LiquidProj3ct's Forum Page

Profile  |  Topics  |  Replies  |  Favorites

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 748 total)
  • in reply to: Restricted to Podium license owners
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant
    This content is restricted to Podium license owners.
    in reply to: Restricted to Podium license owners
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant
    This content is restricted to Podium license owners.
    in reply to: 2.35 #19079
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    I had the same thoughts that thcilnnahoj, but I already open my big mouth enough 😆

    in reply to: Restricted to Podium license owners
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant
    This content is restricted to Podium license owners.
    in reply to: Preview 2.34: Minor consistency updates #19072
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    I haven’t seen ‘track object’ used anywhere yet.

    Me neither, I made up that ‘object’ while writting last post 🙂

    if we don’t want to list inputs, outputs, device mappings, presets, and parameters every time

    Why not? I see other calling them inputs and outputs, ie: http://flstudio.image-line.com/help/html/app_wiz2.htm

    best regards 🙂

    in reply to: July 2010 competition #19069
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    Congrats Shifrin 🙂

    Now I’ll have a discount to buy Podium, again! 😛

    in reply to: Preview 2.34: Minor consistency updates #19068
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    While translating the manual I’m seeing that it seems my C++ manual I read one year ago… everything are ‘objects’ and ‘events’. This is the right way to name the ‘objects’, though, I think it would be wisest name them by its functions, as we can read in the most of manuals, ie:

    Instead “note event” just “note”
    Instead “track object” just “track”

    It would ease a lot the reading since it will seems more ‘close’ to regular people. What do you think about it?

    in reply to: Few feedback request in one screen shot #19062
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    Yes, it would be very comfortable when you insert a multitimbral&multioutput template, ie, Poise with layered inputs and multiple outputs. Audio Outputs in arrangement view and Midi inputs in mixer would be hide.

    in reply to: 2.35 #19058
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    I reproduced a crash, just try to drag and drop an audio input to an empty track. It crashes always.

    in reply to: Few feedback request in one screen shot #19057
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    @thcilnnahoj wrote:

    How about something like this?

    It won’t work, of course, if Frits already has plans to change the look of normal event selections. Come to think of it, I think it also won’t work if you have those event headers enabled. :-k
    Anyways, I’d prefer any kind of phantom copy highlighting to be optional, as I don’t need it personally.

    Yes, something like that but more easy to the eyes. After you try it you will use it! 😛 (well, if you work with tons of 1bar/2bar clips)

    To more easily align sequences and events, I still like the idea of optional bars reaching down from the timeline ruler displayed at the beginning and end of events while moving/resizing them. Coloring even/odd bars differently is nice, too, but I’d prefer to have a blend setting to tone it down or even turn it off (already said that in the other thread).

    Well, I was talking about gridlines in editors, not coloring bars differently (it’s cool, tho). I’ve problems when I’m moving notes in piano roll or creating new ones. Imagine a 8bar piano roll without bold gridlines at all, with one regular gridline each 1/16 notes. That’s the feeling I’ve when I’m moving short notes in a complex clip, I don’t know easily if I’m placing it in the step 12th ot 13th. If you set the snap in Podium to “Bar” you will see different gridlines. I’m asking they’re available too when snap value will be 1/16 or 1/32, having regular gridlines, semi-bold gridlines for each beat, and bold grid line each bar.

    I don’t think you’d necessarily need another checkbox in the tags dialog (though it might be helpful), or a second check button on tag buttons.
    What better place to tag tracks to be shown/hidden in the mixer than the mixer itself!

    I was talking about ‘hiding’ not ‘tagging’ 🙂 They’re different things. Hiding can be perfectly compatible with tagging. Hiding means ‘hide’ the mixer OR track strip, never both. Try Sonar or Reaper and right click in one of their tracks, you could ‘hide’ them in the mixer or in the arrangement view. Sonar allows you hide them in both, but we don’t need such thing because we’ve the tag system.

    Does any of this sound good or is it still too confusing?

    I didn’t understand this paragraph too much (what a day! where are my neurons??), but I hope that above answer helps 😳

    in reply to: Preview 2.34: Minor consistency updates #19055
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    I didn’t understand very well the problem with bouncing 😳

    in reply to: Preview 2.34: Minor consistency updates #19047
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    Maybe it’s a good idea, but I’d like that my mates write their opinions about that.

    in reply to: 2.35 #19046
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    I don’t think that. I don’t know any video or audio program that need to use points (some ot them use only one at the top of each clip for fadein/out), all of them resize clips dragging from the border, and all of them do timestretch with a hotkey while dragging. It’s the standart way. Having lots of handles can cause troubles as I’m having [and nowadays there is only 2!]. There is few features that are standart enough in the market to change them [without enough benefit].

    Please, think about it.

    I quote myself:

    edit: when people test demos they don’t read manuals until they think that the program can satisfy their needs (lots of times they never do it!). If you integrate easy, fast, consisntet and standart methods Podium had a bigger chance to show its power and advantages.

    When you try a program similar to another you already has, you try to adopt the same workflow (unless you see it a self-evident and better one). I think it’s the key.[/quote]

    in reply to: 2.35 #19042
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    @thcilnnahoj wrote:

    I think I can recommend the new Vegas Movie Studio HD Platinum 10 (lots of confusing product names…). Most importantly, max track count was increased, and it should cost the same or even less than 9. I finally got around to ordering it too – should be in the mail by now.

    I did it, thanks for the tip, this program is much better than camtasia for my purposes with Podium, I going to try to do a video about that techno track I made yesterday. Maybe I could buy it, after my 30 days of trial, I always use them if there isn’t any restriction.

    in reply to: Preview 2.34: Minor consistency updates #19041
    LiquidProj3ct
    Participant

    Yeah, thanks, I was about to ask about those \, I was searching in wiki docs although

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 748 total)
© 2021 Zynewave