View Issue Details
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0000212||Cinelerra-GG||[All Projects] Feature||public||2019-05-07 11:49||2020-04-07 13:42|
|Priority||normal||Severity||minor||Reproducibility||have not tried|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version|
|Summary||0000212: Pixels unit vs percent (%) unit in some plugins|
|Description||Some plugins like Titler and Sketcher, use pixels unit; then if I use Proxy without Scaler You can't use it (or yes with a different workaround).|
I would like to have, like in Perspective plugin, % unit instead pixels unit, then I can use Proxy (without Scaler), also for Sketcher and maybe also for Titler. Seems to me that Perspective plugin don't use pixel units but % unit so, for example, x=50% means center of the canvas and x=100% means right side boundary of the canvas.
It would be very useful because it would also work with Proxy (without Scaler).
|Tags||No tags attached.|
@Pierre Totally agree. When I talked about architecture, I did it thinking about AutoCAD, and the precision that these apps work with. But an NLE does not require precision, rather that it is practical.
Gaudi was a genius and built imitating nature. But this is another topic :-)
Thank you very much for your good observation.
I understand your argument very well and I tend to agree, but I would remind you that architecture is considered an art...
Architects are artists who use their precise knowledge of materials as instruments of creation. Your argument would work better if you compared the work of artists with that of engineers.
@Olaf is very right, with cinelerra we do art not mathematics.
When I did a master's degree in digital animation, called Maisca (https://ladat.es/). One day I said to the teacher, is that Maya (Autodesk) is very imperfect, and his response was blunt. "What do you want to do art or architecture? Because here we make art".
In fact blender that is all terrain has both working modes, it can be used as an application with the precision of Autocad, or freely. Autocad = Architecture, Free = Art.
Audiovisual technicians do not need precision, we need a tool that allows us to make art in the simplest possible way. I know this can be difficult for a programmer to understand, where the perfection of mathematics is a fundamental and necessary pillar.
For example when I adjust something on the screen, I do not look at the value in px so that it is exactly, axis x 250px axis y 150px ... I look at the screen and I like its position as if it is 250 or 253.4px, this is indifferent.
When studying and doing color correction, using exact values was considered not to work well, because when you adjust a color, you don't have to look at the value, but the result.
Cinelerra is for making visual art, not architecture. I think it would be very wise to use% and not px. Except in standard resolution formats.
% Art vs px Architecture
Greetings and it's just one more opinion.
I suggested percentage unit because it is easy to use and free from pixel unit. For me the goal should be the possibility of using Original or Proxy (with no scaler) media, without to see the differences by user's point of view.
Another example could be Sketcher plugin: when I draw a line with 5pixels width in Proxy unit, when I turn on to Original Project size I have to multiply the units for the Proxy factor (but You know what I want to say, of course).
For converse, if You have a few of time to try, Camera and Projector in Compositor works very well: when Proxy feature is enable, the pixel unit is referred to Proxy size; when Original size is enabled, the pixel unit is referred to Project size.
I think that using pixel unit is good but it is binding (the unit of measurement used is absolute and not relative). So when you move a item from left to right on Compositor's Canvas (line, circle, point or Vframe-picture) of 100 pixels, the item is moved of 100 pixels whether you are in 4k, or in Full HD (1920x1080) or in Standard Definition (PAL720x576) or in Proxy. This is a great problem sometimes.
Even if Olaf says something else, in another softwares they use percentage unit or a own "scale" (not pixel); or they make a internal conversion when proxy is used so you can not see if you are in proxy or less, and the pixel unit is referred to project size (even if they are showing proxy size in their "Compositor").
In CAD (Computer Aided Design) software the unit used is "without measure", or better, they use Unit measure. So 1 unit can be: 1 meter or 1 millimeter, or 1 inch, or 1 feet. Is the user who assigns his own unit of measure in the project. I don't know if this can help GG for something idea.
Finally, may be that in some case has more sense to use percentage unit (or another type of measurement) instead of pixel.
If someone has a different idea is welcome. Thanks.
I see the difference as follows: working in percentages is more like working artistically. True to the motto "Pi * thumb".
Image editing is always pixel-based. A video editor is also image editing. If you prefer to work exactly instead of artistically, you will always have a calculator at your fingertips. And yet it won't fit, as working with other NLE's has shown. Talking about proxies is not fair to the editor. This condemns the editor to carry the weaknesses in programming.
MASKING request also (ported from other issue)
And I ask you, why don’t use percent unit instead of pixels unit (like I wrote in 0000212), like other NLEs do? So it would not be affected by the project format, and if an users uses Proxy without scaler. And if another hyperformat (16K) comes out the tool always works, I think.
As an example consider that Feather goes from -100% to +100%, and +100% is the max positive Feather=Project width format (or what you think more appropriate).
So if I insert Feather(%)= 2.5 you have:
- format project 1080p ==> Feather(px)= 1080*2.5/100= 27 pixels
- format project UltraHD 3840x2160 ==> Feather(px)= 2160*2.5/100= 54 pixels
- format project 8k 7680x4320 ==> Feather(px)= 4320*2.5/100= 108 pixels
- Proxy without scaler 480x270 ==> Feather(px)= 270*2.5/100= 6.75 pixels => 7 pixels
So you can change the project format and what you see on Compositor is always the same Feather (size of feather), I think.
I understand you about the precision but, like in Mask tool, where you have Fade value goes -100_0_+100 (float, precision=2) and you, luckily, can use proxy (no scaler), I think that rounding may not be a problem (if possible to implement it by code).
In other NLEs the unit used is percent to avoid any "problems" with Proxy, I think, and maybe that, so doing, it is independent by used resolution. Of course, for the Title and its fonts other considerations have to be done.
Thanks to take in consideration this suggestion.
|A brief discussion here has left this still hanging. Using pixels is important because it is exact whereas percentage (%) is not exact. By that I mean, 5% of 121 is 6.05 which is not going to show as an exact number, whereas 6 pixels are always just 6 pixels and not 6.05. The only option that may or may not be possible, is to let the user pick percent over pixel with pixels being the default. We will have to discuss some more but I do not know when that will happen.|
|2019-05-07 11:49||IgorBeg||New Issue|
|2019-05-29 02:06||PhyllisSmith||Note Added: 0001602|
|2019-05-29 11:43||IgorBeg||Note Added: 0001604|
|2019-08-26 23:25||PhyllisSmith||Note Added: 0002035|
|2019-08-27 08:41||Olaf||Note Added: 0002039|
|2019-09-04 07:09||IgorBeg||Note Added: 0002066|
|2020-04-07 09:31||RafaMar||Note Added: 0003109|
|2020-04-07 12:23||Pierre||Note Added: 0003110|
|2020-04-07 13:42||RafaMar||Note Added: 0003111|