[Ardour-Dev] ardour3 video timeline

[Patrick Shirkey]

On 06/28/2010 10:56 AM, Robin Gareus wrote:
> On 06/28/2010 01:38 AM, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
>    
>> I think it will be very useful for post production work. My only concern
>> is that it doesn't necessarily allow extension for the inevitable future
>> request for video editing capabilities...
>>      
> I've been pondering this beforehand. The image-timeline present in
> ardour2 does allow editing but it's more a curse than a blessing.
> besides ardour3 broke that code completely.
>
> The problem is a more general one: for video-editing you'll want a
> different tool-box. "move" and "trim" are probably the only ones in
> common, not to mention you want a different GUI layout.
>
> Oh and it can be extended. While the current number of "rulers" is
> hardcoded, they can be created dynamically and handle actions :)
>
>    

I'm wondering what is so difficult about dropping the code that displays 
the video timeline into a track/bus widget. Surely it accepts any child 
widget that we can throw at it within reason? Or is it a custom widget 
that has been hard coded to accept only bus and track widgets?



>> However if it is viable to place the time line in the editor panel at
>> some future date when the single track system is stable and fully
>> implemented then it seems like a very good solution to get the ball
>> rolling.
>>      
> I dare say that much of the essential code (video-backend and timeline
> calc) can be re-used. But it'll be a major effort to implement the GUI.
> I actually tried to do that before I came up with the current ruler
> solution: I've hacked>  2000 LOC [Time|Stream|Image|Axis|View] classes
> last week without even displaying a single video-track before I realized
> that it could not be done cleanly without patching libardour.
>
> The current prototype is<  500 LOC and displays something. Adding calls
> to a video-decoder and frame-cache is easy.
> The session-management and setup&  option dialogs - while sounding
> trivial - are much more work.
>
> The main reason to keep it simple was to get sth. that is usable for
> more than 3 persons on this world (aics + ardour2) soon.
>
>    

I absolutely agree that we want it to be more widely accessible.


>> I understand that there is already Blender and several other very good
>> video editing systems but the same defence was used for midi editing and
>> now we have ardour3. so it's probably best to plan for the eventual
>> possiblity that ardour will become a fully featured video editing system
>> too once this step has been integrated and proven stable.
>>      
> Well, Midi is at least audio-related but Video-editing is whole
> different subject. In a professional workflow one does mix the two.
>
> The current algorithm that aligns the video provides for time-offsets
> and concatenation of videos in a single track (playlist). That's not
> editing but it can in principle _read_ simple EDL.
>
> In fact I see this video-timeline as a handy addition. The main focus is
> to improve interoperability with xjadeo and session management.
>
> My support for a FLOSS NLE is on lumiera.
>
> AFAIK lumiera only implements minimal audio features but already has
> jack-transport sync on their feature list. IMHO a lumiera session export
> to ardour (or even tighter integration) will be the way to go.
>
>    

While I agree with you and would be more than happy to use the modular 
approach I do recall pretty much exactly the same statement being said 
about muse/rosegarden in the past ;-)



-- 
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd