adding a gender just makes things a shade less generic, and i don't have time to explain the hair colour, eye shape, disposition, height, sleeping patterns and overall cuteness of my 2yo.
more cash than brain there. FCPx is the reason sales of Premiere went up so much.
Avid is a little difficult to get started on, but is better for film. there'll always be a place for the offline/online split, because now all the computers can do HD in realtime in finished quality, people are starting to shoot in 4k, 5k, and up. Avid can deal with piddly low-res stuff and makes damn sure it matches the 4k 3D crazy high res stuff without causing the colourist several weeks of panicked conforming where the offline has destroyed the reel numbers and timecodes and they have to just pop each and every reel up on the telecine to see which is which, rather than just putting the EDL into the film scanner and letting it rip.
yes, i was that panicked colourist and was earning far too little to be chasing my short-ends around.
you'd have several source decks remote-controlled by your editing machine, and you'd set ins and outs which end up in a record list tied to one deck (or a few that mirrored the same codes, so you could spit out a few dubs at the same time).
you always had a monitor in front of you - if anyone had to work blind they were doing it wrong.
no it doesn't (ffmpeg that is). but it's much easier to do it wrong than right, and the docs are awful (i often have to read the source to figure out how to use a particular feature).
also, try avxsynth and vapoursynth (the latter doesn't do audio yet, but is very promising and python based so quite GUIable).
but fuck the CLI - linux needs something better than a toy editor and needs something with professional features and a familiar interface. for some reason every opensource video editor seems to think the timeline idea is bad somehow and they make their own retarded interface that nobody wants or can understand.
what is needed is something that can produce EDLs at the very least. XMLs and ALEs, or MXF would be a good place to go from there.
The linux kernel had a minor snafu that causes those samsungs to brick. it's fixed now, and has been for a couple of months.
i wish people would stop it with FUD, no matter what side it comes on. researching claims you make would be a good start, otherwise this shit perpetuates.
google washed their hands because they bought ON2's codebase in good faith.
think how long it's taken anybody to litigate - by all accounts, the code is all but unreadable. there's some interesting unique stuff in there, mainly written to avoid patents.
i wonder why there haven't been similar claims made against theora (modded VP3)? except from MPEG-LA who in my opinion are a protection racket.
LCDs have been on par or exceeded plasma since 2008 at least. but you may be thinking of a different thing than me. for me it was always about colour rendition, and plasmas just lacked dynamic range where it counts. contrast ratio numbers that are printed on the bezel of the set are not the same as dynamic range when you've gone in and turned off all the stupid bells and whistles so you can just look at the pictures the TV is being fed with.
IMAX 3D is the exact same thing as twin-lens DCI. single lens DCI is it's more problematic cousin that's seen more in budget conscious cinemas that can't afford the twin-lens setup.
the reason it was restricted to IMAX for so long was twofold: - expensive - you need twice as much film and twice as much projector, and the precision engineering to keep them as perfectly in sync as possible to keep people from throwing up. - technically difficult. the IMAX format is a massive piece of film. take 70mm and turn it sideways, but keep the same aspect ratio so you effectively double the size of the frame (like how A3 paper is two A4 pieces side-by-side). the advantage there is the tolerances in the projection and camera systems are effectively 1/16 the tolerance of regular 35mm systems for the same mechanical tolerance. this means when the film inevitably jumps around in the projection gate, there's still very good alignment between the left-eye projector and the right-eye projector, and you don't get up-down bobbing between your eyes as much as you would with 35mm.
that said, there's still a lot of bobbing around and it's quite distracting.
twin-lens DCI does the same thing, but without film. it's a solid-state chip that doesn't move, so left-right eye alignment is kept forever (or until someone knocks it).
single-lens DCI uses active glasses and is really shit. ask at the cinema what they're using. if they can't tell you, don't go there.
* disclosure - i'm a film guy, or was one until the film industry got hit by the GFC and nobody made ads anymore.
"when it's done well" is the opposite of the anthropic principle, and can be used to cynically defeat any proposition without even trying.
ever see 2D pictures not done well? go to facebook for a few seconds and realise that in the right hands, even the easiest enabling art form can be done in a terrible way that makes your eyes bleed and brain melt (and then the brain will leak slowly out of the bleeding eyes).
that said, i have an instinctive mistrust of small cameras. a small camera means a small sensor means a shitty lens means everything's in focus and you have one of the biggest tools in your photographer's toolkit completely removed.
Slashdot Mirror
adding a gender just makes things a shade less generic, and i don't have time to explain the hair colour, eye shape, disposition, height, sleeping patterns and overall cuteness of my 2yo.
i'll never take a plane or submit a patent again...
whoa, whoa! steady on! i'm approaching my safe lifetime limit of anyways.
a third?
maybe we need to construct an Ark?
if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear.
volcanoes with nukes in them! that's totally science!
atoms run linux just fine.
your point stands, but a lot of that works in wine, and cockos is working on a linux port of reaper.
nuke for motion graphics (or even digitalfusion).
i think the autodesk editing programs run in linux. you'll be paying much more than $500 for smoke, combustion, etc though.
at the lower end there's always lightworks, but you'll need to wait a bit while they get their shit together.
premiere 6.5 may work in wine if you poke at it enough. cut in DV quicktime and you stand a chance. export EDL and conform in something else.
more cash than brain there. FCPx is the reason sales of Premiere went up so much.
Avid is a little difficult to get started on, but is better for film. there'll always be a place for the offline/online split, because now all the computers can do HD in realtime in finished quality, people are starting to shoot in 4k, 5k, and up. Avid can deal with piddly low-res stuff and makes damn sure it matches the 4k 3D crazy high res stuff without causing the colourist several weeks of panicked conforming where the offline has destroyed the reel numbers and timecodes and they have to just pop each and every reel up on the telecine to see which is which, rather than just putting the EDL into the film scanner and letting it rip.
yes, i was that panicked colourist and was earning far too little to be chasing my short-ends around.
that's avisynth. it works in wine quite well.
it's also being ported (avxsynth) and rebuilt with python driving the scripting part (vapoursynth).
not the best for editing, but amazing for processing and all kinds of format conversion
timecode has userbits - no need for detecting pips.
btw, this stuff is already done sort of.
and digislates will do the tones for you.
you'd have several source decks remote-controlled by your editing machine, and you'd set ins and outs which end up in a record list tied to one deck (or a few that mirrored the same codes, so you could spit out a few dubs at the same time).
you always had a monitor in front of you - if anyone had to work blind they were doing it wrong.
editing is not for cutting out the commercial breaks - it's for telling stories.
no it doesn't (ffmpeg that is). but it's much easier to do it wrong than right, and the docs are awful (i often have to read the source to figure out how to use a particular feature).
also, try avxsynth and vapoursynth (the latter doesn't do audio yet, but is very promising and python based so quite GUIable).
but fuck the CLI - linux needs something better than a toy editor and needs something with professional features and a familiar interface. for some reason every opensource video editor seems to think the timeline idea is bad somehow and they make their own retarded interface that nobody wants or can understand.
what is needed is something that can produce EDLs at the very least. XMLs and ALEs, or MXF would be a good place to go from there.
dammit, you beat me.
don't be so down on yourselves. Jamon Belotta alone is plenty of reason for Spain's existence.
then there's the free tapas.
The linux kernel had a minor snafu that causes those samsungs to brick. it's fixed now, and has been for a couple of months.
i wish people would stop it with FUD, no matter what side it comes on. researching claims you make would be a good start, otherwise this shit perpetuates.
google washed their hands because they bought ON2's codebase in good faith.
think how long it's taken anybody to litigate - by all accounts, the code is all but unreadable. there's some interesting unique stuff in there, mainly written to avoid patents.
i wonder why there haven't been similar claims made against theora (modded VP3)? except from MPEG-LA who in my opinion are a protection racket.
FRAND != free. the articles say no such thing.
besides, it's not as if wheels aren't constantly re-invented in the software world.
i guess in future we wont let British supermarket chains run nuclear power plants...
FWIW MOX is made from decommissioned weapons. it may well have saved lives on balance.
* for a given value of picture quality.
LCDs have been on par or exceeded plasma since 2008 at least. but you may be thinking of a different thing than me. for me it was always about colour rendition, and plasmas just lacked dynamic range where it counts. contrast ratio numbers that are printed on the bezel of the set are not the same as dynamic range when you've gone in and turned off all the stupid bells and whistles so you can just look at the pictures the TV is being fed with.
poppycock. it's nothing to do with patents.
IMAX 3D is the exact same thing as twin-lens DCI. single lens DCI is it's more problematic cousin that's seen more in budget conscious cinemas that can't afford the twin-lens setup.
the reason it was restricted to IMAX for so long was twofold:
- expensive - you need twice as much film and twice as much projector, and the precision engineering to keep them as perfectly in sync as possible to keep people from throwing up.
- technically difficult. the IMAX format is a massive piece of film. take 70mm and turn it sideways, but keep the same aspect ratio so you effectively double the size of the frame (like how A3 paper is two A4 pieces side-by-side). the advantage there is the tolerances in the projection and camera systems are effectively 1/16 the tolerance of regular 35mm systems for the same mechanical tolerance. this means when the film inevitably jumps around in the projection gate, there's still very good alignment between the left-eye projector and the right-eye projector, and you don't get up-down bobbing between your eyes as much as you would with 35mm.
that said, there's still a lot of bobbing around and it's quite distracting.
twin-lens DCI does the same thing, but without film. it's a solid-state chip that doesn't move, so left-right eye alignment is kept forever (or until someone knocks it).
single-lens DCI uses active glasses and is really shit. ask at the cinema what they're using. if they can't tell you, don't go there.
* disclosure - i'm a film guy, or was one until the film industry got hit by the GFC and nobody made ads anymore.
"when it's done well" is the opposite of the anthropic principle, and can be used to cynically defeat any proposition without even trying.
ever see 2D pictures not done well? go to facebook for a few seconds and realise that in the right hands, even the easiest enabling art form can be done in a terrible way that makes your eyes bleed and brain melt (and then the brain will leak slowly out of the bleeding eyes).
that said, i have an instinctive mistrust of small cameras. a small camera means a small sensor means a shitty lens means everything's in focus and you have one of the biggest tools in your photographer's toolkit completely removed.
a 3D camera with big sensors would be amazing.
if that were the case, screens would have been made taller, not shorter.
it pretty much goes like this:
some new technology comes along. it goes into cinemas, because it can be much bigger and more expensive, and wouldn't really fit in a living room.
the cinema types rejoice and finally hail the final defeat of television land.
then some bright spark does the same thing on a scale that fits in television land.
then the cinema guys implement the next big thing, rinse and repeat.
google glass is sitting there, somewhere in the future, promising to fuck the shit out of cinema land and television land.
but it probably wont.