The step-in, step-out methodology is ancient and clumsy.  An updated DS tree-type effects would be great and hopefully translate easily to online in the DS world.  C'mon folks, even FCP's effect handling is superior at this point.

gracias.

sw

I previously asked for a Node-based compositor effect/plug-in for MC...

http://community.avid.com/forums/t/49374.aspx

But as someone politely pointed out:

'Why would anyone spend 100 - 200k on a DS suite if they could do it all in MC for under $5k?'

That's the bottom line I'm afriad.  Which is a shame.

Thats a good point and interesting dilema:  Where do you stop developing your lower end products to prevent them from taking sales away from your high end products? 

What I am thinking is not to change the effects offered in each product (DS being the higher-end product with more robust toolset) but standardize the way effects are handles in eachh product so the offline to online process is smoother.

The bottom line is also the fact that even FCP has a better and more flexible way of dealing with effects on timeline clips.  Whatever happens, Avid needs to get into the 21st century in the way effects are handled and modified.

I agree.  I don't think it needs to necessarily be node/tree based like it is in professional compositors, but at the very least it should act like After Effects, Premiere, FCP, and I'm sure many other applications that I may just not be familiar with.

Effects are my number one gripe with Avid, and if they fixed that, there's absolutely nothing else in the program that would ever be even close to a deal-breaker with me.

If you haven't tried it, the DS Tree Effects (or node based) is a great way to work and is much more logical than the current Avid MC-based effects and even FCP.  Kind of like plumbing:  ya got a "gazinta" and a "goesoutta" and you add your effects in between.  

MC could offer its same effect package so as not to take away from DS, just in the Tree Format, and ideally these Trees would "Total Conform" over to DS.  My dreamworld...

It would be a great feature, but to be honest, as has been mentioned in the past:

Without the compositing side, why exactly would would buy a DS?  I'm not knocking the application, but with the new MC shipping soon that will effectively handle HD quicker (or at least on a par for most jobs we do) than the current DS, the only real benefit to go into DS would be for those big effects-heavy programs, where you can 'button-off' looks etc. with the Effects Tree. Not that that's a big issue on the MC (there are various workarounds), but seriously, when all the effects from the Offline 'Total Conform' into MC (unlike DS); the Grader is FAR more responsive and has more features; and the actual Editing side isn't painfully slow for doing some basic changes, it's gonna be interesting this year to see what they do with DS v9 to keep it in the game.

To bring it back to the point of the thread: I don't think they'll in any way bring in a compositing side to MC whilst DS is around, they can't afford to because it'll soon be the only reason why anyone would think of buying it.

Remember how well the DS Editor did (that was a cheaper DS without the Compositing side)?  Well, no one bought it.  I mean, why would you?

Whilst this might sound like I'm ragging on the DS, I'm not.  I think it's a great piece of software, but with the new MCs the people in Montreal are gonna have to really do something to make it a viable product to spend that kind of money on.

Well, there is 2K and 4K capability. In fact Sunday night I completed a 6K job. An intuitive timeline, unlimited layout customization, Source side effects, reference clips, scripting, Symphony style color grading, advanced titling, drag and drop editing, Kung Fu editing, 3-2 contract / expand, better alpha handling,  Not to knock Composer, we have 4 of them in my facility, also 2 Symphony Nitris. 

Once you get to cut on DS, editing on anything else is like driving with oven mitts. The issue I've got with MC, is that there are far too many button clicks to perform simple operations. I don't think that the GUI is any different than before. Just more streams of realtime.

I don't think effects trees are necessary on MC. They do however, need to change the way effects are applied. The effects interface is Victorian.

The DS Editor was an attempt to quell the demand from Symphony users for a HD product. It was a failure because Avid didn't follow up the offering with an integrated training program (look at the Tutorials on the Soft site, ver 5.0 for goodness sakes).

The way DS currently stands it is an extremely viable product. It lacks marketing and training to show how really strong it is. In fact, it's a testament to its fundamental design, that some of the features we've had in place for years are only now making it into competitors products.

I edit on many systems, both offline/creative and online. The money spent on a DS is well worth it. After all, its competition is not Media Composer, Final Cut or Symphony, it's Quantel, Discreet, Pirahna, and Scratch. I would love to see more of the good from MC into DS and the DS into MC.

Michael

Agreed.  I was involved with DS since version 1 and it is clearly a superior product for finishing than anything Avid has/had in its MC based stable.  Once you get on the system and realize how DEEP the toolset is, you do not want to go back.  For finishing (not just "Total Conforming") the MC to DS workflow is the best I have found.  And if the top management of Avid is to be believed, there are very good things coming for DS and its users.

If Avid does ever update the way it handles effects in the MC product line, I would just like to see it much more compatible for its hi-end product of DS.  How that is done is up to them.  If that's containers and trees, so be it.  Or if Avid copies the Final Cut method of effects, thats good too.  Almost anything is an improvement over the step in, step down, step out method we work with today

Guys

I really don't want to hi-jack this thread into a DS v. MC debate - they are both great machines depending on the job, but...

let me give you my company as an example of what I'm saying.

We, like a lot of people, were originally 'forced' to buy a DS when we went HD, as MC/Symph couldn't do it (and we were told that it 'couldn't/wouldn't) be able to in the near future.

Even when MC could do HD, it was still quicker to make our programmes (which are mainly long-form) in the DS - even with the list of incompatibility issues that we didn't get when we Onlined in our HD Adrenaline - purely because of the render time.  However, the gap was a day normally.

Now, with the new MCs (and Total Conform) it will be quicker to do it in MC.  I can't tell you just how long it takes to 'fix' things that come from the Avid sequence and just don't "come across" to DS.  The kind of programming we make consists of, like most other people I'm guessing, a grade and 'effecting' on some material (reconstructions etc.) and Supers.  With a handful of increasingly cheap plug-ins you can make a programme look amazing in MC, without needing the great deep Toolset of DS, in a fraction of the time at a fraction of the cost.  That's my point.

I completely agree it would be great for real compatibility between MC and it's 'older brother' DS - and I'm sure the guys in Montreal are working they're hardest to get this - but it just isn't the case at the minute.

I would love a Node-based effects tree is MC - it is a far more advanced way of handling effects than can be done in MC - but in the end that's just not gonna be worth the massive price difference for companies making basic HD programming (not 2k etc...).  Especially, when at present the MC has a better Grader (larger Toolset), a Tracker that actually works (Steadyglide which is amazing), a better native Keyer (SpectraMatte) and a whole host of other things that are on the DS Wishlist:

http://dswiki.wikispaces.com/2007+Wish+Lists

I can't wait to see what Montreal do with v9 - but unless they address this it's gonna be hard for any company like us to justify buying (or upgrading) a DS.

Sorry, it wasn't supposed to become a flame war. I don't think every show is best suited on a DS, hell, a linear bay is great for some facilities. However, I would love to see more MC editors exposed to DS, half the wishlist on the Avid Forum is already available in Avid owned code. If they would develop a product that shared the best of each system, they would have a worldbeater.

I look to compete with Flames, Scratch and a host of other finishing systems. I want the DS to work flawlessly with FCP, MC, Vegas and whatever else that they throw at me.

I know plenty of Film Screening work that went to Adrenaline once they saw how good DNX looked. I even know some places finishing for film-out at DNX(on the sly of course). I think this doesn't bode well for Symphony sales more than DS. If you can finish in MC the majority of the work that used to be sent to Symphony, where is the motivation to upgrade?

I think DS has a great future, it can handle 4:4:4 as well as the 2K and 4K jobs. Graphics, Compositing etc., Symphony on the other hand...

It looks like things are popping up in Montreal now. Hopefully there are some pleasant surprises coming.

You're welcome for the great tracker by the way. The algorithm is pure DS The Spectramatte keyer is neat, but like the tracker is still not complete(how about shapes for instance). I guess no product is perfect yet. Once they develop the McDS we can all sing Koombayah and roast marshmallows. Until then we can help each other support the Avid products across the line.

Michael

Michael,

You're ansolutely right, all our editors use DS/MC interchange-ably (to varying degrees of expertise, of course), and there are definitely benefits on both sides.

I was just putting across our present predictament.  We need to invest in at least another HD suite (probably 2).  Considered DS Assist a while back - (tried it out, didn't work, no support, dropped the idea) - and now with the massive price-drop of MC/Symph and faster/more real-time machines, it's essentially a no-brainer.  Considered MC over Symph - but again for the additional power at that price, we're probably going Symph, we'll have to wait and see.

Genuinely looking forward to seeing what Montreal has up there sleeves, might completely surprised us all.