-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Martin Ellison schrieb: > I've been looking at the Cin3 documentation on http://ichthyostega.de/cin3 > and I notice under > ProblemsTodo there is the question, "is it really necessary to have fixed > global tracks?" > > Can I argue that the answer is No, and that a better approach is to use a > tree of Metatracks.
Hello Martin, agreed, my answer is "no" to both questions at the mentioned place. > One kind of metatrack would be the result of a timeline, which would > incorporate multiple input > (meta)tracks. Currently, I am following a slightly different aproach, with the same net result. With "I am following" I mean: I am implementing it currently this way, to see if it works out without contradicions: The Session now has not one EDL, but N EDLs. Each is a collection of media objects placed in somehow. Each EDL can have a reference point in Time. I plan to implement the "meta clips" to be the contents of some EDL, i.e. you can use it in another EDL as you see fit, but when "opening" the clip you'll switch over to the EDL holding the contents of the clip (and we need to work out a mechanism to avoid cyclic dependencies, of course). This works only because of the other (more fundamental) change I try to make: Don't treat the tracks as fixed first-class entities anymore. Tracks are a mere organisational grid for the user. They are structured as a tree (of course, this is self-evident). To complement this, properties like e.g. the output connection are not so much hard wired, rather they are derived from the context to some degree. For example, if you wish, you could plug a clip directly into some output port (hard wired); otherwise the system will search an applicable output port info attached to the track, or the parent track or finally use a session-wide default. > An editor could ignore this and just have one timeline that took the real > input tracks as input > and output the final render. This would be the same as Cin2. Yes, I want to stress this fact: the system will come with a default configuration which behaves pretty much conventional. > In all this I am referring to the user interface (in the sense of the view of > the editing project > as presented to, and manipulated by, a video editor). Agreed again. All of this is the "high level model". We have a Builder component translating this into the "low level model", which is a network of render nodes. Regards, Hermann V. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHohjlZbZrB6HelLIRAkWiAJ4kvkMvqOnPOGXjwmnzDZj4HJNGXQCfaj9A Ci876yQxwbC7pcoOxKiuh/g= =rfEr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Cinelerra mailing list [email protected] https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
