who's never used video?

LOFA · Post by **LOFA** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 5:18 pm

mikemc wrote:There is something called 'Total Recorder' for windows that is similar to snapz on mac, the Total Recorder Pro version can capture video: the video/audio quality from these sort of things, is it good?

snapz really impresses me. Live, however, has demonstrated some inconsistancies when I playback my recordings,ie: frame-jump-glitches.

aqua_tek · Post by **aqua_tek** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 5:20 pm

aint tried it.

polyslax · Post by **polyslax** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 5:50 pm

Video is useless for me. I don't expect the app to be custom-made for me, but I was disappointed to see that time had been spent on it tbh.

hoffman2k · Post by **hoffman2k** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:05 pm

Video was a step in the right direction.
Mp3 support was/is pointless, evil and it slows down evolution...
If Ableton never allowed MP3, then more online music stores would sell .wavs.
Who cares if a wav takes more space then a mp3? It gets converted to wav anyway.
What a waste of developing resources...

b0unce · Post by **b0unce** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:45 pm

huh ?

the extent of abletons mp3 support is.....a built in mp3-to-wav converter ?
I dont know how much dev-time they spent coding this, but could it really amount to being a waste of resources ?

hoffman2k · Post by **hoffman2k** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:00 pm

b0unce wrote:huh ?

the extent of abletons mp3 support is.....a built in mp3-to-wav converter ?
I dont know how much dev-time they spent coding this, but could it really amount to being a waste of resources ?

Count all the mp3 converting bugs we all tested thru...
A system to save a .asd file to an mp3 file from a warped .wav...
Then the inevitable requests for AAC, Flac, whatever the next flavor is...

All in all, this probably took them 5 minutes to implement. Who knows?
But support issues and related requests will always be there...

So in the long run, its less useful then the tiny bit of video support we got.
At least that was a step in the right way.
Hell, it even came with that time-warping feature.

But thats just my opinion.
I probably will need to make a standard disclaimer for posts like this

Did you ever hear the comedy album from Dennis Miller "The Rants"?
I should probably get an arsenal of disclaimers like on the end of each of his rants.
People seem to take my rants as personal attacks on their belief system.
Guess i got a lot to learn from Colbert. The guy is about as transparent as glass. Yet I have no clue who he would vote for

Angstrom · Post by **Angstrom** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:02 pm

I haven't really used L6 video in a project, so I ticked no. But I will be trying to use it soon. I'm embarking on an AV project at the moment, so I'll have to see how it works out.

ironically I haven't done any music to a video since L6 came out and it was a real pain doing it in L5 !

Generally In my own work I would tend to make a video to my music, rather than the other way around. But I'm working to alter the balance there.

scientist · Post by **scientist** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:07 pm

i'm longjohn's cousin he mentioned a few posts up. i use quicktime import regularly. although i've run into a few problems with dropped frames and/or the video image just plain stopping, for the most part it works just fine and i use it all the time. the main problem is people for the most part don't understand what its for. it is (at this stage in development) not intended for video editing/export of any kind. it is merely a tool for people who need to compose music and sound effects for film/video...the video production is independent of live. i make the music, spot the sound effects, etc...then hand off the audio file to the video editor who puts things together in a video editing app. for those that complain about it taking valuable ableton development time away from other things:
1. they've stated it was quick to implement (quicktime is essentially a plug in that hands all the complicated codec/rendering stuff).
2. they've also stated that without quicktime import that the track master/slave option wouldn't exist.
3. more flexibility for quicktime in live equals even less need for something like protools, and less protools = more live = more money for ableton to spend on other fun features.

for those that simply want to manipulate video from within live there are plenty of midi options available right now...

Daim · Post by **Daim** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:26 pm

my opinion is that this whole video boom is nothing but marketing....

for me it's completely useless because it's not really related to audio. serato did the same.

it's just this "wow they got video" for the media but for producers or musicians it's useless.. maybe for 10% not, great

i wanna see usefull features made for users instead of such things which give only good press

scientist · Post by **scientist** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:34 pm

Daim wrote:my opinion is that this whole video boom is nothing but marketing....

please see my post above.

nobbystylus · Post by **nobbystylus** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 8:05 pm

it is very useful for me...

Daim · Post by **Daim** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 8:14 pm

well.. doesn't really change my opinion.. and nobody who's using protools for video editing will start using live because of this quicktime support.. that's a whole other world

EEkevin · Post by **EEkevin** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 8:14 pm

Can't vote becuase I am slow in upgrading to L6... which I am kicking myself for after scoring a 15 minute documentary last weekend in Live without the video function. I look forward to using it when I upgrade, especially when they allow other formats other than .mov.

And especially when it is integrated so much I can VJ with my midi footcontroller as I trigger loops to play along with... everything in sync... that would be beautiful...

nobbystylus · Post by **nobbystylus** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 6:11 am

Daim wrote:well.. doesn't really change my opinion.. and nobody who's using protools for video editing will start using live because of this quicktime support.. that's a whole other world

I used to use Logic for video.... now i use Live...

rbmonosylabik · Post by **rbmonosylabik** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:49 am

nobbystylus wrote:
Daim wrote:well.. doesn't really change my opinion.. and nobody who's using protools for video editing will start using live because of this quicktime support.. that's a whole other world
I used to use Logic for video.... now i use Live...

I used DP for video... now I use Live