While Cinelerra isn't perfect, it works.  But I think you have a
misunderstanding of the typical Cinelerra user.  Most Cinelerra users
are open source people first and editors second.  In my case, I'm an
animator first and an editor second... and open source best suits my
small business because I can add (or pay other people to add) custom
features if I need them.  Cinelerra is fast for what I need it to do.
It's slower in some situations for some things and faster in others.
That's the nature of trade-offs.  If Cinelerra doesn't suit your
workflow, use another package.  That's the beauty of choice.  I
certainly don't use Cinelerra for all my editing needs, but it's there
when I need it for the things it's good at.

The program needs work; on one is denying that.  However, your abrasive
and demanding attitude in the face of non-trivial tasks (no matter how
easy you might envision them to be) is not, IMHO, helping at all.
Cinelerra has a very limited number of volunteer developers with a very
limited amount of time and no concrete leadership.  Saying that the
developers are presumptuous or not listening to users is a huge
misinterpretation of the reality of the situation on your part.

Furthermore, you wrote:

> Cinelerra is based in some incredible ideas... video editor with
> masks , fast system response, renderfarm capabilities,a fast
> subtitler, I mean, dude, THIS IS A GREAT IDEA (in 2000), but why you
> think that editors works in that same way today? editors needs moe
> things year after year.

How so?  Editing hasn't changed.  Formats have changed, editors have
started taking on more responsibilities that used to go to compositors,
but the essence of multi-track editing hasn't changed.  Now, if the
issue you're trying to address is whether or not Cinelerra facilitates
the needs of an NLE in the most efficient way, then you might be on to
something.  However, to fall for the hype of feature creep that
commercial packages have is a mistake, IMO.  Don't get me wrong; there
are some great new features out there.  I just haven't seen anything
revolutionary or groundbreaking in the realm of video editing software
for quite some time now.

> sorry If i sound like a marketing department dude, hehehe, but
> analyze other apps like blender, and the succes is because fits
> industry standards, I was a softimage/3dMAX animator, when i met
> blender, it was different but the general UI was FASTER, and we can
> do more in less time, who cared about external render or raytracing
> in 2003? for model-edit-render there wasn´t anything like it, and the
> USERS took it, and developers LISTENED, actually founded ORANGE
> project, so they can make an openmovie calling USERS to participate
> (now they are working in hairy animals), and they realize what tools
> the user cculd need. do you SEE why blender becomes a success?
> because the developers know that the user needs comes first, so in
> the past 4 years how many NEW users has blender3d and cinelerra ?
> wich of those in threir respective areas are more industry accepted?
> how many studios changed finalcut and premiere for cinelerra? how
> many studios changed 3dmax or maya for blender3D?

This, I feel, highlights you're misunderstanding of the situation.
Blender's development success isn't necessarily because they listen to
all their users.  Blender's success is because the majority of the
developers *are* users.  That's how open source works.  People write
software to scratch their own itch because, generally, it's something
they need.  The Orange, Peach, and Apricot projects exist to better
facilitate that.  Blender is written for Blender users (not Max users
or Maya users or Softimage users).  That is the reason for its growth
and success.  Don't make the mistake of thinking that open source
developers don't use the software they write.  The developers on this
list are *very* aware of Cinelerra's shortcomings and keenly interested
in finding solutions that work (in a general context as well as one that
fits within the structure of Cinelerra).  This is a very challenging
task and there's no fixed leadership set of goals to better facilitate
that.

So, long story short, without someone with both the willingness to lead
and the proper understanding of Cinelerra's existing codebase (not to
mention people willing to follow this person), you're simply going to
have to be patient.  Cinelerra will move as best as it can within the
constraints of the time and patience of its very generous developers.
If Cinelerra isn't "there" for you right now, use something else... or
find ways to contribute or help out (other than screaming ridiculous
claims like "Cinelerra's developers don't listen to users").  Also,
don't interpret my response (or anyone else's response) as "the voice
of Cinelerra developers".  I no more speak for developers than you do.
These are my thoughts as a user who has an understanding of the
software development process.

I, for one, still use Cinelerra pretty frequently (when Blender's Video
Sequencer isn't enough) for some projects where it's well-suited and I
appreciate everything that our developers have been able to do so much
with the limited resources that they have.  Thank you.

Take care.

  Fweeb

_______________________________________________
Cinelerra mailing list
[email protected]
https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra

Reply via email to