Hi everyone,

I'm creating a new thread here to discuss any feedback users of Titler+ in Media Composer 2022.4. 

Avid Titler+ Updates - This release includes a number of updates for the Avid Titler+ tool, including:

- New Improved Titler+ Dashboard with dedicated Font, Transformation, and Style sections

- New Alignment Tools to easily position and align titles and shapes

- Reorganized Effect Editor to reflect the changes in the Titler+ Dashboard

- Typing speed performance improvements

- 80+ bug fixes (Since January alone)

References:

Here is the main documentation page for Media Composer 2022.4:
https://avid.secure.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/User_Guide/Media-Composer-2022-Documentation 

Here is the "What's New" which includes Titler+ on Page 6:
https://resources.avid.com/SupportFiles/attach/WhatsNew_MediaComposer_v22.4.pdf

Here is a note from the Titler+ Team on what to expect in the next few versions being released:
https://community.avid.com/forums/t/205523.aspx 

I am eager to try out this new version of Titler+, but have been burned in the past with compatibility issues with previous versons of Media Composer on OSX.

The show i am on mainly uses Titler+ for subtitles. I have had issues with titles loading in different sizes and screen placement on older verison of Media Composer that other editors are working on.

Is there any sort of docmentation on Titler+ backwards compatabiltiy so I can make sure I can use the improved tool but still have the abiltiy to hand off to facilities running say 2020.12.6? Usually desire to stay in parity with Media Composer versions, but this update could save a lot time and pain.

No, I don't believe there is. 

I hear many horror stories of titler + effects not carrying over properly between versions. The font would change for example when opening the same sequence in a earlier version of Media Composer. I personally haven't experienced this so far. 

I think you'll find it's best to do some tests on your own to see if the titles carry over between your specific versions. 

Hi Chris!

Here's my feedback.

Feels snappier! Yay!

The updates are all nice. Simpler and easier to find controls = better!

STILL locks up my system when I try to change the color on any text! Boo!

This bug has been in the tool since its initial release. What gives? I don't do anything fancy. Just type some text, then fool around with fonts, placement. Tne new tweaks are nice. they make things like text placement really fast. When I select text and try to change the color though? I get locked out of doing anything. I can't even quit the app. I have to force quit. Really? I'm kinda astonished this hasn't been fixed.

Also, if the team is looking at revisions, I have to ask why they keep thie extra floating palatte as the main window for the tool, rather than integrate all the functionality into the effects adjustment window, like most other plugins. It's honestly annoying that I have to control the tool from two different windows, and I bet that palatte split is in some way why the color correction bug hasn't been fixed.

That said (or written), I want to believe! I do. Hope springs eternal that one day, Title+ be on par with other NLE's text tools.

100% agree with this!

mcdannyj:

Also, if the team is looking at revisions, I have to ask why they keep thie extra floating palatte as the main window for the tool, rather than integrate all the functionality into the effects adjustment window, like most other plugins. It's honestly annoying that I have to control the tool from two different windows

mcdannyj:

Also, if the team is looking at revisions, I have to ask why they keep thie extra floating palatte as the main window for the tool, rather than integrate all the functionality into the effects adjustment window, like most other plugins. It's honestly annoying that I have to control the tool from two different windows, and I bet that palatte split is in some way why the color correction bug hasn't been fixed.

I understand that the separation of the controls from one location (classic Title Tool) to two locations (Titler+) is disruptive to many people's muscle memory.  However, it is incredibly important that everyone remembers WHY this was done.

Back in 2018, it was revealed that Apple would be removing functionality in its macOS that would allow the classic Title Tool to work in forthcoming macOS. There was no physical way to simply replace the code with some sort of new code because the "stuff" needed to do so was simply not available. It was decided that a new method of titling (eventually Titler+) needed to be created. 

There was a HUGE outreach to all of Avid's customers, both publicly and privately, to ask everyone what things they would like to see changed about the current way the Title Tool was working. I remember seeing lists and lists of responses. Half of everyone out there loved the classic Title Tool and wanted to make it even simpler than it was. The other half out there hated the classic Title Tool and wanted it to be bolstered significantly, almost into a replacement for After Effects. The input was fiercely polarized, making decisions difficult to navigate. One thing was consistent however -- all industries, from Hollywood to TV to individual freelancers and so on, reported to Avid that that the method of creating each new title and having it result in a new master clip and media file in a bin was a universally disliked trait of the old system. 

The obvious choice to everyone at the time to fix that was to simply make titles become effects. This would allow an editor to make all sorts of changes, but not to need to render any of them, nor result in the titles getting populated into bins and into the managed AvidMediafiles folders. 

Now... Fast forward to today, and there's a huge number of people forgetting all of that.

Chris Bové:

One thing was consistent however -- all industries, from Hollywood to TV to individual freelancers and so on, reported to Avid that that the method of creating each new title and having it result in a new master clip and media file in a bin was a universally disliked trait of the old system. 

I am really really shocked by this Chris... I work in UK broadcast, by far the biggest user of Avid here, and I don't know a single editor who would single this out as an issue and not a necessary feature and indeed a major problem with the new Titler+. On an average series that goes back 15+ seasons we use hundreds and hundreds of titles and the ability to re-create them and lay them as seperate alphaed media is paramount - who exactly were these people?

But Chris, this doesn't explain the two-window approach with overlapping funcionality between the two of them. Why not put it all in the effect editor window (along with being able to click and manipulate in the record monitor).

If there is no way this will ever happen...could we add a button to open the Titler+ window from inside the effect editor? Since Titler+ is an effect like all others now, the proper way to open and edit one that's already placed in the sequence would be opening the effect editor.

Chris Bové:

The obvious choice to everyone at the time to fix that was to simply make titles become effects. This would allow an editor to make all sorts of changes, but not to need to render any of them, nor result in the titles getting populated into bins and into the managed AvidMediafiles folders. 

Now... Fast forward to today, and there's a huge number of people forgetting all of that.

Chris Bové:

One thing was consistent however -- all industries, from Hollywood to TV to individual freelancers and so on, reported to Avid that that the method of creating each new title and having it result in a new master clip and media file in a bin was a universally disliked trait of the old system. 

I have never in 31 years of using Avid heard anyone, let alone myself, express this.

I have found the ability to re-create tiltles in the way the title tool did fast and very useful.

So that makes at least two of us...

David

Mercer:

Chris Bové:

One thing was consistent however -- all industries, from Hollywood to TV to individual freelancers and so on, reported to Avid that that the method of creating each new title and having it result in a new master clip and media file in a bin was a universally disliked trait of the old system. 

I am really really shocked by this Chris... I work in UK broadcast, by far the biggest user of Avid here, and I don't know a single editor who would single this out as an issue and not a necessary feature and indeed a major problem with the new Titler+. On an average series that goes back 15+ seasons we use hundreds and hundreds of titles and the ability to re-create them and lay them as seperate alphaed media is paramount - who exactly were these people?

Hi Mercer, 

Forgive me for asking, What advantage does that workflow offer over simply dragging the titler + effect into a bin, and re-using that "title bin" for other projects within a series?

Philip Kapadia:

Hi Mercer, 

Forgive me for asking, What advantage does that workflow offer over simply dragging the titler + effect into a bin, and re-using that "title bin" for other projects within a series?

Philip,

1. The title "effect" is already in the bin.

2. It is already rendered.

The point being made was that Mercer and I were surprised that this workflow was universally objected to...

Chris - 

Thanks for your response! I haven't forgotten how the old title tool operated, but I don't particularly miss it. This isn't about muscle memory being broken, at least for me... I think, and I totally understand the need to re-build the code to deal with modern OSes. I even mostly like the new implementation of the title tool.

You said this! >>>> "The obvious choice to everyone at the time to fix that was to simply make titles become effects. This would allow an editor to make all sorts of changes, but not to need to render any of them, nor result in the titles getting populated into bins and into the managed AvidMediafiles folders."

Thank you! This part of your response is, I think, the first time I've understood, as a non-coder, why the Title+ tool took the direction it has. A title is not an effect, and vice-versa. Great! Whatever under-the-hood coding is needed that keeps Title+ from being an effect is not, for me the crux of the argument though. It's mostly this, to quote jcmcnamee:

"this doesn't explain the two-window approach with overlapping funcionality between the two of them. Why not put it all in the effect editor window (along with being able to click and manipulate in the record monitor)."

From a usability and clarity-of-interface standpoint, why is the functionality split in the way it's been split? If the coders need to bust out the controls to a separate window (as opposed to the old title tool, where the controls were bolted onto the title tool window... because the old tool was it's own separate program, right?) why are there parameter controls in what looks like the effects control window... if a Title+ piece of media isn't an effect?

I really really hate to point to Premiere  (I'm sure y'all do as well) but stay with me for a second. They do something similar to Title+ in that you can just start typing in the playback window and Premiere will create a new piece of title media. Premiere also has two places where you can control the parameters... in the effects control window for the clip itself on the source side, and in the parameter controls window that comes up if you go into their "Graphics" mode. If you've used Pr, raise your hand if you make adjustments on the source side of the effect. When I work in Premiere these days, I think I always go into Graphics mode to make adjustments. What makes it easy to use is the fact that the controls are layed out in window (in a mode or workspace, call it what you will) that is built into the main interface. And as far as I know, Premiere doesn't proclaim itself to be a modal NLE.

Now... Title+ is defnitely making strides towards the same level of clarity and effciency of operations. Maybe after writing this tome, I am making an argument about my muscle memory getting borked, but it seems to me, that main floating window is, to quote David Letterman, pants.  IMHO, one of the solutions to the Title+ quagmire would be to make the Title+ tool part of a truly separate mode. Not just have individual editors creating their own Workspaces where they've opened up the Title+ tool and saved it, but... you know... a title creation, or "graphics" mode? Just like how Avid can be flipped into a Workspace/mode for Color Correction, or Audio Mixing. And when you switch into that workspace, ALL the controls for Title+ are in one place and there's no duplication of functionality. Maybe Avid currently does that, and I've just missed it?

Oh, and maybe they could fix that color correction lockup bug. Hope springs eternal!

Okay... Sorry for the tome. Stepping off the soap box!

Philip Kapadia:

Hi Mercer, 

Forgive me for asking, What advantage does that workflow offer over simply dragging the titler + effect into a bin, and re-using that "title bin" for other projects within a series?

Sorry Phiip, yes David is spot on with the difference and the ability to instantly re-create that media, even if it is 10 years old and lay it to any length over any shot. FX always are subject to change when you copy them to a bin. An example we use continully are straps that are multi-layered saved sub-sequences, with titles (both legacy and Marquee, and alpha animated graphics). My total surprise was not that Titler+ could not move us into different ways, eventually of achieving the same thing but that anyone who has edited with Avid over that last many years would find this the main reason, universally to move away from Legacy Title Tool - because as both I and David show it's certainly not shared here in major UK broadcast.

I might add that I know very few editors who will even attempt to use Titler+ at all and many more who simply don't know about it. I tried to use it when I took over my current series as online editor and with a view to get the offline editors to move to it - it was simply unworkable and still is I'm afraid. Most facilities are several versions behind a current release too (because of rigorous testing and stability roll out) - it will take I estimate 2 years or thereabouts for most large facilities to be on 2022, as it stands today.

Mercer:

Philip Kapadia:

Hi Mercer, 

Forgive me for asking, What advantage does that workflow offer over simply dragging the titler + effect into a bin, and re-using that "title bin" for other projects within a series?

Sorry Phiip, yes David is spot on with the difference and the ability to instantly re-create that media, even if it is 10 years old and lay it to any length over any shot. FX always are subject to change when you copy them to a bin. An example we use continully are straps that are multi-layered saved sub-sequences, with titles (both legacy and Marquee, and alpha animated graphics). My total surprise was not that Titler+ could not move us into different ways, eventually of achieving the same thing but that anyone who has edited with Avid over that last many years would find this the main reason, universally to move away from Legacy Title Tool - because as both I and David show it's certainly not shared here in major UK broadcast.

I might add that I know very few editors who will even attempt to use Titler+ at all and many more who simply don't know about it. I tried to use it when I took over my current series as online editor and with a view to get the offline editors to move to it - it was simply unworkable and still is I'm afraid. Most facilities are several versions behind a current release too (because of rigorous testing and stability roll out) - it will take I estimate 2 years or thereabouts for most large facilities to be on 2022, as it stands today.

 

Okay, understand. Thanks for explaining.

In that case - a "render to bin" sort of setting within the title tool would be ideal? it would render the current title as a alpha matte into a bin.

David Yardley:

Chris Bové:

One thing was consistent however -- all industries, from Hollywood to TV to individual freelancers and so on, reported to Avid that that the method of creating each new title and having it result in a new master clip and media file in a bin was a universally disliked trait of the old system. 

I have never in 31 years of using Avid heard anyone, let alone myself, express this.

I have found the ability to re-create tiltles in the way the title tool did fast and very useful.

So that makes at least two of us...

David

+1, and I suspect many, many more. I know of no one asking for this, and certainly did not read about that odd conclusion here, or elsewhere. Sadly, sounds like a false justifiation for a very misplaced path towards the need for a Mac-compatible titler. 

And of course, that was four years ago...more than sufficient time to correct. For me, it was far too little, too late in the game - after 30 years as a Media Composer owner, I ended my renewal for my last remaining license in Dec. 2021, a year after the then Customer Advocate promised significant improvements in Titler+ in the course of 2021. History proves otherwise, and I was done with the hopeful smoke being blown by Avid's advocates here in the forums.