ConquistadorConquistador@Zynewave wrote:
That sounds like the best solution. I have never worked with InDesign or Acrobat, so I don’t know which tool is best for this job. Another thing that is missing in the current wiki to PDF setup, is a TOC with page number references. Maybe that can easily be auto-generated in Acrobat too?
Most likely. I will look into it. 😉
No. The whole point of the work I have done with the wiki setup, is to avoid having to maintain the separate HTML guide.
We are on the same page then. 😉
ConquistadorBut as I said, this could involve a lot of work.
If as you suggested in your second response, separating the PDF updates from the release time frame then that should be Ok.
Of course it would help if you can give me an idea as to what sort of help exactly you would be interested in…
Graphics only?
Text and Graphics?
Rewriting sections of the Podium guide with updated graphics?
Other?
To update a second version of the guide in another format (InDesign) would take time, and I would depend on you to make the updates before I could include the PDF in a new release.
I need to look into this a bit more but I think all I would need is Acrobat Professional for the PDF output. I only mentioned Indesign because you did. Thinking it over I think there should be no need really for Indesign if all you need is a very good quality PDF for Podium.
I have the full version of Acrobat. Acrobat Professional.
I can create a PDF from a single or even mulitple files, web page (even directly from Internet explorer) so there should be no need for a second Indesign version of the Podium guide (as a PDF) maybe we misunderstood each other there, as after thinking it through there should be no need for Indesign if all that is needed is a high quality PDF. 😉
If you want to experiment with this, you can download the fullsize screenshots in the getting started wiki page. Clicking the screenshots in the wiki guide will open them first in a semi-size window, and another click opens them in fullsize. The other screenshots in the ‘old’ parts of the guide I don’t have in fullsize.
Yes, thanks for the tip there…I think I will experiment with that. 😉
Another solution could be to remove the PDF files from the installer, and make them available as separate downloads. They are relatively large and take up considerable space in the installer. That way I don’t have to worry about the PDFs before each release, and you can update the guide whenever you have the time. Still, a lot of work for you
Yes this too could work. Would there still be a HTML version with the Podium installer though?
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
If anyone knows of a way to create higher-quality PDF files, I’m all ears. What is important to me is that I can generate the PDFs automatically from the wiki contents. It would be too much work if I have to cut and paste wiki changes into a dedicated PDF program like Adobe InDesign.
he he….that may be where I can help you Frits… 😉 I have IndesignCS2 and Acrobat Professional so really with those tools the output should be top notch and it would save you a great deal of time.
As for the images…I noticed on the Wiki that even those images are not that clear either…if you could let me have all the original screen grabs possibly going back a few years…I might be able to come up with the kind of PDF result you may be interested to see. 😉 Just offering some assistance here. I cannot of course help with development, but I can possibly help you in this area 8)
I am still getting to grips with Indesign and Acrobat. My time is spent mostly learning Photoshop CS2, GoLive and Flash Pro 8 but I am happy to give some time to help produce improved images for the Podium PDF and any other possibly areas within the PDF if you need assistance.
I don’t know how long it will take me but I can get back to you once I have something ready.
I just need all the original Podium guide screen grabs, prior to any conversion…I think I would need to work with them in PhotshopCS2 in their original state for the best results.
Interested? 😉
ConquistadorIt’s great to see the Podium guide as a PDF! 🙂
One problem….I can barely make out the detail in the pictures. They are very blurry. Try page 8 as one example, really fuzzy.
It is as if the image has been increased in size instead of maybe decreased in size. So they appear badly pixelated.
Some issue on exporting the PDF maybe?
Just checked out z3ta regarding the issue we discussed previously…100% rock solid preset changes from within the GUI now. 😀
They sync up perfectly with the preset panel. 🙂
Thanks!
ConquistadorVery nice! 🙂
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
The VST .fxp file format can store max 24 chars in the preset names. So when you export a preset with a longer name to fxp, the name is cut off.
Ah ok…that explains it thanks. 😉
I think I’ll leave zPEQ as it is for now. Importing your preset files as library presets works quite well I think.
Agreed it does work very well I only brought it up as it was your suggestion not mine. You suggested it and asked me for my opinion on it which I agreed to on this thread…
http://www.zynewave.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=947 (second post)
I simply thought you might have forgotten about it. 😉 But yes the current import process is indeed absolutely fine ‘as is’. 😉
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
I don’t think it is fair to say I say so little about it. On several topics over the last couple of months I have mentioned that improvement of audio features is going to be the next big step on my plan.
I think you misunderstood me there….I did not mean you have not mentioned audio features (of course you have) but really you have said hardly anything about clip fades specifically. Gotta make this clear you are of course in no way bound to ‘explain’ to anyone why x number of words have not been said about feature x or y! That would be silly of course! That is not what I mean. 😉
I think that would be even beyond splitting hairs.
I guess when you say audio features you mean clip fades are included in that but they just have not got a specific mention for a long time and as I said it’s so unlike you to not implement a highly wanted feature.
I guess I am just so used to your quick responses and discussions about features over the years. That is basically it I guess. 😆
I do see its importance, and it doesn’t require a major rework of the engine.
Clarification that is all I was looking for. 8)
It is a highly requested feature, you have never said no to it’s implementation, but ‘audio features’ is a very broad term ( this is probably what caused the confusion then).
I guess if you are saying clip fades are included in that…fine. Yes it’s obviously an audio related feature but I think you know what I mean when I say very little has been said about it specifically over a good deal of time. Hence this thread. 😉
Most of the features implemented over the last few months, such as the project start page, have been usability enhancements. User feedback on e.g. kvr suggested that it was difficult to get started with Podium, so I considered this equally important as event fades.
Maybe even much more so than event fades…but we are past that now.
You yourself have contributed a large number of posts about the urgency of making it easier for new users to get into Podium.
Time well spent as the results are great. Way easier to navigate Podium now. 8)
It’s hard to please everyone at the same time.
Unless you are perfect I would not expect you to do that anyway. 100% certain everyone here agrees with that. 😉
I’m trying to please most people with frequent Podium releases.
I think the rise in the number of responses to the last few threads in the Release forum shows that is clearly working. Although even without any response to a release thread that does not mean we are not pleased with that approach. No one has complained about it ever. I see no reason for anyone to complain in future. 😉
I’m sadened if this gives the impression that I’m ignoring big features like event fades.
Well sometimes a little bit of clarification goes a loooooooong way. As you cannot be expected to read our minds I just thought I would ask a few questions about it in a relaxed and sensible manner. Which I have done.
I did not think you were avoiding it for the fun of it, but it’s just unlike you to say so little specifically about a highly anticipated feature. That’s all really. Your level of responsiveness to bugs and features is so high, I was just really puzzled by it’s lack of appearance in Podium yet. 😉
Nothing to get under the weather about. (it’s quite sunny here today by the way 8) I was just curious about your views on it really. I am glad I asked as it has been clarified now. 🙂
Sometimes I wonder if it would be a better solution to do like e.g. Jørgen is doing with eXT2; Stop the frequent releases and announce that something “big” is coming up, and then go undercover for a year or so.
I understand what you mean and of course that is up to you. Podium is in such a good state that frankly if you never released anything for a year or two I would have plenty to keep me busy feature wise in Podium It simply does not have any bugs either which is really quite remarkable 8)
Possibly the best aspect of Podium for me as it means it is 100% reliable.
As for using Jorgen as an illustration. Going undercover gives me the following impression 😆
1.You literally taking the Podium master development console and moving everything under ground.
2.Changing your name.
3.Responding to posts with only a yes or no.
4. Walking around with a long coat, dark glasses and a Fedora hat however hot the weather is, and even when sitting at your desk! 😆
That would concern the Podium community quite a bit I think…just kidding of course. 8)
FWIW…Jorgen has not gone undercover he is busy with the next ‘upgrade’ of EXT but he remains very much accessible on the EXT forum (as you do, and have been on this forum). If what I have read is correct, then screen shots and many discussions about EXT2 have already taken place anyway *with Jorgen* that is.
He has not gone undercover.
This thread is just in response to your invitation to users to get involved and discuss the future of Podium, that is all. 😉 We all have been doing that here for years now, this thread is no different. Correct me if I am wrong, but I really doubt you have any plans to change that.
Think clarification here not criticism Frits. They are worlds apart.
Please dont take a friendly and at times even humorous request here on this thread for some kind possible clarification on a particular feature as a personal criticism of you. Now *that* would be saddening after all this time. 😉
User interaction…thats all. I don’t see how this thread is different. 😉
Thanks for your response which does provide clarification. Personally I would have no issue with a user of my product asking questions about it. But asking not ranting, flaming and throwing personal insults all over the place. That would be needless and very silly. Obviously I have not done that here.
As Podianer said…
We users and those who request some features from time to time are only interested in the growth of Podium. How YOU, in the end, react to those requests in terms of schedule or priorities, has always been great!! So take your time!
+1 😉
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
If you are just looking for a way to verify whether there are any events on a hidden track, you could check the event list in the track inspector.
No Frits, not a simple verification of track events (I have no need for that) but full editing capability of track events, as we have currently with any child track that is last placed in any group tracks with all their lanes hidden <<<<<<. :wink: Clicking on each hidden lanes track strip (<<<) would switch the currently visible track in the arranger to the highlighted hidden lanes track, when clicked and as a result show the contents of *that* track. 😉
From there I would edit it as any other track. 8)
When I designed the hidden track lane feature, the main purpose was to be able to hide tracks that had no events on the timeline.
Thats fine and I remember 😉 Of course that does not stop it’s original purpose from being developed further.
This FR goes in at the low-priority end of the todo list 😉
Either way…low or high is fine by me 😉 Clip fades and cross fades (including auto crossfades) are by far my no.1 FR’s.
I do hope however that those two highly requested features are not also low priorities.
But yes the track lane suggestion I made in this thread can most certainly wait. 8)
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
New tutorial: Multiple monitor outputs
http://www.zynewave.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tutorials:multiple_outputs:index
Comments?
I wonder if any of you have done something similar, or even were aware that you could do something like this in Podium?
Very interesting. Made me smile for sure. A bit of an advanced feature there.
While not nearly the same thing, I do have a *sub* master track just below the master (but above the rest of the mix) that I map either the Inspector (to fully analyze my mix) or the excellent new Sonalksis Free G.
Sometimes I swap out the stereo version of the Sonalksis FreeG with the Mono version to hear how the mix sounds in mono. This seems to work so far as all the pan settings on tracks disappear.
The tutorial you wrote highlights some of the more advanced capabilities of Podium. 8) Good to see. Certainly some things I did not know but I am glad I know now 🙂
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
The banner is a screenshot of the new splash screen you will see when 1.71 is released.
Interesting. New look Podium. I suppose it is somewhat consistent with the massive changes that have taken place in Podium since the currrent splash screen first appeared.
I’m currently writing about the project start page in the guide, and the “getting started” pages will be updated as well. Having the guide in the wiki section will hopefully make it easier for me to keep the guide updated. When I eventually fill out the remaining chapters, my goal is to keep it updated on every release.
Good plan.
You’re all welcome to edit the wiki. If you’re afraid to touch the Podium guide, then you could consider writing tutorials describing how you work with Podium. This way you could get feedback on the tutorials in the forums with suggestions on how to improve the workflow.
He he, I think the Podium guide is a pretty big deal. I certainly do not want to mess that up 😆 I really like the idea of tutorials and have a few in mind. I will probably start with that and then progress to the Podium guide. 8)
ConquistadorI just spotted the rather bold Podium banner. Nice.
It might be an idea to link this to the Releases forum as the banner has the very latest version no. on it. Which I think is a good idea but possibly linking this banner to the Releases forum would be a good idea as well.
The size of the banner is quite nice, I think it demands to be clicked 😆
Something else I noticed…some of the screenshots in the Podium guide may confuse more than clarify since they are now a bit dated. I guess you would love to have the Podium guide automatically update it’s text once a new update is released 😆 but in any case I thought I should bring it up.
Maybe if the whole guide is updated first (even if it does take some time)…then any new updates added to the guide as they arrive. This would be much easier I imagine.
Otherwise it may never be fully up to date as has been the case for as long as I can remember. Tough job for a single developer. But it I really think it could be fully up to date with perhaps a bit of assistance 😉
I guess writing is not as exciting as coding and seeing the results eh? If so I can see why. 😉 Maybe as members we could somehow chip in to update certain parts for you?
Certainly identifying out of date entries or screenshots (as above) might not be too difficult and would I imagine save you a bit of time that could be better spent on development?
ConquistadorSome nice ideas. 8) Although I think any changes to the ZPEQ would be very low priority for me compared to others but…as far suggestions of my own (in addition to yours)…
1. Output meter
2. Real time spectral analysis overlayed onto the ZPEQ display.
All very nice just thinking about it but still very low level stuff compared to other features that have been requested on this forum.
Frits appears to have a very clear plan as to what can be done this year or not, which is good to see. He does though add the odd minor request here and there between updates so maybe this can make it into a not so distant update 😉
I would much prefer a simple zCompressor before any changes to the ZPEQ along with a long list of other things 😉
But as you did ask, the two I mentioned would be my addition to your suggestions. 8)
ConquistadorCheers Frits. Thanks for extending Podianers request even further, to other areas within Podium as well. Every little bit helps! 🙂
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
I have seen the T3 video. Wasn’t the category browsing a feature for loop files rather than plugin presets?
I think both.
Certainly I would wait until the VST3 spec is made public by Steinberg. The info says it supports a category description for the plugin. Maybe they also added something like this for presets, although I doubt it.
By all means. If it will make it easier to implement. 😉
Not this year.
Before adding loop browsing features, I need to improve the loop playback support.
Makes sense. At least another FR is off my list and on the future forum for reference when you are ready.
Cheers. 😉