Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 11th Jan 2010 08:10 UTC
Multimedia, AV I followed the hype: Reddit, Slashdot's front page, months of thumbs up on my blog and various video forums by Linux users for OpenShot. Given that I'm longing for a usable Linux video editor since 2003, and given that OpenShot version 1.0 had just been released, I naturally gave it a go, by also downloading its provided dependencies on my Ubuntu Linux 9.10.
Thread beginning with comment 403999
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: A common problem
by tupp on Thu 14th Jan 2010 11:51 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: A common problem"
Member since:

Sure. Cite a page that was last updated a year ago. Do you know someone at a studio who uses it? Has he told you so? Thought so.

The Mac version of CinePaint was last updated less than a year ago, on March 26, 2009:

Now, do you think that the post production industry has completely changed in less than a year? Who do you know that has confirmed that nobody uses CinePaint?

Thought so.

You know what's big today? Integrating tools that once were separate into one big package. ILM's Zeno can do almost everything except modelling. And look no further than Nuke which is bought by studios left and right. It has a very nice Paint module that can be used precisely for those tasks -- like, for example, dust busting and wire removal -- where CinePaint would've been used. It also has a nice optional plugin called "Furnace", which provides advanced capabilities for automated wire removal, degraining, dirt removal, dust busting -- you name it. Today you don't need to leave your compositor for tasks where you would have used an external paint application.

I found a write-up on Zeno: "Zeno is like a collaborative scene file, a concept CG artists might know from blender...": Looks like your proprietary software had it's inspiration in OSS.

Which is actually what I have been saying -- a lot of open code is modified by the studios for their own needs.

The studios hire more programmers than almost any other type of organization. Do you think that they are paying all those programmers to fix dust spots with off-the-shelf Photoshop?

And another thing, you seem to think CinePaint can only be used in VFX and animation shops. Well, in the film industry, there happens to be a little known style of shooting called "live action." I know it might be hard to believe, but there is a more going on the the movie world, other than "Wall-E" and "Shrek" (although I think that CinePaint was used on Shrek).

CinePaint is used for live footage, too, and nobody is going to purchase Zeno nor Nuke, just to touch up their live action shots.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: A common problem
by DerGenosse on Sat 16th Jan 2010 13:09 in reply to "RE[7]: A common problem"
DerGenosse Member since:

CinePaint is used for live footage, too, and nobody is going to purchase Zeno nor Nuke, just to touch up their live action shots.

No s**t, Sherlock! Putting words in my mouth again? Nowhere have I argued that anybody is going to purchase Nuke or whatever for the sake of merely retouching live action material. I have argued that a VFX studio -- I was all the while talking about VFX studios, remember? -- isn't likely to introduce an external paint application into their workflow, when any retouching job can be done from within their already existing compositing tools. There is no need for CinePaint when you already use Nuke.

Also, you were the one that started to babble about CinePaint's bright future without any proof. Now you suddenly want *me* to prove that it isn't used? You claim something, you prove it. From the publicly visible state I'd say the evidence is against you.

Reply Parent Score: 1