I often find that I'm converting from layers to images or objects because I can't find a node that will do the thing I want it to otherwise.

For example:

-It doesn't seem possible to change the size of an image. There's no transform image node. Resize image will pixellate the image but won't have the same effect as transform layer.

-It doesn't seem possible to process the layer with regard to visual effects. It therefore has to be changed back to an image. For example, imagine you want to change the hue of some copied layers.

-It's mostly easier to work with objects when making shapes and things, even if you want to make 2d shapes, so then I end up converting object to layer.

As I go on to write more complex compositions, I can easily imagine changing back and forth between these three modes many times within the composition. So my question is, does it really matter if I switch modes a lot? Or is it better to keep it to the minimum because of CPU? Should I try and find workarounds to keep things in the same mode or should I just change back and forth casually?

Comments

I think Vuo would benefit

useful design's picture
Submitted by

I think Vuo would benefit tremendously for ease of use by new users in making these types explicit and even changing the wire thickness/dashes or port shapes to make this more explicit.

Images are bit format. Scenes, shape objects and layers have their unique structural definitions. It’s not clear to the new user how to proceed a lot of the time given the large number of processing nodes that are specific to one or another data type. It’s a catch 22, until you learn about all of them your end up chasing your tail a lot in Vuo in my experience.