28 ms·

Simplicity? Well, if you're used to GNU Radio maybe ;) The graph view on top will be very off-putting to normal users. It's even off-putting to me and I'm a hu

Simplicity? Well, if you're used to GNU Radio maybe ;) The graph view on top will be very off-putting to normal users. It's even off-putting to me and I'm a huge nerd. I'd rather hide the non-destructive nature in a normal graphical editor UI people are used to. So people can edit away and when they're happy with a version of the file they can just flag it. And then they can jump between those flagged versions or browse the whole history with instant revision switching. I've done something similar with an audio editor.

programmarchy 4y ago
Graph editors are fairly normal in the design world. See Blender, Houdini FX, Substance Designer, Unreal Engine, etc. So maybe as a huge nerd you’re not a normal user. Personally, I love graph editors and find them intuitive and easy to work with.
- crazygringo 4y ago
  Forgive my ignorance, but what is the point of a graph editor in this 2D workflow, as opposed to a simple list of operations? Graphs imply branching and recombination, while this product home page just shows a linear series of operations. Is there branching so you can apply different sets of operations, and then recombination happens with blending operations?
  - underanalyzer 4y ago
    I would guess combining pieces of two images is a simple place where the graph could become non linear. Agree that if that is the case they should indicate it in their gifs tho
  - WastingMyTime89 4y ago
    It’s not a 2D workflow. Editing involves branching. It’s usual to apply treatment to the image then merge it back using a special kind of merge for exemple to isolate a colour channel or to do things on the desaturated image to work on lighting.
  - whywhywhywhy 4y ago
    A node system can do everything a linear system can but also branch or send the same asset down multiple flows and back again without the linear workflow crutches for that (“smart objects”/“symbols”). Ive been wanting someone to tackle this on the 2D side for a decade now.
- dylan604 4y ago
  Resolve and Nuke are also node based So yeah, I'd agree that because one is a nerd does not mean they are well versed in all things nerdy.
WastingMyTime89 4y ago
> Simplicity? Well, if you're used to GNU Radio maybe ;) The snark is uncalled for. You are just ignorant of the field you are commenting about. This kind of interface is extremely common in software geared towards image correction in the video industry. That’s the standard for colour correction for example.
TeMPOraL 4y ago
> The graph view on top will be very off-putting to normal users. It's even off-putting to me and I'm a huge nerd. What I believe is also off-putting to a casual user of image editors is... layer-based workflow. Layers are great as a concept. Effect / "live" / non-destructive transformation layers are even greater still. But the Photoshop-style UI everyone copies is just plain bad. I've recently been doing lots of non-destructive layer-based editing in Affinity Photo 2, and almost from the very start, I found myself dreaming about a node-based UI, or at least a layer-centric UI. That said, looking at the screenshot, I'd probably make the node-based editor an overlay on top of the image that you can quickly (as in sub-100ms) toggle on or off, or at least have the interface split vertically (due to the market standardizing on those ridiculous ~16:9 aspect ratios). > I'd rather hide the non-destructive nature in a normal graphical editor UI people are used to. So people can edit away and when they're happy with a version of the file they can just flag it. And then they can jump between those flagged versions or browse the whole history with instant revision switching. That sounds like... pain, and eliminates a lot of the value that non-destructive editing brings when it's the primary philosophy and mode of working. The approach you describe reminds me of Microsoft Word - for at least 15 years (and probably more), it came packed with structural/semantic editing features, and nobody uses them anyway, because people still find it easier to "edit away" in immediate mode, and by the time they notice the problem, it's too much work to fix it.

programmarchy 4y ago

Graph editors are fairly normal in the design world. See Blender, Houdini FX, Substance Designer, Unreal Engine, etc. So maybe as a huge nerd you’re not a normal user. Personally, I love graph editors and find them intuitive and easy to work with.

crazygringo 4y ago
Forgive my ignorance, but what is the point of a graph editor in this 2D workflow, as opposed to a simple list of operations? Graphs imply branching and recombination, while this product home page just shows a linear series of operations. Is there branching so you can apply different sets of operations, and then recombination happens with blending operations?
- underanalyzer 4y ago
  I would guess combining pieces of two images is a simple place where the graph could become non linear. Agree that if that is the case they should indicate it in their gifs tho
- WastingMyTime89 4y ago
  It’s not a 2D workflow. Editing involves branching. It’s usual to apply treatment to the image then merge it back using a special kind of merge for exemple to isolate a colour channel or to do things on the desaturated image to work on lighting.
- whywhywhywhy 4y ago
  A node system can do everything a linear system can but also branch or send the same asset down multiple flows and back again without the linear workflow crutches for that (“smart objects”/“symbols”). Ive been wanting someone to tackle this on the 2D side for a decade now.
dylan604 4y ago
Resolve and Nuke are also node based So yeah, I'd agree that because one is a nerd does not mean they are well versed in all things nerdy.

WastingMyTime89 4y ago

> Simplicity? Well, if you're used to GNU Radio maybe ;) The snark is uncalled for. You are just ignorant of the field you are commenting about. This kind of interface is extremely common in software geared towards image correction in the video industry. That’s the standard for colour correction for example.

TeMPOraL 4y ago

> The graph view on top will be very off-putting to normal users. It's even off-putting to me and I'm a huge nerd. What I believe is also off-putting to a casual user of image editors is... layer-based workflow. Layers are great as a concept. Effect / "live" / non-destructive transformation layers are even greater still. But the Photoshop-style UI everyone copies is just plain bad. I've recently been doing lots of non-destructive layer-based editing in Affinity Photo 2, and almost from the very start, I found myself dreaming about a node-based UI, or at least a layer-centric UI. That said, looking at the screenshot, I'd probably make the node-based editor an overlay on top of the image that you can quickly (as in sub-100ms) toggle on or off, or at least have the interface split vertically (due to the market standardizing on those ridiculous ~16:9 aspect ratios). > I'd rather hide the non-destructive nature in a normal graphical editor UI people are used to. So people can edit away and when they're happy with a version of the file they can just flag it. And then they can jump between those flagged versions or browse the whole history with instant revision switching. That sounds like... pain, and eliminates a lot of the value that non-destructive editing brings when it's the primary philosophy and mode of working. The approach you describe reminds me of Microsoft Word - for at least 15 years (and probably more), it came packed with structural/semantic editing features, and nobody uses them anyway, because people still find it easier to "edit away" in immediate mode, and by the time they notice the problem, it's too much work to fix it.