphical languages are still 2-dimensional as they are written, because people use lines (rows) as logical units of code. The compiler makes a largely 1-dimensional interpretation of it, but this is not how people write and read code. Similarly, Pd almost completely ignores the actual position of the objects (except [inlet] and [outlet]) when interpreting a patch. However, the usual rules of formatting source code completely ignores any use of columns beyond plain indentation, and makes rules that conflict with the potential that columns have in a document. Sometimes a piece of code would read better as a table, but coding standards defines read better with their own criteria anyway, which bends in the direction of 1-dim, but still supports 2-dim as far as line breaks and indentation do. Somehow Pd's way of laying out processes in two dimensions is more inspiring to me than the sequential, left-to-right programming of SC etc. You'd be surprised if you thought about how much right-to-left parsing it's possible to do for grammars that are always thought in a left-to-right way... But that's besides the point, as that alternate parsing is as one-dimensional. There are several important languages in use, which consider newline as being largely equivalent to a semicolon. In that case, the change of line is seen as more two-dimensional, because it is not just ignored in the parsing. I'm not here to argue that non-graphical languages are fully 2-dim... else they'd probably be called graphical, to the extent that ascii-art is graphical. _ _ __ ___ _ _ _ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801, Montréal QC Canada___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
Hallo, Mathieu Bouchard hat gesagt: // Mathieu Bouchard wrote: On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Frank Barknecht wrote: I believe, the choice between a 1-dimensional language like SC and a 2-dimensional one like Pd is a state of mind thing. I do my fair share of 1-dim programming, Non-graphical languages are still 2-dimensional as they are written, because people use lines (rows) as logical units of code. The compiler makes a largely 1-dimensional interpretation of it, but this is not how people write and read code. Similarly, Pd almost completely ignores the actual position of the objects (except [inlet] and [outlet]) when interpreting a patch. In usual text based languages like C, Lisp, Forth, Python, Java, ... the second dimension is largely irrelevant, because every identifier only is concerned with what's left or right of it, not what's on top or below. Line breaks or indentation have some meaning in some of these languages, but I wouldn't really take this as a new dimension. It's maybe 1.25-dimensional. ;) Even traditional math notation has more dimentions than these languages, if you think of the symbols for sums or integrals. In Max/Pd this is the rule, e.g. objects have arguments (left/right) and in/outlets (top/bottom). A very interesting document in this regard is Bert Sutherland's thesis The On-line Graphical Specification of Computer Procedures from 1966(!): http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/13474 Ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ __footils.org__ ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
Hi David, You should learn everything you have time to, that way learning more stuff that does not yet exist will be easier. PD and Max are very similar, learning one gets you a huge way to learning the other, just a few interesting caveats here and there (and differing object names, and objects). Max/msp is what $600 or so? Plus the upgrades for the rest of your life. ;) As for alternatives to the established stuff look into: ardour, cinelerra, gimp, inkscape .b. David Schaffer wrote: Hi everybody, I'm a stage/audiovisual technician willing to make a move into digital arts. I've been using pd for quite some time know and I was wondering if it would be useful for me to learn Max: according to you guys, which of the two programs seems to be most widely used, most popular, most promising in terms of future devellopements? Is it worth to be good in both or to become excellent (whatever that means...) in one of them? Is there another platform out there that would be worth giving a look (outside of the established stuff like pro tools, final cut, photoshop etc...) Thank you for your answers. D.S ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] a general discussion about which software to learn: pd, max, both... or else?
Hi David, It depends very much on what you want to do with the program and what the people around you know and use. My first reflex was to write max is the better solution because it hase more users and better support. but I think max is not so reliable and known to crash sometimes and a lot of people in theatre and stage situations don't want to use it. (well, pd can crash too). max has a nicer interface. if you want to look into the sourcecode then you have to use Pd. I think you should start with Pd, it is similar to max and if you ever think you miss something, then you can change to max later. I switched between both programs, but now I am back to Pd. m. David Schaffer wrote: Hi everybody, I'm a stage/audiovisual technician willing to make a move into digital arts. I've been using pd for quite some time know and I was wondering if it would be useful for me to learn Max: according to you guys, which of the two programs seems to be most widely used, most popular, most promising in terms of future devellopements? Is it worth to be good in both or to become excellent (whatever that means...) in one of them? Is there another platform out there that would be worth giving a look (outside of the established stuff like pro tools, final cut, photoshop etc...) Thank you for your answers. D.S ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
