Slashdot Mirror


Blender Gets Audio Sequencing

Qbertino writes "The universal GPLd 3D tool Blender that was bought free by the Blender community not so long ago, has gotten audio sequencing added to its feature set. This has been missing ever since the integrated Video NL (Non-Linear) Editor/Sequencer was introduced. The only other 3D package known for its integrated Video NLE is the proprietary Houdini, which also runs under Linux but comes at something like $3000 for its small featureset. This finally gives the OSS community a lightweight alternative to this and eases syncing 3D animation and audio a great deal. Audio sequencing will be integrated in the upcoming 2.28 release of Blender. Early adopters can download here."

31 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. But can it still by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Make smoothies? I hope so! Mmmm, smoothies...

  2. Blender? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Blite my shiny metal ass!

  3. It doesn't make too much sense by Samir+Gupta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just like those all-in-one cell phones, or printers/copiers/scanners/faxes, I suspect that they will have to compromise on quality, lest they end up with some bloated software product.

    I'd much rather have separate best-of-breed software packages, than an integrated one that does everything OK, but not great.

    --
    -- Samir Gupta, Ph. D. Head, New Technology Research Group, Nintendo Co. Ltd., Kyoto, Japan.
    1. Re:It doesn't make too much sense by Ogerman · · Score: 2, Informative

      I suspect that they will have to compromise on quality, lest they end up with some bloated software product.

      I'd much rather have separate best-of-breed software packages, than an integrated one that does everything OK, but not great.

      I disagree with the myth that addition of features necessarily compromises quality or causes bloat. If you're talking about a highly monolithic application, then yes, that *can* be an issue. However, proper modular design entirely dispenses of the drawbacks of feature 'bloat'. Furthermore, memory is a non-issue with modern hardware, so that argument falls flat. What's left is something along the lines of: "will adding this feature compromise the integrity of other features?" If the answer is no and the feature will add to the program's usefulness, there is no reason not to add it. Granted, if someone tried to integrate a word processor into Blender, *that* would be useless bloat. But trying to be the ultimate integrated 3D modeling / NLE package is a worthy goal. There are a lot of advantages to combining the two tasks, such as being able to do all rendering and compositing in one pass and without having to constantly switch back and forth between applications, doing renders / re-importing results back and forth, etc.

  4. Counterparts to Photoshop, Maya by digitalhermit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Blender is definitely a great success story. Like Gimp is to Photoshop, Blender is to Maya. Though Photoshop is still the heavyweight tool for photo manipulation and though I'm an experienced Gimp user, I know that there are things that Photoshop can do that Gimp cannot do as easily. But the $500 price tag for Photoshop makes me a big, big Gimp fan. It does everything I need. Same for Blender. It is not in the same class as Maya but with a little work, can do many of the same things. In fact, it's at the point where it competes well against many of the lower end commercial packages costing hundreds of dollars.

    1. Re:Counterparts to Photoshop, Maya by the_real_tigga · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Like Gimp is to Photoshop, Blender is to Maya.

      AAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAAAAHAHAHA!

      I like blender but this is hilarious.
      Have you ever even *glimpsed* at the things Maya can do?

      --
      my .sig is better than yours.
    2. Re:Counterparts to Photoshop, Maya by Osty · · Score: 2, Informative

      But the $500 price tag for Photoshop makes me a big, big Gimp fan. It does everything I need.

      Unless you're a graphics design professional (in which case, $500 is a business expense and can be written off on your taxes, and is a small price to pay to have the industry-standard tool), you probably don't need most of what Photoshop does. However, Photoshop's interface is one of its greatest assets, and you can get that and all the functionality most enthusiasts need in Adobe's Photoshop Elements product. It's $99 and available for Mac and Windows. If you're too lazy to go to the store, you can pay online and download it.


      If $99 is still too much for you, then I can't help you.

  5. It *does* make sense by AsparagusChallenge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Blender's primary target is to be able of making ready-to-publish video from scratch. Composing audio is a priority, unless you aim to recreating the beginnings of cinema.

  6. Houdini != small feature set by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sorry for the nitpick, but for the sake of not propogating mis-information, Houdini has anything but a small feature set, modeling/rendering/compositing very powerfull scripting, CHOPS/SOPS very powerfull particle systems, its been around quite a bit longer then blender as well. More along the lines of Maya Unlimited and Softimage XSI featureset wise.

    http://www.sidefx.com/

  7. How in the ... ?! by gergi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm totally impressed. I can't even figure out how to use blender much less resequence my audio (or whatever)!

    Seriously... Anyone out there know how to use Blender? Wanna send me some links to documentation, particularly tutorials? Even better would be tutorials that are up-to-date!

    --
    Nosce te Ipsum
    1. Re:How in the ... ?! by digitalhermit · · Score: 5, Informative

      I started a page here. I'm preparing a section on shaders and animation that should be ready in a couple weeks.

    2. Re:How in the ... ?! by FunkyChild · · Score: 4, Informative

      This should get you started. There's a good community site at www.elysiun.com - they can help answer questions in the forums if you get stuck.

  8. Re:OSS is feature obsessed by lowmagnet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Good example of featuritis is the GIMP and their script-fu menus. Who else but a geek would write a library framework for plugins that often crash and take the program out with them.

    The easier the interface, the less features, the better. All of the software I love to use (except Photoshop) fits this mould. Not that Photoshop is bad; it's the best. The problem with Photoshop is too many features to get to the work I need to do.

    --
    Heute die Welt, morgen das Sonnensystem!
  9. Bloated? by metalhed77 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Blender may be crap, but at 2 megs it is hardly bloated.

    --
    Photos.
  10. missing functionality, but adding new toys? by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Maybe it's just me, but they seem to be rather confused between the "About Blender" pages, the Changelog, etc...2.2.7 specifically says cartoon shading doesn't work. "About Blender" says it does. Which is it, guys?

    Then, note that a lot of file formats don't work on Linux- only Win + MacOS X. None of the plugins work in OS X yet...so on. It's beta quality stuff, like walking into a house and the owners keep telling you "no, don't open that door, it's not on the hinges!" or "watch your step" when you pass by the 3-foot hole in the floor. Oh, but look at the MARVELOUS sun porch they just finished!

    See this all the time- developers working on the bright+shiny things, while leaving behind major, glaring problems. Guys, fix it up so existing stuff works, THEN add new toys. What good is a car that has a really sweet stereo setup, but only 3 wheels?

    I get the distinct impression Blender developers have bitten off more than they can chew, but are back in the kitchen for dessert regardless...

    1. Re:missing functionality, but adding new toys? by FunkyChild · · Score: 4, Informative
      Maybe it's just me, but they seem to be rather confused between the "About Blender" pages, the Changelog, etc...2.2.7 specifically says cartoon shading doesn't work. "About Blender" says it does. Which is it, guys?
      Blender already has basic toon shading capabilities - it can render toon-style 'edges' on models, and with a bit of fiddling with textures and normal-dependent falloff gradient textures, you can get a reasonable result (as is on the left in this thumbnail image, however this isn't dependent on light sources.

      One of the new volunteers, Cessen, has been working on an updated shading system which adds on an Oren-nayar blinn shading and a toon shading method to the current phong shading. Cessen's new work is a much easier and more accurate way of toon shading (works based on light sources, specularity etc), not to mention the obvious improvements in adding blinn shading too. Unfortuately there wasn't enough time to integrate Cessen's changes for the 2.27 release, but it should be in the next.

      Also keep in mind that Blender has only been open source for a relatively short time, and want' originally developed in an open source context (a la netscape->mozilla). It will take some time for developers to properly familiarise themselves with the huge amount of code in there, and start to re-organise it into something that facilitates an open-source model rather than the previous.
  11. Kudos to the Blender community! by stox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Blender project is a major milestone in the progression of open source software. For the first time, a closed project was brought into the open by the users. Compared to others, they have been remarkably fast at bringing a working product to market. They have also been extremely responsible in respect for copyright, and are currently helping to bring more closed work into the open. This project is one class act, and I hope that their model is extremely successful.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
  12. Bloated? by crunchywelch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's interesting reading the posts bewailing software bloat, I wonder how many of these posts are submitted by media creation professionals? Have you taken a look at Newtek's VideoToaster lately? Or how about Final Cut Pro? Granted, both are more NLE video editors (Although VideoToaster comes with Aura and Lightwave) but both of these products are chock full of "bloat" and causing the industry leaders like Avid take notice. I'd much rather have a production suite with some "bloat" in order to curtail some of the endless Render -> Export -> Import/convert -> re-sync -> export -> encode -> master -> blah -> blah -> blah process..... I for one can't wait to try out the new blender features, nice work and full steam ahead!

    --
    1400x1250 in a 640x480 world...
  13. bah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Adding useful features is such a waste of time!

    Now, rewriting it in Java, That would be a REALLY good use of development time!!

  14. missing functionality? by swerk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just because some of the newest features aren't fully fleshed out yet (quicktime support, multilingual interface, this new audio stuff, etc) doesn't mean things are broken.

    Every single blender developer (of which there are many now, thanks to Ton's hard work and the fundraiser resulting in the code being opened) shouldn't have to concentrate on one new feature at a time. So naturally there will be several things being added at a time, at various stages of completion.

    By the way, toon shading does work, we've had lots of releases since 2.2.7.

    Blender just keeps getting better and better. I personally didn't/don't use the game engine features much, but plenty of people do and I think it's great that they're getting rebuilt now without the proprietary code that had to be removed for 2.2.16 (first release under the GPL). I DO think I'll be using these new audio tools, and I'm glad the people who have been working on them do not share your view that all existing features should be polished before anything new is added.

    The GIMP, KDE, GNOME, the Linux kernel itself, are all huge projects with many facets which would never be as sophisticated as they are today without many developers plunging in and doing new stuff. Does the technique make for some rough edges? You bet. But it also results in full-featured and useful software.

  15. user interface blues by sashang · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've tried several 3d modelling packages. Most of them have innovative and different user interfaces. I've found blender's ui to be hard to get to grips with. It's incredibly cluttered and the shortcut keys aren't standardized. You're also presented with a myriad of buttons and switches that easily confuse.

    1. Re:user interface blues by digitalhermit · · Score: 3, Informative

      Keep this in mind:
      The focus of the mouse pointer determines what each key sequence does. This can be confusing at first but makes it easier later. In other words, if your pointer is in the modeling window then keys will have a different effect than if you're in the controls pane. The alternative may have been to assing a modifier sequence, but you could argue that this forces you to put two hands on the keyboard. As it is, you keep one hand always on the mouse and the other always on the keyboard.

  16. Re:OSS is feature obsessed by Hamster+Of+Death · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Simply because fixing bugs is boring and often tedious. Not many people get their kicks bug fixing. Writing new features is much more appealing since it is a) new and b) makes Open Source Project X that much more comparable to Closed Source Project Y

    So new features are added first because they are fun and increase product visibility. Bugs often take a back seat due to the drudgery associated with them.

  17. elySiun.com by FunkyChild · · Score: 3, Informative

    Damn.. That link should be www.elysiun.com not elyiun.

  18. Now that that's taken care of by fluxrad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How's about someone get to work on a fully featured audio sequencer for linux?

    I'm super happy that we can now sync music to animation in blender. It's just too damned bad we don't have an app to actually make that music in linux.

    --
    "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
    1. Re:Now that that's taken care of by sharph · · Score: 4, Informative

      You want to make music in linux?

      Ever heard of audour?
      Or audacity?

      You want an audio sequencer? Check out soundtracker.

      Or if you like to mess with oscillators and stuff, spiralsynthmodular.

      don't you DARE tell me we have no sound apps in linux.

      if you're STILL unconvinced, check out http://linux-sound.org/

    2. Re:Now that that's taken care of by digitalhermit · · Score: 2, Informative

      The May 2003 issue of Linux Journal features Linux and sound. Check out Linux Journal then navigate to the May 2003 issue in the archive section. The ones they mention are still in beta or development stages but some are useful, according to the articles.

  19. Re:There is a free version of Maya. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    There is a version of Maya for linux as well..... (pixar is using it that way)

  20. Undo? by Tyler+Eaves · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Okay, and UNDO is going to be implemented when? Seriously, I can't take a graphics package without an UNDO feature seriously.

    --
    TODO: Something witty here...
  21. Use AnimationMaster from Hash by dnoyeb · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Personally I have been using Hash Animation Master for about 3-4 years now. Has all the power of the big boys, but its only $300 and has a community which is very open and helpful. Patches come out all the time, and most bugs are found by the community.

    If you want a 3d package but do not have $3000, but want something easy to use than any other, check out www.hash.com.

  22. Closed source is feature obsessed by FooBarWidget · · Score: 3, Insightful

    why o why are closed sourcecompanies obsessed with features ? why cant you fkin fix bugs instead of the current obsession with adding more and more features that add more bugs making it even more unstable, is it boredom or pride ?

    do yourselves a favour and make the original application perfect ie: bug free , before adding more features/bloat?

    MS word gets more and more features every release, and most users don't even use a lot of those features. photoshop gets more and more features every release, while most non-professionals and home users don't even need everything photoshop can do.

    *sigh*

    Now back to reality. Why do you blame OSS? Closed source is no different. If anything, it's *closed source products* that add more and more features without looking back. Compare the latest version of Opera with Opera 3. On the other hand, compare GNOME 2 with GNOME 1: they actually cleaned up the GUI and *removed* a lot of config options and replaced them with sane defaults and autodetection, sped up Nautilus many times, and fixed numberous of bugs.

    As for your Mozilla comment: Mozilla is meant to turn out this way. The Mozilla browser suite as we know it is just a "technical demo": it was never meant to be the final product. Mozilla was destined to split off in seperate products that use the same browser engine.