I am the Senior AV Broadcast Technology Analyst at Loyalist College where I primarily design, install and maintain campus AV, Digital Signage and Broadcast systems and equipment. I have also do some teaching for Camera, VFX and Audio/Video editing as well; I love my job. My background includes Broadcast Television, Video Production and Technical work. My passions include traditional and digital drawing, fictional creative writing, VFX, and cinematic video projects. I have also recently rekindled my interest in robotics and have tinkered with Arduino and Raspberry Pi and a few programable robots.
I find I most comfortably find myself in the chaotic limbo between the artistically and technically creative, believing one can indeed excel at both. Which is probably why I am loving VUO! :)
One thing I don't want to see is the editor become to busy and feel pieced together. I really like how clean and simple the look of the editor still feels and don't want to lose that. So I was thinking, what if the editor had a very simplistic representations for GUI nodes showing a default look of the GUI elements built right in the node, not showing the custom themes or looks that have been applied and would be seen in the render window. This would keep the clean VUO look to the editor but still offer full composition control for many GUI elements, it could even be a collapsable feature so you don't have to use/see it if you don't want to. This could work for future GUI nodes too.
Some other ideas for GUI:
I was also wondering if maybe nodes like the slider and future rotary slider (knob) could have the option for increment steps via a list input.
Also, would it make sense for a rotary slider GUI node be able to switch from a chosen range to an unlimited rotary encoder when it just sends events out one output port for left rotations and another output port for right rotations?
This recent discussion about the UI nodes got me thinking again about some things I'd like to see happen with them in the future. I've used UI elements in my own projects quite extensively, mostly with apps I've exported but there have definitely been some things I've found to be tedious when designing with them. Before I go any farther I want to say how much I really do like and appreciate what the Vuo Team has done with them so far, I intend my suggestions simply be for taking away the tediousness of designing with them and to speed up workflow.
"That one actually has an equivalent in Vuo named "Displace 3D Object with Image". Search for "Rutt Etra" on google, and it is pretty telling what the idea is."
Magneson it is important to note that the Vuo Team has taken the time to ensure typing more advanced terms like "Rutt Etra" into the Node Library search pane will still bring up the appropriate, more commonly named node "Displace 3D Object with Image". I think this is a good balance of ensuring newer artists aren't overwhelmed with confusing, albeit more accurately named, terminology but also allow experienced artists from different backgrounds to find the nodes they are looking for.
I must work and organize in a similar fashion to Joëlle as I too really appreciate the ability flexility we currently have to organize nodes by colours of our choosing as well as miss the QC Macro way of grouping nodes. In fact I was thinking about QC macros on several recent projects so it was nice to see someone else thinking the same thing.
To comment on the use of colours for organizing a composition, there are a few colours I regularly use to identify certain types of nodes; similar to the way QC used pre-coloured nodes to identify different node groups. However for the most part I use the colour options we have to group sections of my composition so I can more easily see which part of the composition I need to zero in one when I'm editing. Once in a very complex composition I used a specific colour to identify what parts of the project I've committed as "working" when I was trouble shooting and playing around with different possible solutions. I'm certainly not opposed to additional organization methods but I really like what we already have as well.
In regard to QC style Macros. While I have used sub-composition from time to time to simplify part of my composition, I find I usually don't want it in my node library as it's almost always a one time solution for a specific composition. So in saying that I really do miss the way QC Macros worked, just simply grouping nodes and making things less cluttered. I also find that sometimes changing nodes into a sub composition breaks what it was supposed to be doing. I haven't figured out why this happens, likely because I am not understanding how events are traveling through them, but it is the reason I rarely use them.