31–40 of 64 posts
What… is the point of node editing? Current image editing is only destructive if you save over the original file? What am I missing? This seems way more tedious than just making the changes like in Lightroom.
On the other hand, if it (will?) be possible to work in several color models in one graph it will be very useful to implement Dan Margulis' color correction technics which require working with channels from different color models simultaneously.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds to me a lot like people that have a narrow and shallow level of experience in the field they are diving into, so they keep bumping into the walls. Dev: I had this great idea of making this new thing because I haven't seen it before Everyone Else: Yeah, it looks like this or this or even that. Have you looked at what other people have done and the pain points they solve or cause? Dev: Nah, this is a totally dif…
As a graphics professional who loves node-based workflows, I find the constant re-invention of the wheel pretty painful. With some coordination of this effort, Blender or Natron could be real open-source challengers to Nuke, but starting from scratch seems always to be more enticing.
There are also very close cousins like Reason and its rack connections, which could contribute some nodes-101-level concepts to most basic graphical node workflows.
What… is the point of node editing? Current image editing is only destructive if you save over the original file? What am I missing? This seems way more tedious than just making the changes like in Lightroom.
Many Dan Margulis' tricks cannot be reproduced in Lightroom model. Especially tricks which need to work in different color models simultaneously. Even full Photoshop struggle to represent these tricks in non-destructive way!
What… is the point of node editing? Current image editing is only destructive if you save over the original file? What am I missing? This seems way more tedious than just making the changes like in Lightroom.
Nodal based image editing is the standard in the film industry, though obviously there it’s predominantly used for sequences of images. Nuke is the industry standard, though there are a few others. I would agree it’s pointless if you just want a simple linear set of image processing operations like Lightroom, but film based compositing is obviously vastly more complex than that.
What… is the point of node editing? Current image editing is only destructive if you save over the original file? What am I missing? This seems way more tedious than just making the changes like in Lightroom.
It is more tedious for simple stuff than layer stacks, but more complex stuff quickly becomes more tedious (or impossible) with layer stacks. Hence, node UIs have become standard with compositing applications that were not designed by Adobe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yikes! I can't imagine working like this. Every node based editing system I have used behaves exactly like you describe where adding/dropping a node on a connection between to existing nodes automatically connects the new node as expected. The only time I've seen this add new, disconnect, make new connections are in chart/graph programs like Omnigraffle or similar programs people draw up database schemas and network…
That’s UX improvement and we are taking about a v0.6. Maybe the devs were simply focused, on you know, making the image editing part work before working on quality of life improvements.
Why not make this commercial though? I wouldn’t mind spending a small amount of money on such an editor.
I've never understood the need for 2d schematic editor when a ordered list of filters would suffice. Do you like to move pixels around that much?
My main problem with node editors is that I wish the layout were better managed, let the machine handle it. There is something that feels awkward about node editing to me, but I am not smart enough to come up with an alternative. A tree browser perhaps, Or something like the scratch programing environment?