[Bf-committers] Sequencer feature requests from Plumiferos

Peter Schlaile peter at schlaile.de
Thu Nov 16 23:02:55 CET 2006


Hi,

> An example
> of this is the 'insert between', which is a confusing feature that
> seems to be there to work around confusing complexity in how parts of
> the sequence editor currently works.

this feature is already removed from CVS. It is not always quite easy to
find the simplest way of doing something - you have sometimes to try
something and see that it is wrong later on.

> I'd really like to see some kind of design concept/mockup/proposal,
> some research of features and workflow in other editors and what they
> get right or wrong, or at least some kind of plan for how the
> sequence editor should evolve, including what sort of functionality
> is feasible to potentially add, what is out of scope, and plans for
> how to allow for this functionality in the interface.

Well, Bob started already a Wiki-page long ago:

http://mediawiki.blender.org/index.php/Requests/Sequencer

I think we should clean it up and start again. (It is even funny to read
the page and notice, that most of it is already accomplished ;-)

Regarding sequencer design: I must admit, that I like the _design_ of the
sequencer very much. There are some usage issues, some features could be
added in the current framework, but the basic design is nice.

The implementation was really messy. Every time I add a patch, I clean up
the code in the same step. (You may have noticed, that code size actually
shrunk a bit in sequence.c, when I added the speed effect...)

I also do not think, that we should try to copy other NLEs. I see the
sequencer as a 3D-modeller's view to video editing. This is not the same
view other programs take, it is the way Blender "thinks". If you don't
like thinking like Blender, maybe you should switch to another program.

Nevertheless, Matt is right. We should check, what features / GUI design
decisions other NLEs make and decide, if they fit Blender or if they
don't.

But I definitely will not copy e.g. the style of Avid just for the sake
of it. (I personally dislike the way, Avid's GUI thinks, but this
is another story...)

> I personally wouldn't mind at all if some of how the sequence editor
> works right now gets scrapped in favour of a new design that can better
> accommodate the sort of nice modern features and editing
> functionality that people would like, but in order to do that, there
> needs to be some kind of design guideline.

I agree.

I will update the Wiki-page as soon as possible with my ideas of the
future sequencer.

Greetings,
Peter



More information about the Bf-committers mailing list