Welcome, Guest
Username Password: Remember me
Anything that doesn't fit into any other category.
  • Page:
  • 1

TOPIC: Which came first?

Which came first? 1 week, 1 day ago #222997

  • hugly
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 25379
  • 1 week, 1 day ago
Sometimes I wonder, has increased complexity of design been introduced to hide existing issues or do the issues result from increased complexity of design, I mean globally speaking.

What do you think?
It's better to travel well than to arrive...
Last Edit: 1 week, 1 day ago by hugly. Reason: typos corrected

Re: Which came first? 1 week, 1 day ago #223013

  • schrauber
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 4385
  • 1 week, 1 day ago
As a layperson, I would think that complexity need not be a fundamental problem if, on the one hand, it is so well structured for the user that it remains manageable and, on the other hand, the company has the capacity, means and structures to manage this complexity in a future-proof manner.

From a different thread ) :
[..] when we delved deeper and deeper into the code base of Lightworks
[..]
We have spent numerous years cleaning up the code base to bring it right up to modern day standards and this of course takes a very long time.
[..]

I don't know how far this work has progressed and how structured (modular?) the new and changed features are implemented and documented.

As a layman, I fantasize about a code that is completely electronically documented in every detail. In this scenario, before every small change to the code, a checklist would first be created automatically by the assistant program, taking into account all known interactions with other program parts, and the requirements previously defined for this code module, module, parameter, function, return values, etc.
When a new functionality is added or a repair is made, the assistant program would compare the new requirements with the old requirements and automatically warn in case of conflicts.

No idea if something similar is used, and if such a thing even exists.

I think the initial documentation process would probably take many times the time of the actual program development.

However, Lightworks does not only use its own code, but also needs to interact with other programs and hardware.
Mainly automatically translated
--------------------------------------------
Software: Lightworks 2020.1; || Windows 10, 64 Bit
Hardware: Intel i5-4440 (3,1 GHz); || shared RAM: 8 GB; || Intel HD Graphics 4600 (can use max. 2 GB of shared RAM)
Last Edit: 1 week, 1 day ago by schrauber.

Re: Which came first? 1 week, 1 day ago #223015

  • hugly
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 25379
  • 1 week, 1 day ago
Slightly off topic.

From another recent discussion:

jquenneville wrote:
Also, the new 2020 version changed the way you work with lock adjustments. It used to be that you could playback each clip independently. Now you cannot and both clips will play. The only thing you can do is move the heads independently. This makes it extremely difficult to use the "manual sync" method.


schrauber, do you know the reason why independent playback, which can be truly useful, has been dropped with 'Allow lock adjustment' enabled'?
It's better to travel well than to arrive...

Re: Which came first? 1 week, 1 day ago #223024

  • schrauber
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 4385
  • 1 week, 1 day ago
No, I only noticed it after you mentioned it.
I can only make guesses. Maybe so that the user doesn't have to switch the option all the time if he wants to see the result after a synchronization correction (without the playback causing a loss of synchronization)?
Mainly automatically translated
--------------------------------------------
Software: Lightworks 2020.1; || Windows 10, 64 Bit
Hardware: Intel i5-4440 (3,1 GHz); || shared RAM: 8 GB; || Intel HD Graphics 4600 (can use max. 2 GB of shared RAM)

Re: Which came first? 1 week, 1 day ago #223025

  • hugly
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 25379
  • 1 week, 1 day ago
Hm. Since it's possible to move the playhead with the mouse and with the next/previous commands, it's as a easy as before to mess things up, just the ways to mess things up are different.

Progress would be a function for saving and restoring sync states. The first to save would be the one the multicam bin has been created with. That would provide the chance to recover if things got messed up. I use cue markers on the sync points to recover, unfortunately not possible when syncing by audio waveform, once messed up you have to start all over again, with a new multicam bin synced by waveform.
It's better to travel well than to arrive...
Last Edit: 1 week, 1 day ago by hugly.
  • Page:
  • 1
Time to create page: 0.37 seconds
Scroll To Top