www.filterforge.com - Feature Wishlist

Simple Batch Rendering

Crapadilla — Tue, 21 May 2013 20:15:49 -0400

Crapadilla, Thu, 16 Nov 2006 12:52:57 -0500
I know the topic of animation has been touched here and there in feature requests (and the FF team is probably weary reading it), but since I view this as my personal most wanted feature of all time, I am going to request it again here: A simple batch rendering capability with rudimentary keyframing within Filter Forge.

Quote
onyXMaster wrote elsewhere: Batch processor is certainly possible (even for frames of different sizes).

Now this doesn't have to bloat FF up into a full-blown animation package. Rather, it could be very simple: Give us an interface that asks for an output path, the number of frames to be rendered and allow two values to be entered there for each control of the filter, one value for the first and one value for the last frame. Then do a simple linear interpolation of the values for all frames inbetween at rendertime. And be sure to output the rendermaps as well.

I am quite sure this would make many animators and compositors/VFX guys VERY happy, who wouldn't have to hold their breath for a compositing package plugin anymore, and it should be rather simple to implement...

:dgrin:

Igor Lorents, Fri, 17 Nov 2006 08:38:18 -0500
Actually, we do have an internal command-line render utility. Not sure our QA dept has ever seen it :D but it works pretty well while it is in the debug environment :D

Anyway, it doesn't have any interface to provide ranges for controls' values, nor rules to control interpolation within that range. And I'm not sure it will ever have features like that. And of course no key-frames.

Crapadilla, Fri, 17 Nov 2006 19:50:29 -0500
Hey, I'd even be using some external hack if it saved me from having to setup and render each frame manually. FF is just too sweet in too many ways to not use it in animation. And there's nothing like hitting 'Batch Render' and calling it a night...

:dgrin:

timetourist, Thu, 22 Feb 2007 03:08:28 -0500
hey crapadilla its wierd reading your own toughts written by someone else months earlier :D

...last night i was thinking this exact same funktionality & interface. exept i would have called it "sequence rendering" and instead of "linear interpolation" would have written something like "those curve control thingys"
...hehee

to a person who dont know nothing about coding software this would seem like a simple thing to add compared to the effect it would have in sales. it would look so damn good right there on the "key features" list.

is this in reality a ridiculous ammount of work and not gonna happen... or should we keep this dream alive?? ;)

uglyboys, Fri, 14 Jan 2011 10:21:57 -0500
try it inside photoshop for batch rendering.
I usually do it.
but it involves single setting only

Equator, Sun, 16 Jan 2011 07:40:37 -0500
Crapadilla, exellent proposition!
But, first of all, batch rendering must be in GUI-mode, not 'command line'.
In command line mode this will be very inconveniently.

uglyboys, Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:15:17 -0500
I have been using rendering sequence of pics in an animation via photoshop batch.
but now i got a new problem. I want to render all images used as texture for my 3d project.
But i have to render every texture manually as they are different filters or different presets at least. I learner to group them (only 1 fav folder for this). BUt i found no tool for batch rendering all filters in my fav folder or at least with option to select the filters and presets u want to render. It would be a great tool. Even if every filter is rendered at same pixels (again option to choose pixel for each render will be great) and obviously it will be great to have it in GUI.

Moreover i may render each texture individually but the problem is Filterforge has no notification sound at the end of rendering which will be again a useful feature or else we need to spend all time in front of monitors to see it rendering or keep guessing its done or not.

uglyboys, Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:18:11 -0500
And it will be great if FF cud render all maps of a 3d filter instead of rendering singles. I need to render each map seperately. 1 for difuse, 1 for bump and so on

Equator, Fri, 20 Jan 2012 11:29:29 -0500
very actual topic!

mwoods, Mon, 23 Jan 2012 09:58:20 -0500
I keep getting emails asking me to upgrade to Filter Forge 3.0.
I look at the feature list, and there is nothing new that I really want or need.
I would upgrade in a heartbeat if it had better animation capability.
I have used the photoshop batch, but its clunky, and doesn't give me all the controls I want.

My preference would be an Adobe After Effects plugin that would let me keyframe the control properties of the filter.
I read at one point that the FF team was looking into doing this, and was hoping to see it in FF3.
I work in motion graphics, use AE all the time, and would happy to be on a beta test team for it.
I would kill for a Filter Forge AE plugin.

-Matt

SpaceRay, Mon, 23 Jan 2012 11:53:30 -0500
:D Animation inside Filter Forge ???? :?: FF plugin for AE ? :?:

Are you really serious asking for this knowing what FF Inc. can do ?

I have a very good answer for this taking a quote form a very good answer given by Morgantao in this thread here

Quote
Morgantao wrote: (well, I have modified it to be adapted to this thread) Sorry mwoods, that option is to be implemented in FF 136 (Coming out September 2214). Untill then there's nothing you can do to have any kind of animation inside filter Forge

:D

If you will ONLY upgrade to a new version of FF until it gets animation, well please take a sit and wait for it, although I think that most probably we wil find you like in the future like the image shown below after waiting for it :D :D

The only possible solution for you now is to get the Genetica software, altough if you need animation, it is very expensive to buy unless you get a 50% discount that happen sometimes. Now in this moment they are having a 30% discount, although the real price is 899$

Morgantao, Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:30:47 -0500
:D Nice adaption SpaceRay :D

mwoods, Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:13:28 -0500
I'm not saying I will only upgrade if FF gets animation. I'm saying in a tight economy we have to choose what software to buy/upgrade. My primary job is motion graphics. Better animation support (particularly AE support) would transform Filter Forge from a neat tool that I use only occasionally because its cumbersome and doesn't fit into my workflow to a major tool that I would use frequently. I am more likely to upgrade a major tool I use frequently.

I feel like its important to add my vote to a thread requesting this feature.

Also, AE support has been talked about by the moderators before.
Back in 2006, Bella wrote that AE support was part of the long term plan in this thread here

The other thing that might get me to upgrade would be under the hood algorithm improvements that speed up filter rendering time.
Neither of these things are listed as features in the current update, thus I feel no pressing need to upgrade.

Cheers,

-Matt

SpaceRay, Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:33:00 -0500

Quote
mwoods wrote: Also, AE support has been talked about by the moderators before. Back in 2006, Bella wrote that AE support was part of the long term plan

There asre many things that have been said and promised in the forums since 2006 and many of them are still in development to be implemented in a possible future version that is not yet know when will it be.

The key words are "LONG TERM PLAN", this means it could be next year, or in 5 or 10 years from now, or in 2214 :D

Quote
mwoods wrote: I feel like its important to add my vote to a thread requesting this feature.

Of course that you are free to add your vote and make you wishlist and request for the features you want and need for FF, but this remains like that, a feature wishlist until there some news from FF that it will SURELY be included in a next version, and is not valid if they say that they will think about it, until tehy see that this is possible and doable.

MachinesInMotion, Tue, 21 May 2013 20:15:49 -0400
Until this is officially added, I hacked something together Here. I hope that helps. There's no keyframing, but it is an easier alternative to ffbatch for running filter forge over a large set of files.

Library Capability

IgnisSerpentus — Mon, 20 May 2013 17:01:36 -0400

IgnisSerpentus, Fri, 17 May 2013 17:33:03 -0400
K Id like to make a request for a library capability....

I attempted to make subfolders, to organize my own filters in a better way, and was saddened by the fact you can't. I need some kind of organization to be prevalent with work type things, so being able to add subfolders that I could separate all the filters I make into, would be awesome.

Unfortunately, for now, I ended up backing up my filters onto my slave and deleting some of them out of my physical library, so at least it was less chaotic.

SpaceRay, Mon, 20 May 2013 08:43:33 -0400
This has been already requested many times but it was not added, and until FF 3.0 there is no way to make subfolders or create your own inside filter forge.

Although there are some good news:

Right now and with Filter Forge 3.0 there is an alternative that has been done kindly and greatly by Saragani and Morgantao

Morgantao´s New tool for custom organizing and managing FF library!!!!

FFCat is out of beta!

Please, help to test the New tool for custom organizing FF filters !!

----------------------------------

FILTER MANAGER IN FF 4.0

And the second good news is that finally the filter forge team will include custom filter organization and management inside filter forge 4.0

So you will be able to make your own folders and subfolders, there is more informationb about this in this thread

Official discussion: upcoming Filter Manager

but there is no date when is going to be this available (well it will be before the end of this year for sure) and if it is going to be inside a beta version or in the final version.

IgnisSerpentus, Mon, 20 May 2013 17:01:36 -0400
Awesome! Thanks for the heads up, and for the links.

Be able to replace and update obsolete components in some easy way

SpaceRay — Mon, 20 May 2013 10:28:56 -0400

SpaceRay, Mon, 20 May 2013 10:18:15 -0400
Now that the FF 4.0 is going on the works, it would be good to be able to have some old filters that are great and very useful BUT that have some possible problems with the new version that could be able to have some way to replace or upd ate old obsolete components of some old filters with the new versions and so be able to solve some problems.

As it is now there is no easy way to do it, and it is many times a tedious, boring and complex thing to do, specially on complex filters where this old components is already attached to many others components, and the only way I see to replace it is to put the new component and rebuild all the complex mesh of links with the other components, AND also you have to copy and modify the settings of the replaced component so it has the same settings as the old one, so after this, is not something that you would like to do often. :(

Would be great if there could be a way where you could:

1 - select a component and then after select an option where could be for example "upd ate component version" and then it would replace the old one with the new version and keeping the same links to others components and it´s own se ttings.

2 - Select the new version component fr om the components menu and drag and drop it over the old obsolete version of the same component and so then it would replace the old one with the new version and keeping the same links to others components and it´s own settings.

3 - An automatic way to update all the old components of any filter you may choose

4 - or any other possible way that could be for replacing old obsolete components.

This is not a new feature request and this has been already been in the feature wishlist since 2006

Replace Module. in 2006

Update Obsolete Component Option in 2007

GMM, Mon, 20 May 2013 10:28:56 -0400
SpaceRay, please don't create new redundant threads if you find an old topic on the subject. Bumping an old thread is ok; creating multiple redundant threads is... unwelcome.

PS. Currently we've got no plans to introduce a component auto-updater in FF 4.0.

Filter list preview much bigger? Filter library inside FF bigger too?

SpaceRay — Mon, 20 May 2013 10:20:47 -0400

SpaceRay, Wed, 08 Jun 2011 10:15:44 -0400
There is something I have been thinking since long ago, and now that FF 3.o is in development I want to give a suggestion and if it in someway is possible to be apllied to FF 3.0 or to FF 4.0.

My own problem is that for searching a downloaded filter in the very small and tiny little window at the up left side of Filter Forge program is for me very difficult. I can´t see well the very small thumbnails of each filter, I only choose it really by it´s name as I remember it. I am using a 1600x1200 resolution, so perhaps this could also be the reason, and I have been thinking to buy a 1900 x 1280 monitor, but this would reduce even more the window with the filters.

So what I want to suggest if there could someway to give an option to enlarge and make bigger this filter window and to be able to have larger thumbnails previews of each filter downloaded, and be able to see them better.

I thought that perhaps it could be resizable, or have a zoom option, or could even could have a fullscreen option when you are looking to them, and the get back to normal size after choosing, or whatever the FF team finds better solution or any of the forum users can think of.

FILTER LIBRARY BROWSER INSIDE FILTER FORGE

The same as before, when I go to the Filter Library Browser inside FF, I would really love to have the filters previews as it happens in the filter forge website, that when choosing a filter you get a really big preview of the filter so you can see it very good and high quality and not the tiny window that opens in the right.

Could in some way have the filter library browser the same page size and all the info the same as in the website but inside Filter Forge in the Browser Library ?

I think that later I will put a graphical photos to explain better what I am trying to say.

Thanks very much

SpaceRay, Tue, 16 Aug 2011 05:48:37 -0400
Some time ago I have put this thread and did not show a screenshot of what I mean with this

I attach a screenshot of my monitor with 1680 x 1050 and I usually find very difficult to see the tiny thumbnails of the filter. Can you see well them and is just me that have bad sight and can´t see the details ? I already wear glasses, but even then I can´t.

DO you have a 1680 x 1050 monitor or 1920 x 1280 FULL HD or even a 2540 x 1440 ??

Do you see very well and can see the details of the filters thumbnails to be able to choose one just by the thubnail look ?

The thumbnails gets smaller and smaller with higher resolutions and is each time more difficult to see the tiny thumbnail filter preview, and is better for me to choose by name.

This is why I was asking if it would be possible to have an option to make the filter thumbnails preview bigger.

Kraellin, Wed, 17 Aug 2011 09:01:06 -0400
both a tabbed interface and adjustable interface object windows have been suggested before, along with undocking and moving interface windows around.

SpaceRay, Sat, 20 Aug 2011 13:31:07 -0400
I asked and suggested this in June 2011, but nobody answered (because probably are already many tired for asking ans suggesting this and FF does not listen and do not care of what FF users want) and only Kraellin is keeping asking for this

Quote
Kraellin wrote: both a tabbed interface and adjustable interface object windows have been suggested before, along with undocking and moving interface windows around.

THanks for answering and I like that you keep asking for it.

Congratulations for being SO PATIENCE !!! You have already been asking for this tabbed and asjustable interface SINCE 2006 and still in 2011 you are still keeping asking for it.

And it seems that as there is no news that this will be added or changed in FF 3.0 we will have to continue waiting until FF team decides to change sometime the User interface.

GMM, Mon, 20 May 2013 10:12:45 -0400
SpaceRay, asking the same question in multiple places spoils your karma. I've screened the duplicate in this thread.

SpaceRay, Mon, 20 May 2013 10:20:47 -0400
Sorry GMM, I wrote the text on this thread and then after I though that would be better to ask it in the filter manager thread, but I forgot to copy the text and delete the one from here.

Official discussion: upcoming Filter Manager

Vladimir Golovin — Mon, 20 May 2013 09:52:30 -0400

Vladimir Golovin, Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:59:50 -0400
Our number one feature request is the ability to sort filters into custom categories / folders / favorites. We are planning to release this functionality in the upcoming Beta 2 of Filter Forge 4.0.

In this thread, I'd like to discuss the proposed implementation of the Filter Manager:

Vladimir Golovin, Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:59:59 -0400
I'm continuously updating this text, so re-read it periodically:

[list]
[*]Back and Forward buttons work exactly the same way as they do in Finder on Mac or Explorer on Windows, so users on both platforms will find them familiar.

[*]Custom Filters is where user-created filters are stored. The folders in Custom Filters are physical: that is, you can specify an exact folder in the file system where they will be stored, and all subfolders in these are also physical, they'll have a corresponding folder in the file system. This is nice for backup and version control systems.

You can freely rename or delete these folders and their subfolders, and you can rearrange the contents of each storage folder (however you can't move a top-level storage folder into another), but remember that all this will be reflected in the file system, which is why you should be careful if you have a storage folder listed for backup in some software, or, say, it is a part of a local Git repo.

These storage folders will be tolerant to 'foreign' subfolders and files not belonging to Filter Forge. This is needed because version control systems may leave their own files or subfolders in folders they index.

One of these custom storage filters is marked as Default (initially this will be My Filters). When you edit a library filter, download a custom filter via an .ffxml URL or double-click a .ffxml file in your Explorer / Finder, it will go into the default filter storage folder.

If you change the location of a top-level storage folder (this is done via a special dialog box), the contents of the folder will be migrated to the new location, in a manner similar to Outlook / Outlook Express storage folders. If you rename a top-level storage folder outside of Filter Forge, it will cease to be visible inside FF, and all shortcuts to filters that were there (e.g. Favorites) will be lost. (Related: We probably will need to scan newly-added storage folders for filters).

My Filters is just one of these custom filter storage folders, not some special entity. It's just created on installation and marked as default. You can safely delete it if you want and create another storage folder or multiple ones, with any names you like (assuming that they pass the naming requirements of your file system).

[*]Filter Library structure remains rigid and controlled by our editors. You can't create subfolders under Filter Library, you can't rename them, but you probably will be able to delete them, together with donwloaded filters they contain. To organize them, use Favorites:

[*]Favorites are what you call custom categories. They can contain shortcuts to both library filters and user-created filters. Same filters may belong to multiple Favorites folders (but duplicates in the same folder are not allowed), which essentially makes them similar to tags.

Unlike Custom Filters, Favorites is a virtual folder: it doesn't have a corresponding folder structure in the file system. Just as before, Favorites will contain shortcuts to file, not actual copies, so it's always safe to delete a filter from Favorites.

[*]Recent Filters, Search, Trash, and whatever else we have time and desire to add to this list are virtual folders, whose contents depend on the purpose of the folder. Some of these virtual folders will allow to alter their contents (e.g. you can delete filters permanently from Trash), and some, such as Search or Recent, won't. So far, only Search is going to be implemented, but I'd like to hear what other virtual folders you'd like to see.

[*]Drag-and-drop with multi-selection: the interface will support drag-and-drop and multiple item selection in the Filter pane but not in the Folder pane (similarly to Windows 7 Explorer).

[*]Draggable separator between the tree and filter pane: the screenshot above doesn't show it, but there will be a separator that allows you to resize the width of the tree area.

[/list]

So, am I missing anything? I'd like to spot any potential problems with the above design before we go full steam ahead into implementation.

Andrew B., Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:20:33 -0400
Looks good. A couple suggestions

1. The tree needs to be compact, so the user can see more in the small window. Make the font in the tree display the same as the small one you use for filter names. Use smaller icons.

2. Under your "Recent Filters," I hope this is sorted descending by date of use. I also hope the user is able to sel ect one or multiple filters on this list and delete their shortcuts.

Questions.

1. It is hard to find newly downloaded filters. I have to look in every category to see what is bolded. It would be nice to have them show up in a virtual folder. Maybe the "Recent" folder.

2. If I download a filter fr om the forum (not the library), and open it, where will FF store it by default. Suppose it has no category.

Sphinx., Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:25:14 -0400
Thats damn good news! And the design seems solid :-)

Could you outline the preset thumbnail strategy?

Vladimir Golovin, Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:42:24 -0400
Andrew,

Quote
1. The tree needs to be compact, so the user can see more in the small window. Make the font in the tree display the same as the small one you use for filter names. Use smaller icons.

I just used a Windows 7 Explorer screenshot for the mockup. The actual implementation should use a more compact presentation.

Quote
1. It is hard to find newly downloaded filters. I have to look in every category to see what is bolded. It would be nice to have them show up in a virtual folder. Maybe the "Recent" folder.

Recent Downloads could be implemented as a virtual folder that stores shortcuts, not filters. Shortcuts could be made deletable.

Quote
If I download a filter fr om the forum (not the library), and open it, where will FF store it by default. Suppose it has no category.

It goes into the custom filter storage folder marked as Default. You can set any storage folder under Custom Filters as a default. For most people, this will be My Filters. See the big text in the beginning of the thread for details.

Vladimir Golovin, Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:43:39 -0400

Quote
Could you outline the preset thumbnail strategy?

Sphinx, I'm not sure I understand the question. Please explain in as much detail as possible.

Morgantao, Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:40:15 -0400
I think Sphinx means "Can we move the presets around, or name them"? ;)

I would love to see custom keywords for filters. but that would probably require adding an additional tab after filter's About tab.

uberzev, Thu, 13 Sep 2012 23:28:11 -0400
"Recent Filters" could either mean the recently rendered or recently modified. I prefer the modified definition although you could add both sorting options.

"Custom Filters" > "My Filters" seems redundant to me, unless...
Filters that are loaded externally (for example a forum attachment) would be placed in a different sub-folder.

I realize you just used a Windows Explorer screenshot but I'd like the top level items (Filter Library, Custom Filters, Favorites, Recent) to have a more distinctive look compared to their subfolders. Make them more button-like...

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 02:24:28 -0400

Quote
I think Sphinx means "Can we move the presets around, or name them"?

Morgantao, the presets tab isn't affected by this feature, it's just got included into the mockup. (Though the presets could definitely use some drag-and-drop within the pane, to reorder them.)

Sphinx., Fri, 14 Sep 2012 11:50:12 -0400
Vlad, I'm thinking about the "cached" preset images for a Filter. When the filter is moved and copied etc - will the images also be copied, or do we have to wait for all presets to render again in the background? What do you plan here?

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 11:58:38 -0400
Sphinx, if the filter was moved or copied via Filter Manager, thumbnails will be moved/copied automatically, no preset rendering would be necessary.

Andrew B., Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:05:38 -0400
Regarding things like Recent, Searched, and Trash.

I see a need for easily finding recently edited, recently downloaded, and recently used. I guess recent downloads could be in a separate category. This stuff is at the bottom of the tree, so making a couple extra categories probably won't get in the way of anything.

Trash and Searched are also important.

I assume the user will be able to sel ect multiple sequential items fr om this history and delete them, without having to click one at a time.

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:31:00 -0400
Andrew,

Yes, Recent could have several separate subcategories like Downloaded, Edited, Used.

Regarding Trash, I don't yet have a clear idea where to put it, and creating a top-level section for just one sub-item doesn't sound as a good idea.

Recent searches could be placed directly under search, like this:

Search:
- Results
- Recent
-- "Flowers"
-- "Cats"
-- "Dogs"
- Saved
-- "Polycarbonates"
-- "Heterofractal"

Regarding deleting from history: if we decide to make history items deletable, they will support multi-selection.

Andrew B., Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:33:43 -0400
Are you talking about two different "recent" features here with one being a category as you have pictured in the photo above, and a different one being Recent under searches??? Personally, I don't see a need for recent searches.

If someone searches and finds what they need, they use it in some way. Then it shows up under the regular Recent feature--the one you have pictured with categories on the mockup you posted. And that one should be populated automatically. So I don't think you need a recent under searches.

With regard to users deleting the Recent entries, if it's not too hard to implement, I think it would be good.

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:40:48 -0400
Andrew, regarding recent searches, this just a possibility, and idea. For FF4.0 we want to release a bare-bones implementation, only basic stuff, no feature creep like Recent Searches.

uberzev, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:37:44 -0400
How about an option for larger thumbnails on the filter selection pane?

Seems like that wouldn't be too hard to implement.

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:53:16 -0400
Uberzev, that should be possible. We could use preset thumbnails: they're a bit larger and we already have them pre-rendered and delivered from the server.

uberzev, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:53:21 -0400
Mockup showing nicer category styling and larger thumbs...

Morgantao, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 02:14:24 -0400
+1 to uber's mockup :)

uberzev, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 02:28:52 -0400
Instead of calling it "Filter Library" how about "Library Filters"?

Small change but I think it makes a more logical progression...

-Filter Library
-Custom Filters

vs.

-Library Filters
-Custom Filters

Vladimir Golovin, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 04:44:09 -0400
Zev, large thumbnails look good. And while we're at it, we'll implement the tiled filter panel view, as suggested by the author of this mockup:

(But please, let's avoid over-excitement and keep the discussion informative and to-the-point. Spotting possible problems with the design is much more important.)

uberzev, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 05:17:49 -0400
For the tiled filter panel I'd like an option for big tiles with overlaid text...

Skybase, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 05:18:16 -0400
This is actually really cool. Now... where's the render window? :p

I think Uber's suggestion regarding that is neat. I typically try to save screen space so....

Crapadilla, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 05:23:28 -0400
+1 for large thumbnails & tiled filter panel view.

What about sorting? Currently filter sorting is hardwired to alphabetic by filter name, but one could imagine sorting by tags, author, submit date, etc. Would this be any useful?

Vladimir Golovin, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 05:47:34 -0400
Uber, yes, that's almost exactly what I had in mind for larger previews. However, it will be only possible if we already have the thumbnails of the appropriate size pre-rendered. We probably do pre-render such or similar size (for the web pages), but I'm not sure if we download them to the client.

Vladimir Golovin, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 05:49:26 -0400
Dilla, any sensible sorting should be possible via the right-click menus, assuming that we have the data to feed to the sorting criteria.

uberzev, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 05:51:24 -0400

Quote
What about sorting? Currently filter sorting is hardwired to alphabetic, but one could imagine sorting by tags, author, submit date, etc. Would this be any useful?

Yeah that would be great.

However there might be some redundancy with the "Recent" virtual folder, so I have a solution to merge the two ideas.

I think virtual folders should not have any sorting ability that is different from other folders, other than the ability to remember their sort order.

Thus to make a "recently edited" folder we first create a virtual folder set to show all filters.
Then we change the sorting method to recently edited.

uberzev, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 06:20:06 -0400
My idea for the structure...

LIBRARY FILTERS
• Effects
• Textures

CUSTOM FILTERS
• My Filters
• Downloaded Filters

FAVORITES

SEARCH

SAVED SEARCHES
• Recently Edited
• Simple Filters
• Surface Filters
• Library Filters > Authored by Me
• Custom Filters > Effects
• Custom Filters > Textures

uberzev, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 21:39:31 -0400
8)

Skybase, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 22:45:36 -0400
That mockup is sweet stuff :)

Morgantao, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 04:28:40 -0400
Oh, something I would like to see is in the search, next to the name of the filter, how about it's category?
Right now you have to right click the filter and click Locate Category, which in turn takes you to the category, and leaves the search.

uberzev, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 04:48:26 -0400

Quote
Oh, something I would like to see is in the search, next to the name of the filter, how about it's category? Right now you have to right click the filter and click Locate Category, which in turn takes you to the category, and leaves the search.

Decent idea. I think a tooltip could take care of providing that info without having to add a new interface element.

Vladimir Golovin, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 05:18:25 -0400
Everyone, let's not get carried away with features. Finding out what's broken with the current design is much more important. By all means, do suggest features, improvements and mockups, I just wanted to remind us all about the main purpose of this thread.

uberzev, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 06:03:58 -0400
Sorry if we're overwhelming you.

There's a lot of pent up ideas. :D

PS
I'll be doing my part by not requesting a sports scores component.

Vladimir Golovin, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 06:24:41 -0400
No problem! Speaking of the design quality, I was quite surprised by how quickly this post has silenced all forum discussion of "custom categories". Not a single thread after it posted. The official discussion isn't exactly bustling with activity either, despite my repeated bumping.

I take that as a very, very good sign :)

Crapadilla, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 06:31:39 -0400
The silence is due to SpaceRay currently compiling an epic wall-O-text about 'custom categories'. I have a feeling it will crit quite hard...

:D

Crapadilla, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 07:00:18 -0400
Vlad,

Regarding the Custom Filters top-level folders in your mockup:

I take it that 'My Filters', 'Project 1' and 'Project 2' can originate from three completely different locations in the file system, and that we could theoretically have an infinite number of these 'top-level' folders?

Will there be a way to keep 'foreign' subfolders from showing up inside the Filter Manager as category folders?

Vladimir Golovin, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 07:07:35 -0400
Now that's the kind of questions I'd like to see here!

Quote
I take it that 'My Filters', 'Project 1' and 'Project 2' can originate from three completely different locations in the file system, and that we could theoretically have an infinite number of these 'top-level' folders?

Yes.

Quote
Will there be a way to keep 'foreign' subfolders from showing up inside FF as category folders?

They shouldn't show up unless they have .ffxml files inside.

Edit: On the other hand, this would eliminate the ability to create new folders from FF GUI, because an empty folder would be immediately hidden because it doesn't yet contain any .ffxml files.

Edit2: On the third hand, these extraneous files and folders should usually be hidden. I just checked with the programmers: Mercurial, Git and Bazaar don't litter in subfolders, SVN leaves a hidden folder in every subfolder.

So, the least resistance solution so far is: don't show hidden folders in Filter Manager (but move them during migrations).

Crapadilla, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 07:25:44 -0400
Creation/deletion/renaming of category subfolders inside the 'top-level' folders can be achieved via both the file system and the Filter Manager UI, correct? The Filter Manager will always sync with the file system and vice versa?

If the Filter Manager always accurately reflects the subfolder structure found in the file system, this also means that we can have structures of arbitrarily nested category subfolders within our 'top-level' folders, not just the 'one-level-deep' structure shown in the mockup?

Vladimir Golovin, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 07:44:29 -0400
1. Regarding the sync between Filter Manager and file system:

Yes, ideally it should sync. However, this is tricky. For example if you move a storage folder when FF is closed, it can't know where you moved it, so it will consider the folder to be missing or deleted, and will drop thumbnail images for filters that were there, and delete all orphaned shortcuts from Favorites, Recent etc.

But when you add some new .ffxml files into an existing storage folder when FF is closed, it will pick them up during startup folder scan and render thumbnails for them.

Moving filters between storage folders outside of FF counts as two events: 'a filter was removed from a storage folder' (with thumbnail and shortcut cleanup etc.) and 'a filter was added to (another) storage folder' (with thumbnail rendering, re-indexing for search etc.)

To sum up, the benefit of reorganizing filters within Filter Manager is the persistence of thumbnails, search index and Favorite/Recent shortcuts.

2. Regarding the subfolder depth in Custom Filters:

Yes, you can have arbitrary subfolder structure and depth in Custom Filters, despite the mockup showing a single level depth.

Crapadilla, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 07:45:48 -0400
On a tangent:

Since the Filter Manager will probably consume a very "verticalish" area on the left of the Main UI when in full glory, are there any plans to relocate the Filter Controls to the vertical area between the Filter Manager and the Render Preview)?

In effect, this would lead to having only vertical dividers on the main UI. Since the filter controls can get rather 'vertically expansive' as well, this kind of layout could be much more screen-real-estate-efficient, no?

Vladimir Golovin, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 07:54:15 -0400
Regarding the vertical design: I don't yet have a definite opinion on it, but I'm dead sure that we're not touching that for this release. The programmers already have their plates full to the brim (Group debugging and Filter Manager being the biggest chunks of work). We'll implement Filter Manager first and see what UI needs will arise from that.

Crapadilla, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 07:58:33 -0400

Quote
But when you add some new .ffxml files into an existing storage folder when FF is closed, it will pick them up during startup folder scan and render thumbnails for them.

Meaning the Filter Manager will sync once on FF startup, but not during a running FF session? Will we get a Sync button to manually start a sync process?

Crapadilla, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 08:04:40 -0400
Regarding Favorites:

I take it we'll be able to create arbitrarily nested category folder structures within Favorites too, or is this a simple tag-list?

Vladimir Golovin, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 08:05:37 -0400
An important thing to note about bold top-level sections, i.e. Filter Library, Custom Filters, Favorites, Recent, Search etc.: These are not folders but "sections". They cannot contain filters or shortcuts, only subfolders.

As uberzev noted above, this leads to awkward redundancy in the default structure of subfolders of a new installation of FF:

Custom Filters (can't put filters here)
- My Filters (filters go here)

Favorites (can't put shortcuts here)
- My Favorites (shortcuts go here)

On the other hand, this will stimulate people to reduce the awkwardness by adding their own folders :D

Vladimir Golovin, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 08:11:54 -0400

Quote
Meaning the Filter Manager will sync once on FF startup, but not during a running FF session? Will we get a Sync button to manually start a sync process?

Good idea. This can be done via a Refresh menu item in the right-click menu belonging to a subfolder. This will have a side effect of being able to quickly refresh just a single folder.

Quote
we'll be able to create arbitrarily nested category folder structures within Favorites too

Yes. Favorites are a strange hybrid between taxonomy and "tagsonomy". They are organized like folders, with arbitrary depth and structure, but you can put the same filter (a shortcut to it, to be precise) into multiple Favorite subfolders!

Evernote uses a similar approach for their tags. They have nested tags, but nesting doesn't really mean anything, other than convenience for the user.

Also, Favorites (and other shortcut-storing folders) can only store shortcuts to filters. Shortcuts to folders are not supported.

Andrew B., Sun, 16 Sep 2012 12:16:34 -0400

Quote
Speaking of the design quality, I was quite surprised by how quickly this post has silenced all forum discussion of "custom categories". Not a single thread after it posted. The official discussion isn't exactly bustling with activity either, despite my repeated bumping.

I think this is because you got it right first time. Your first design provides the original structure at the top, adds flexibility of custom categories at the bottom, and allows full collapsing of compartments if the user wants them out of the way. It is very simple and powerful at the same time.

With regard to "recent," I can't follow what's going on in discussion. My vote is to have recent everything in it (download, modification, use) and see how that goes.

I saw you posted a mockup of a tiles view of filters. I love this layout because of easy navigation. But I have no idea how I am going to see the render screen in that layout. Maybe I'll just wait and see.

Vladimir Golovin, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 13:14:56 -0400

Quote
how I am going to see the render screen in that layout.

The mockup shows it enlarged to the maximum (via the draggable separator). The tiling is only visible when the area is wide enough (as shown in that picture), otherwise you'll see just a single column of filters, as usual.

uberzev, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 16:09:30 -0400

Quote
I saw you posted a mockup of a tiles view of filters.

Actually I did but Vlad sometimes speaks through me. :D

Sharandra, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 16:42:35 -0400
Would it be possible to add the option to open the filter editor with a double click on the filter?

Lock seamless tiling

TBH-1138 — Wed, 15 May 2013 01:43:44 -0400

TBH-1138, Tue, 14 May 2013 19:53:14 -0400
It's simple. You can force seamless tiling to always be on, just like how you can disable it.

Skybase, Tue, 14 May 2013 21:24:07 -0400
You mean like this?
http://www.filterforge.com/more/help/...rides.html

SpaceRay, Wed, 15 May 2013 01:43:44 -0400
OH! Thanks Skybase that I did not know that this override dialog existed and was available and this is because it is only inside the filter editor menu "Filter-->Overrides and have never seen it :blush:

Also thanks to TBH-1138 for asking this

So, I now know why there are some filters that you can´t use the size/pixels or variations :)

a seemingly Basic feature is missing. Pause / Resume

ddaydreams — Wed, 08 May 2013 12:04:54 -0400

ddaydreams, Fri, 03 May 2013 15:19:54 -0400
Need to be able to pause and resume a render.
Some renders can take hours or days. is that in the works? I was surprised to find that this feature is not in FF

SpaceRay, Sun, 05 May 2013 17:45:52 -0400
Yes! This could be a very good and useful idea, because FF takes almost all the CPU usage and leaves very little to do any other thing while rendering a very long render, specially one that can take many hours and even days on a very slow filter, high resolution and maybe slow computer.

As you say, is a basic and simple feature that seems that nobody (neither myself) has tought about it, and I agree that would be good to have and think that would be easy to add as a feature.

Other alternative would be to make FF faster than it is, but I do not think that this would be true anytime soon, although even then, it would still be good to have this "pause render"

Skybase, Mon, 06 May 2013 02:26:33 -0400
It's been discussed before! :) And I wanna see this happen.

"think that would be easy to add as a feature" lolol...

I guess SpaceRay should join as a programmer and add all these amazing "easy to add" features to FilterForge. Right? After all... these features are "easy to add" :p I'm excited.

GMM, Mon, 06 May 2013 04:26:37 -0400
Why not use a third-party tool for that? Process Explorer or even better PsSuspend can freeze running processes.

Skybase, Mon, 06 May 2013 06:31:41 -0400
Any Mac alternatives? :p

GMM, Mon, 06 May 2013 08:35:53 -0400
I'm not a Mac user but Google finds many instructions on using the killall -STOP command on Macs.

ddaydreams, Mon, 06 May 2013 10:36:59 -0400
Thanks GMM
I just tried Process Explorer, it worked fine. I had never considered that.
But still having something like that in FF would nice.

Second question, say that you have started a render and it's going to take 6 hours and want to shut down the computer after 3 hours and resume the rest of the render next week. One would need to save the render at the point of pause.
It would be nice to be able pickup the render where you left off with 3 hours left to go, rather than starting over. I don't think that Process Explorer or anything else can do that.

So my new feature request is to add "save render in progress" for resumption later.

SpaceRay, Tue, 07 May 2013 08:33:57 -0400

Quote
GMM Why not use a third-party tool for that? Process Explorer or even better PsSuspend can freeze running processes

WOW! I have already Process Explorer and use it much, BUT did not know that you could PAUSE any application, I only have used it to kill a process, application or service

And perhaps is even better your alternative PsSuspend

Thanks GMM for the news and suggestion about this

Quote
Skybase guess SpaceRay should join as a programmer and add all these amazing "easy to add" features to FilterForge. Right? After all... these features are "easy to add"

:D :D Like much your polite comment :D :D

Is true that I do not know nearly nothing about programming, and most of the times I speak, think and suppose things without knowing really how easy or hard could be to make something, and I am sorry for this as is not a good thing to do and give an opinion abouit something you really do not know, but on this one I said it would be "easy to add" because I do not think that stopping and pausing the rendering should be something very hard, complex and difficult to make and do not think there could be any technical or other problems.

What I like from this is that I have NOT thought about the GMM clever and very good alternative and that it is really not needed to be included in FF to be able to do it.

Also Is true that I can´t continue putting things like "easy to add" or "this does have to be much complex" or whatever if I really do not know about it and can´t really measure it and have a any proof about it

Thanks also to Skybase for his comment :)

Skybase, Tue, 07 May 2013 10:26:55 -0400
lol... I'm more saying that you should watch what you write, seriously. Even having those little statements can really deduct your credibility over the subject, plus it's awkward to read. I mean it's like my client saying "oh it'll be easy, right?" where I'd have to put my effort into drafting, designing, working, and reevaluating what I've done.... It's "work" after all.

Maybe I'm just over reacting to stuff. But I just don't appreciate statements that undermine what's being done. Yeh? Right? ;)

Burt, Wed, 08 May 2013 12:04:54 -0400
I've been using Sysinternals stuff for years and never considered using Process Explorer to pause FF or other programs - I usually just use it to find dependencies and such - great idea.

While you are discussing the pause option I remember some program I used that allowed incremental processing. For example say the processing invovles three distinct steps you would get an option to

Start
Step1 completed. Continue to Step 2 or Cancel?

etc

I haven't thought through all the implications but since we are on the subject figured I'd add my 2 cents.

Smudge Density Issue

Sphinx. — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:22:50 -0400

Sphinx., Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:30:55 -0500
The density parameter that..

Quote
Help Wrote: Defines the opacity fading of the layers composing the smudge. Lower values produce a shorter and softer trail which fades off quicker; higher values generally produce a longer and more solid trail.

..is not producing a fully opaque/solid result at 100. It looks like there is some bleeding from the adjacent smudged areas. The problem is reduced when you lower the Max Trail parameter - but so is the wanted smudge offset effect.

ThreeDee, Thu, 07 Feb 2013 11:03:51 -0500
Yes, please -- fully opaque at maximum setting!

Betis, Mon, 22 Apr 2013 02:45:38 -0400
+1!

GMM, Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:22:50 -0400
I'm moving the thread to the appropriate forum.

Unit component

ThreeDee — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 01:56:52 -0400

ThreeDee, Thu, 28 Mar 2013 06:57:27 -0400
Would it be feasible to add a Unit component, which would just pass one value forward for each outgoing branch (or loop iteration for FF 4)? This would be useful in those cases where you really just need to output a single value (grayscale or RGB) for RGB Math etc. It would have a Source input and pick the 0,0 (or .5,.5) value from it and forward it to any downstream sample calls. I would assume this to be much faster than having to evaluate every sample separately, like (I believe) all the current components do.

ThreeDee, Mon, 01 Apr 2013 08:23:04 -0400
Since this need was brought up by the new loop component, it might actually be better to add a Variable slave component wherein one can pass a single numeric result to the next stage of the loop, similar to the Randomizer, but user set. Also in this case, one would have to be able to pick the variable fr om an RGB or grayscale image, so the same idea as above but lim ited to the loop.

Sphinx., Mon, 01 Apr 2013 15:55:43 -0400
I used RGBA channels for that purpose in the Julia filter. That lead to the suggestion that FF added multichannel support in the sense that we can add additional channels which will be processed similar to r,g and b. But that is probably a lot of work and your suggestion seem more plausible. One could imagine 4-6 Aux HDR Inputs in the Loop node which can be "fetched" via slave nodes (even cooler would be to have a dynamic solution with x number of auxes). :-)

ThreeDee, Tue, 02 Apr 2013 03:18:33 -0400
Perhaps the simplest implementation of this idea would be to make the Lookup component have a "Flat fill" option to it where it would assume that the X and Y coordinates do not vary (pick the center point or 0,0 point and then look up that coordinate from the Source. The important thing is that the component would only have to look the point up once (per loop) and pass that value. (As opposed to sampling it for every pixel + every subpixel needed for antialiasing.)

I wouldn't mind a similar solution as a Loop slave component. The main thing is to be able to pass one value in the same fashion as the slave components.

Back to the attempted Non-overlapping circles filter, if I replace the Lookup with a Randomizer, I can render one thousand loops or more. But attempting to look up ONE sample from Accumulated, I get to about 7 iterations. The situation should be comparable: Pass one random value or pass one sampled value. Yet one runs linearly, the other exponentially unless something is changed.

Unfortunately the current implementation wrecks about 9 out of 10 loop-based ideas I have.

ThreeDee, Tue, 02 Apr 2013 03:22:37 -0400
My latest attempt gave me a good descriptive word for this phenomenon: It is njyldgarkn annoying!

I tried to make a filter that would generate proper letter spacing for a line of type. I can get up to 10 letters (non-antialiased) before my hair starts to fall off from waiting.

(The letters are picked by random, variation 24 gave me this Scandinavian-sounding swearword.)

Vladimir Golovin, Tue, 02 Apr 2013 09:16:33 -0400
(I'm thinking about this. Implementation-wise, Loop is very tricky, especially when the mappedness of things is involved.)

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 08 Apr 2013 07:14:37 -0400
(Note to self: the variables that we pass cannot be numeric / gray because numerics are evaluated before the sampling begins and can't be recalculated during sampling. So they must be map / green).

ThreeDee, Mon, 08 Apr 2013 11:02:27 -0400
It appears (to an outside observer like myself) that every iteration passes new Position, Iteration and Randomizer values. So you are saying that all iterations of these values are evaluated (in the internal "Prepare" function) before sampling begins, so that they are in fact constant throughout sampling?

So this probably means that even the "Flat fill" option in some components works this way -- it actually does a lookup for every sample although they come fr om a lim ited number of source coordinates?

The funky part is, it is very easy to script a "sample once, pass the same value thereafter" Script component, but it won't work with a loop, for it will pass the same initial value for every subsequent iteration of the loop. Which is why I tried to sample the Iteration slave component to detect when the Iteration changes. In theory it would work, in practise there must be something I don't understand or know, for it doesn't.

Most fundamentally, IF I can make something happen with a LUA script, you could make it happen internally, because the logic is basically the same, right?

Vladimir Golovin, Tue, 09 Apr 2013 09:38:53 -0400

Quote
It appears (to an outside observer like myself) that every iteration passes new Position, Iteration and Randomizer values. So you are saying that all iterations of these values are evaluated (in the internal "Prepare" function) before sampling begins, so that they are in fact constant throughout sampling?

No. All slaves are Map components, therefore their result is calculated in their get_sample() method (that is, on demand) depending on the number of the current iteration.

(Don't forget that you can plug map components -- including other slave components, even from the same Loop -- into inputs of slave components).

Quote
So this probably means that even the "Flat fill" option in some components works this way -- it actually does a lookup for every sample although they come fr om a lim ited number of source coordinates?

Yes, but the the effective number of actually evaluated lookup samples is reduced by the sample cache at the output of the component which is being looked up.

Regarding the rest of your post (actually, thread), I'm still trying to wrap my head around all this. It haven't clicked yet.

ThreeDee, Tue, 09 Apr 2013 13:38:27 -0400
Ok, thanks, that clarifies it. And no, I hadn't noticed that the Slave component inputs are green!

Quote
Regarding the rest of your post (actually, thread), I'm still trying to wrap my head around all this. It haven't clicked yet.

But I assume that you understand the basic problem I am trying to resolve, right?

Vladimir Golovin, Wed, 10 Apr 2013 08:12:43 -0400

Quote
But I assume that you understand the basic problem I am trying to resolve, right?

You are trying to pass a single numeric value, obtained within the loop subtree, to the next iteration of Loop, preferably via a slave component. Correct?

(Actually, during the development of the Loop, I had a vague idea of a multi-variable Loop, that is, the one that somehow accumulates several results during its evaluation, but I haven't found how to combine all these multiple sub-results into a single output result).

(Update: If I'm not mistaken, having multiple Accumulated -> Subtree -> Accumulator paths within a single Loop would fix your problem: you would simply pass your value to the next iteration by directly passing it to one of the additional Accumulator inputs, without mixing in previous iteration. On the next iteration, the value could be obtained via the via the corresponding additional Accumulated slave.)

Sphinx., Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:31:15 -0400
Until you guys figure out the awesome generic auxiliary/multi channel fix (in line with grayscale and color mapped you would introduce multichannel mapped inputs), I think the idea of adding a handful additional accumulator paths is a great compromise :-)

ThreeDee, Fri, 12 Apr 2013 01:53:57 -0400

Quote
You are trying to pass a single numeric value, obtained within the loop subtree, to the next iteration of Loop, preferably via a slave component. Correct?

Yes, exactly, without incurring the overhead of the component sampling for every pixel and thus causing an exponential loop.

Either as a slave component, or if a single-sample lookup could be implemented for Lookup, that would probably work as well.

ThreeDee, Fri, 12 Apr 2013 01:56:52 -0400
Additional accumulators: That could work, if it avoids the branching issue. I don't know if branching the accumulator internally (as opposed to the filter tree) makes a difference or not.

Iteration History (Loop slave component)

Sphinx. — Sun, 07 Apr 2013 07:21:19 -0400

Sphinx., Mon, 01 Apr 2013 05:04:36 -0400
It would be useful if we could work with data from previous iterations. I'm thinking about some sort of History slave here. It could have to general modes:

Absolute: You specify an iteration index and the given result at that iterations data is always present.

Relative: You specify a negative offset (and maybe even positive?) from the current iteration.

(Yet another approach would be to add some sort of post "Extract Iteration" component, but that has other impractical implications, like it would only work with the Loop component)

Indigo Ray, Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:26:00 -0400
So basically, you're doing a loop, and every time you go through the loop, you save the current result in a list? Then after the loop is finished, you can access each list item (each iteration) separately, as many as you want (unlike the iteration preview, which only shows one, and can't be controlled outside of the filter editor)?

Sphinx., Tue, 02 Apr 2013 01:43:08 -0400
Yes, thats pretty much it. :)

Vladimir Golovin, Tue, 02 Apr 2013 09:03:09 -0400

Quote
you can access each list item (each iteration) separately

Are you talking about the accumulated result of that iteration? That is, the contents of the Accumulated input of the Loop for that iteration?

Sphinx., Tue, 02 Apr 2013 09:20:58 -0400
Yes, its actually very close to what you have now with the Accumulated iteration preview functionality.

Vladimir Golovin, Tue, 02 Apr 2013 09:26:30 -0400
So basically you want a slave component similar to Accumulated but able to output the accumulated result of any previous and future iteration (which, BTW, are not calculated yet) of the Loop? And probably an Integer or Map input on that slave that lets you set the iteration you want to retrieve?

Sphinx., Tue, 02 Apr 2013 10:28:36 -0400
Yes, however the need originally occurred "post loop", that is, I needed the loop accumulation from the second last step (as a part of the smooth Julia / Mandelbrot algorithm). But I can think of other uses, and also being able to get the previous loop data *inside* the loop block could be useful (differential, sigma and cubic calculations are just a few examples - I'm sure ThreeDee would chime in here for his path stuff)

ThreeDee, Tue, 02 Apr 2013 10:53:42 -0400
I don't think that future iterations would be needed.

Although there are other ways of doing it, making an animation that "draws" the final image frame by frame (frame = iteration step) would be easier -- a nice side effect of this idea.

In some cases you could also retrieve portions of the complete image by blending with difference mode. At least from paths. :D

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 05 Apr 2013 09:13:01 -0400

Quote
Yes, however the need originally occurred "post loop", that is, I needed the loop accumulation from the second last step (as a part of the smooth Julia / Mandelbrot algorithm).

If we disregard rendering time, could this be (crudely) solved by grouping the entire loop, adding a group input for the Iteration count, instancing the group and reducing the Iteration count for the second instance by one?

This way, the first instance would provide the output of the fully executed loop, and the second instance the second last step.

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 05 Apr 2013 09:15:13 -0400
BTW, Sphinx, what's Njyldgarkn? :?:
Rot13 returns nonsense.

Sphinx., Sun, 07 Apr 2013 07:21:19 -0400
Hehe - something ThreeDee came up with: http://www.filterforge.com/forum/read...sage118881

I believe it is an adjective describing a property of a subject such that

"X is of extreme importance to the majority, the cumulative waiting time spent during their life spans and the finally the CO2 pollution (and thereby the rainforests) , yet it is under prioritized by the authority responsible for X"

Highlight all components of type

Burt — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 19:43:29 -0400

Burt, Wed, 03 Apr 2013 19:43:29 -0400
On big filters when you say want to change out all Profile Gradients for Free Gradients it would be good if you could have a check box to somehow highlight all components of that type - say with a red stroke around them or a change of color. In fact I guess you might have an advanced 'search' of some sort to highlight "all non-seamless components" or whatever else makes sense.

Pattern Lerp Mode

Sphinx. — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 17:34:18 -0400

Sphinx., Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:31:00 -0400
It would be quite handy if all the pattern components had a "Lerp mode" checkbox which enabled interpolation between the two color inputs.

An example of use: currently it is not possible to make a transparent shaped "hole" in the background because of the blending. With lerp mode you simply set the shape alpha fully transparent and that would result in a transparent result too.

Betis, Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:08:49 -0400
Well you could just have the pattern generate a black and white alpha map and use it to plug into the "lerp" input of a lerp component right? or are talking about something else?

Sphinx., Tue, 26 Mar 2013 12:17:07 -0400
yes, but that is both inconvenient and inefficient. :|

Betis, Tue, 26 Mar 2013 15:09:31 -0400
Not so bad, just one extra component.

However I always thought they should be in lerp mode anyway... who uses it in the regular background/foreground mode anyway? It's a strange standard to have.

Sharandra, Tue, 26 Mar 2013 16:17:23 -0400
Are you talking about not being able to give the patterns a transparent color?
Because that annoys me alot, having to use extra components just to get a transparent ellipse or tiles or whatever, lol.

Sphinx., Tue, 26 Mar 2013 17:34:18 -0400
That is exactly what I mean: I expect to be able to define semi transparent something and not having it blended onto some background color (we have the blend component for that).

And Betis I'm mostly proposing this because it is annoying that you have to specify all these extra settings - its not just about the component count.

To me lerp/interpolation would be the natural mode of all the pattern components, and blending is something special (why did FF settle for normal blendmode btw and not some other?)

"Favorites" Weirdnes

Ozmandias — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 05:21:01 -0400

Ozmandias, Tue, 19 Mar 2013 10:15:16 -0400
I don't know if this is a bug or not but it seems bass-ack-wards to me...

I'm running FF Basic, latest version.

The filters that I've designated as "Favorites" do not get tagged in any way, so I can't tell whether or not they have been chosen as favorites. Because of this, I often get the message "This filter is already in your Favorites" when I try to make it a favorite (not remembering that I had already done that). The filters in my "Favorites" have a little star on the icon. Well that's kinda dumb because since I'm in the Favorites category, they're obviously 'favorited' filters. It seems to me that the little star should be showing with the filter in its original category (Creative, Distortions, or whatever), not the Favorites category, so that I can tell which one's I've already designated as favorites.

GMM, Wed, 20 Mar 2013 04:29:33 -0400
This is a good suggestion. I'm moving it to the appropriate forum.

SpaceRay, Wed, 20 Mar 2013 05:21:01 -0400
YES! it happens the same to me too, I have made favorite a filter, and as I do not remember I have already done it, I again try to make it favorite and have the same message "This filter is already in your Favorites"

Quote
The filters in my "Favorites" have a little star on the icon. Well that's kinda dumb because since I'm in the Favorites category, they're obviously 'favorited' filters

YES, is true :D the little stars ONLY appears when you have selected the favorites folder and not outside of it, so it is a pity that they are lost outside of the favorites folder.

CHANGE THE MENU TOO?

Also I have seen that when inside the favorites folder, if you click on any of these filters there is no option to make this filter favorite again, as obviously you are inside the favorites folders

So, my possible suggestion it can be also as an possible alternative, that in the context menu that appears when right clicking on a filter outside of the favorites folder, it would be good that it could put something like "Delete from favorites" instead of "Add to Favorites" so you would quiclky know that this is already added and not try to add it again.

'shift' + drag connection = new connection from same source

CeleriedAway — Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:11:47 -0400

CeleriedAway, Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:11:47 -0400
A tiny request to make work easier in some situations.

Loop component

voldemort — Fri, 15 Mar 2013 11:44:41 -0400

voldemort, Mon, 20 Jun 2011 09:22:06 -0400
Ive looked through the guts of tons of filters that pipe the output into identical components multiple times
While it would not save on render time couldnt you all create a loop component with inputs

for instance zoom blur by uber instead of a ton of repipes you could simply plug a loop component with an integer slider and the user then could select how many times to pipe the effect

again --no this would not reduce render times but it would clean up the code and probably make the code aspect of it more efficient

Skybase, Mon, 20 Jun 2011 09:50:29 -0400
To hint on this really awesome topic, in QuartzComposer there's a node called the iterator, which is basically like a for loop. The iterator works as a macro component. You can add multiple operations into it, and the result is the operation repeated x number of times specified by the user.

Yes, this also gives some of us who don't know lua scripting by heart opportunity to create complex graphics such as fractals and so on. I can think of all sorts of opportunities with just 1 component.

I don't know how people will take this from a technical stand point, but as an artist, I see interesting opportunities with it.

<Actually this was suggested before wasn't it? Forum thread search results in quite a number of similar requests>

voldemort, Mon, 22 Aug 2011 15:10:30 -0400
I'm kinda shocked that this topic really hasn't earned any kind of reply or real attention

Is this just to inconceivable a concept?

Kraellin, Mon, 22 Aug 2011 21:41:56 -0400
+1

Crapadilla, Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:19:32 -0500
+1

Orteil, Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:13:38 -0500
+∞

Skybase, Sat, 14 Jul 2012 06:20:13 -0400
+1 Bump! Don't forget this feature request! :D

Morgantao, Sat, 14 Jul 2012 09:47:54 -0400
+(∞)^2

Ghislaine, Sat, 14 Jul 2012 10:12:50 -0400
voldemort said

Quote
I'm kinda shocked that this topic really hasn't earned any kind of reply or real attention

Skybase said

Quote
+1 Bump! Don't forget this feature request!

And I say that this loop component must be in the list of priorities. So + 1 000 000 000

SpaceRay, Sun, 15 Jul 2012 16:29:13 -0400
YES !!! I agree too that is very important and very needed to make many filter and so you do not have to make such complex filters when it could be much simpler to repeat things and to replicate

SpaceRay, Wed, 18 Jul 2012 19:28:39 -0400
Orteil +∞

Morgantao +(∞)^2

Ghislaine +∞ x 1000.000.000

Me +∞ x ∞ that would be the same

Is there a bigger number than infinity? What is infinity times infinity?

One important thing to keep in mind about infinity is that it's not really
a number, it's something else. It's a concept that means "something bigger
than all numbers." So there are no numbers bigger than infinity, but that
DOESN'T mean that infinity is the biggest number, because it's not a number
at all. In fact, there is no biggest number, because if you think you've
got it, you can always add one, and you've got something bigger.

Since infinity isn't really a number, it doesn't always make much sense to
multiply it by things, but we can think about doing it anyway. We can say
that infinity x infinity = infinity, and keep in mind that we're being a
little bit sneaky to even talk about multiplication like that.

:D

Skybase, Wed, 18 Jul 2012 20:17:13 -0400
PLUS f0(n) = n + 1

Loop components obvious have to be for loops. Just imagine a while loop in FilterForge hahaha.

SpaceRay, Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:05:07 -0400
Will we have to request this feature in a continous loop to FF Inc. until it is finally implemented as it has happened already for many request since FF 1.0 and that are not available yet?

Or will FF Inc. be so kind and good to make this available in FF 4.0 ?

I think this is something very important.

Please, so FF Inc. knows better and can make it as wanted, I think that would be good to explain HOW this component should be done and what options should include

Skybase, Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:28:52 -0400
I mean pretty sure if macros get implemented you can then set the number of feedback per macro although that leads to awful load of computation time so the limit should be set to some reasonable number. ;)

Morgantao, Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:06:23 -0400

Quote
the limit should be set to some reasonable number.

Define reasonable...
Some would say that 20 is a reasonable maximum ammount of presets per filter ;)

SpaceRay, Mon, 27 Aug 2012 05:06:52 -0400

Quote
I mean pretty sure if macros get implemented you can then set the number of feedback per macro

Would be possible to make your own component or control the behaviour of components using macros?

Well if this like making scripts, I will not be able to use them.

;) :D by the way, do MACros work only in Mac computers or also on windows PC?
Perhaps there could be implemented also Windowsros ;) :D

sorry for the bad joke

Skybase, Mon, 27 Aug 2012 07:29:32 -0400
derp.

FEAR NOT IT'S NOT THE SAME AS SCRIPTING!! The idea of macros is like scrippets. You know how you typically copy-and-paste huge loads of nodes? Well imagine bundling the set of operations into 1 component and using that as a component. That's a macro. The ability to bundle a bunch of operations is very very useful because you can nest specific operations instead of having components everywhere.

It makes sense to use the macro as a FOR LOOP since it's a bundled package of a couple nodes. So that basically allows us to expand into different levels of visual complexity without having to find work arounds or copy-and-paste huge loads of the same thing.

SpaceRay, Mon, 27 Aug 2012 08:33:21 -0400
Thanks for explaining it very well, I have understood it right and you are right that this kind of macros for FF would be very interesting, useful and helpful.

But will FF Inc. want to include macros in FF 4.0 ? :?:

I do not know how easy or complex can be to add this kind of macros to FF, but I think it would be worth it considering how many interesting and useful things could be done with this and would be time saving also.

Vladimir Golovin, Thu, 13 Sep 2012 10:21:13 -0400
I've been thinking about loops / iterators / integrators for quite a while. I have a good idea on how to do that, but we haven't prototyped it yet.

In a nutshell, it will include a new type of connector which I tentatively call "loopback". One end of this connection is forever glued to the Iterator node, and on the other end of it is a thingy resembling a control component. The thingy has an output which can be plugged into any compatible inputs. Technically, the thingy may be similar to IntSlider, Slider or Color, but it is controlled by the Iterator, not by the user.

The trick is, the "loopback thingies" emitted by the Iterator (yes, there can be more than one) cannot be connected to inputs of components outside the subtree of this particular Iterator, and to subtree that have connections that go outside this subtree. Tehcnically, it has output of the same type as the Iterator, and this output must be used within the iterated subtree, otherwise no accumulation / merging is possible.

The loopback thingies, or perhaps the Iterator itself, allows you to specify the value range for the thingy.

Also, the iterator will have another special thingy called Accumulated Result, which lets you specify a component subtree which will combine the accumulated result with the current iteration, be it sum, average, some kind of blend mode or whatever else you can construct from FF components.

The loopback connectors can potentially be used for creating variability per cell in Checker components, per Brick / Tile in the Bricks / Pavement / Tile components, or per particle in the Bomber component. For example, Checker could emit loopbacks like "Cell X Coord", "Cell Y Coord", "Cell Row", "Cell Column" and the like. Since we now have Math components, handling real-world numeric data emitted by loopback connectors shouldn't be a problem for the subtree.

Another interesting use: a Noise component can expose the octaves via loopbacks, so that they can be processed by subtrees before being scaled and summed up into the final noise (could be problematic due to internal octave edge-blending).

Added: in other words, loopback connectors let your subtree "know" what particle, cell, brick, octave or iteration is being sampled at the moment, so the subtree can form the result accordingly.

(I'll draw a picture when I get the chance. Update: see below!)

Skybase, Thu, 13 Sep 2012 11:15:50 -0400
Wooord, these things are things I really want to truly see in programs like this. Most other graphics programs don't really host stuff like this and it'll truly be something that will push what we design really forward. :) Hey I'm waiting for it!!

Vladimir Golovin, Thu, 13 Sep 2012 11:23:57 -0400
(Note to myself and programmers: Given the current infrastructure, loopback dongles must be map/green or curvy/blue. They can't be gray because changes of gray inputs require Prepare(). We can't call Prepare() per every sample, that would be slow as hell, especially given the fact that Scripts can have a custom prepare step. If we keep the loopback dongles green/blue, we can do everything during the sampling phase without much problems. Now we only have to find a way to somehow pass the dongle data (or "data for dongle") with the get_sample() call.)

(Related: Houdini seemingly can "cook"/update/data-propagate the network without needing a dedicated prepare() step executed before all sampling. Obviously, that would be a big infrastructural challenge for us. Keeping the dongles green/blue sounds orders of magnitude easier.)

(Another reason why we should avoid making dongles gray: bitmap components. We can't just change blur radius per sample, that would invalidate all rendered cache blocks. Yes, Captain Obvious thinking aloud, but still.)

(Also: the loopback dongles should allow users to manually change their value for preview / tuning purposes, so that the user can tune the subtree. The subtree displayed just for the default values of all dongles would be impossible to tune, users will try to work around this by disconnecting dongles from inputs, entering test values into these inputs, tuning the subtree on them then connecting dongles back.)

(Also: bitmap component would kill dongle metadata. How to deal with this?)

(GUI: Loopback connections, that is the wires that go from Iterator to dongles, aren't free-form. These wires follow rectangular path, have rounded corners and are somehow arranged automatically. This will distinguish them from the regular input-output connections.)

(Lorentz, don't be so scared :), this may be years off.)

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 09:50:21 -0400
It might look like this:

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 09:52:30 -0400
Which would be an equivalent of this subtree (Rotation is marked with yellow to note that it must be manually changed from component to component in fixed increments, 5 degrees for this example):

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 09:59:50 -0400

Quote
Actually this was suggested before wasn't it? Forum thread search results in quite a number of similar requests

BTW, Skybase, could you post the links to these threads here?

Skybase, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 10:28:22 -0400
Here are a couple I recall bumping into. Typically the conversation never carried that far....

http://www.filterforge.com/forum/read...essage1995
http://www.filterforge.com/forum/read...essage6400
http://www.filterforge.com/forum/read...essage6905
http://www.filterforge.com/forum/read...ssage73017

Back in May this year Uberzev came up with this to do recursions:
http://www.filterforge.com/forum/read...#nav_start

But mentions of "looping" are kinda scattered in the forums.

Vladimir Golovin, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 03:20:31 -0400
Regarding the GUI. I guess it would be also possible to implement the Loop component as a "special group" which houses the iterated subtree and variables, similarly to how Quartz Composer does it. But I'd still prefer a non-grouped look, like as on the pic above.

Crapadilla, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 03:50:01 -0400
(Added the links to the wiki "feature wishlist". Thanks, Skybase) :)

Skybase, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 05:09:58 -0400
Cool~ :D

I suggested Quartz Composer's thing because in the end you'd be working with sub-routes which do the looping. But I'm positive both ways will work.

Just as another source of interesting inspiration regarding looping capabilities. I also use a program called Artmatic which does something like you were describing. The program itself does feature both an external iterator component and a grouped iterator (which is featured as "recursion").

The GUI in the program's a bit rigid unfortunately, so the manner in which the loop occurs is through a memory blend at the end of the chain. Just thought that would be interesting to take a look at.

Vladimir Golovin, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 05:40:25 -0400
Couldn't find any information on the Memory Blend node. What does it do?

Skybase, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 05:47:03 -0400
It essentially behaves like a buffer while blending each iteration. In this case, it's using memory max, so that's basically the equivalent of having the max RGB component at the very end of the loop chain.

Vladimir Golovin, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 06:19:04 -0400
If so, if I understand their looping paradigm correctly, their accumulation methods are limited to blending modes implemented by Memory Blend, because otherwise they would need Memory Distortion, Memory Perlin Noise, Memory Math, Memory HueSaturation, Memory Custom Subtree etc.

Skybase, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 07:23:24 -0400
Absolutely. Actually come to think of it, it's pretty much the same thing you've described in the previous posts. It's just that the "blend mode" comes attached to it.

Artmatic on its own goes pretty deep... it's a crazy piece of program. I thought I'd bring it up since the program's looping capabilities are really crazy. And well... there are other types of iterators and just ways to mingle with the nodes all together. hehe

This last one's kinda tricky to explain. X and Y coordinates are translated by the first 3 nodes one being a group component with more transformations inside. The iterator accepts X and Y coordinate space and outputs RGB outputs (XYZ). This is then fed into the XYZ slot of the color node, that gets fed into the memory add component. The last node's there for color correction and it's really not necessary.

I mean of course the program's different, but I thought it'd be nice to share something about it. So I hope this kinda serves as some form of inspiration in the future. ;)

Vladimir Golovin, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 07:58:18 -0400

Quote
Absolutely. Actually come to think of it, it's pretty much the same thing you've described in the previous posts. It's just that the "blend mode" comes attached to it.

It's similar but it's not the same. In Artmatic, the operation that combines accumulated results with the result of the latest iteration is embedded / hardcoded into Mem* nodes, while in the loopback approach I outlined above this operation is customizable: it is possible to use any subtree of components to implement it.

Quote
there are other types of iterators

Very interesting. I'll take a closer look.

Vladimir Golovin, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 14:26:45 -0400
Skybase, I don't have a Mac at home, so I can't try ArtMatic, but I was watching their tutorials. When they showed their component list, I didn't see any Mem nodes or iterators there. Is there a separate menu or list for them?

Ghislaine, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 15:11:33 -0400
Thanks Vlad for the loop component to come. I'm so glad for this. :)

Skybase, Sun, 16 Sep 2012 03:58:33 -0400

Quote
Skybase, I don't have a Mac at home, so I can't try ArtMatic, but I was watching their tutorials. When they showed their component list, I didn't see any Mem nodes or iterators there. Is there a separate menu or list for them?

Artmatic organizes the nodes based on the number of inputs and outputs. And there are a couple menus each with different component menus. So the iterator and memory components are in a variety of areas and not shown in the menu above.

I was wondering if a Component Reference (PDF file) would be handy to have I guess... I can send you that privately.

Vladimir Golovin, Wed, 19 Sep 2012 10:10:13 -0400
(I deleted three posts about my email exchange with Skybase so they don't clutter the thread.)

So I tried Artmatic demo, hoping to play with their Iterator and Looper nodes, but I hit a roadblock I didn't anticipate: I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out how to edit their tree: I mean I couldn't even connect a component's output to an input!

It looks like that I need a full day or two to get familiar with Artmatic tree editing interface, hence this question to Skybase:

Could you explain, in plain words, the conceptual difference between Loopers and Iteration?

I think the following phrase from the user guide contains the key information:

Quote
"After the first iteration, each successive iteration uses the space as transformed in the previous iteration. So, in our example, each new iteration is rotated a bit more. (By contrast, the 1 -> 1 Iterations component uses the same space for each iteration)"

Also, this one:

Quote
The Looper components have three outputs. The first two outputs are the transformed space.

And this one:

Quote
If the iteration is performed by a Looper component, there is an additional step. The output of any component that directly feeds the Looper is fed back into itself in the next iteration. I.e. if Rotate A feeds the looper, the first iteration will rotate unrotated space. The second iteration will feed the result of the first rotation back into the Rotate A component so that the result is a rotation of the rotated space. By feeding the Looper with a compiled tree, very complex transformations can be created.

Quote

If the iteration is performed by a Looper component, there is an additional step. The output of any component that directly feeds the Looper is fed back into itself in the next iteration. I.e. if Rotate A feeds the looper, the first iteration will rotate unrotated space. The second iteration will feed the result of the first rotation back into the Rotate A component so that the result is a rotation of the rotated space. By feeding the Looper with a compiled tree, very complex transformations can be created.

Do they need this "feed-into-itself" thing because they don't have a generic "Mem-Anything" mechanism that allows for custom-designed accumulation operations, not just blend, max, min etc?

Look at the mockup I posted above. There's nothing that prevents you from plugging the Accumulated Result into the Source input of a Noise Distortion, Rotate, Offset or any other distorter. This way, each iteration will operate on the combined results of all previous iterations, and the accumulation operation will be the distortion itself ("Mem Noise Distortion" in Artmatic terms).

Is this what they mean by Loopers?

Skybase, Wed, 19 Sep 2012 12:59:27 -0400
Artmatic by design... does have its intimidating ends. The program itself has been around for 10 years now and ... I've been using it since version 1.0. Heh. I only recently finally began understanding the mechanisms of the program myself!

Quote
Could you explain, in plain words, the conceptual difference between Loopers and Iteration?

<Note: the following is the best explanation I can give personally.>
In SUPER plain english: they're pretty much the same thing. The difference lies in the number of inputs and outputs. They all have to go through the memory components in order for it to work.

In detail:
The iterations node is a fairly basic node, it has 1 input and 1 output, this is indicated as 1->1 in Artmatic terms meaning it operates on 1 signal at a time. The "looper" nodes are fairly new in the program. The most basic looper you can find is the 2 input 3 output (2->3) which basically gives you x, y, and z outputs in RGB. You then have 3->4 as well which has an alpha channel (I think!) Then there are these speciality loopers with cross-looping and otherwise... and I honestly never used those so I don't even know what they do. :(

The loopers, iterations nodes do need corresponding memory component at the very end. I think this is by design of the program. So in case with iterators you have a 1->1 memory component listing. Then with the 2->3 looper you have the 3->3 memory components.

I guess that would be what loopers and iterators would be in Artmatic.

Quote
Do they need this "feed-into-itself" thing because they don't have a generic "Mem-Anything" mechanism that allows for custom-designed accumulation operations, not just blend, max, min etc?

In my understanding yes... I really think this is by design of the program.

So the mockup would be technically much more powerful really if you compare it to how Artmatic's system works.

See, I really brought up Artmatic just because it's got insane looping capabilities, so I thought I give it a mention. :p Really just that. And in all honesty, I wasn't really prepared to answer that question haha. I had to go back and look again at some of the node trees I made. But it's really nice you took some time to check the program out. :) I know its really not the same but I thought it'd give us something to think about.

Hope the stuff above answers your question. In any case... it's really to the best of my ability. ;)

Vladimir Golovin, Thu, 20 Sep 2012 05:53:01 -0400
Skybase, thank you! And speaking of Quartz Composer, could you give a brief overview of its looping capabilities other than the Iterator node? QC looks much more promising than Artmatic in this regard.

SpaceRay, Fri, 21 Sep 2012 02:55:44 -0400
This is interesting and very good if FF wiil be able to have loops and iterators in a component way as this would help very much and I think that will be faster than making them with LOTS of components as it happens now.

uberzev have been making some interesting tests and experiments to try to optimize and get easier loops and iterators in FF 3.0 as shown here

uberBlend - (This changes everything)

I admire the great experience and knowledge that you Vladimir and Skybase have.

Quote
Vladimir Golovin So I tried Artmatic demo, hoping to play with their Iterator and Looper nodes, but I hit a roadblock I didn't anticipate: I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out how to edit their tree: I mean I couldn't even connect a component's output to an input!

WOW! If someone very experienced and expert like you that have so many skills has not been able to figure out how to use this without any previous experience it could mean that is not your fault, and is because the software is complex and hard to learn.

I am supossing this, and I could be wrong and you may be only refering to the loop and iterators part.

Quote
SKybase Artmatic by design... does have its intimidating ends. The program itself has been around for 10 years now and ... I've been using it since version 1.0. Heh. I only recently finally began understanding the mechanisms of the program myself!

WOW, you have been using it for 10 YEARS and only recently began to undertand how it works ?

I am missing something or this program is really very complex and difficult to use and learn?

I can´t try it myself as it only for MacOS, but if this is true I am happy that is not available for Windows, I mean that I was sad that I could not use it, but if it is very hard to use, is not something I like.

Crapadilla, Fri, 21 Sep 2012 03:45:09 -0400

Quote
WOW, you have been using it for 10 YEARS and only recently began to undertand how it works?

Some of us have been using FF since the beta in 2006 and still haven't got it figured out. Like me, for example. It just keeps growing and growing... :D

Skybase, Fri, 21 Sep 2012 04:39:25 -0400

Quote
Skybase, thank you! And speaking of Quartz Composer, could you give a brief overview of its looping capabilities other than the Iterator node? QC looks much more promising than Artmatic in this regard.

Quartz Composer's iterator is actually kinda cool.

This is an old tutorial but whatever discussed here is still valid: https://vimeo.com/808373

You basically have a macro specifically meant to run a portion of the node tree. In the iterator macro you create the "iterator variables" node which basically talks to the iterator on the number of loops the macro is supposed to operate. The iterator variables holds a couple key variables: current index, current position, and iterations. Once the current index and position are plugged into a node inside of the macro, it'll start working.

Quote
WOW, you have been using it for 10 YEARS and only recently began to undertand how it works?

Artmatic is extremely easy to use in that it just generates art itself, but to really start programming, it takes a bit of background knowledge and understanding. So when I learned that, I kinda began understanding how it all worked out. Same goes with FilterForge and many other nodey programs.

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 21 Sep 2012 05:40:34 -0400
I already watched that video (though I didn't yet play with QC, will do that soon).

My question was, are there ways to loop stuff in QC other than the Iterator node?

Skybase, Fri, 21 Sep 2012 06:29:59 -0400
Darn, didn't read properly.

There's a macro called Replicate in Space which is capable of reproducing objects within the macro multiple times. There's also a feedback patch which allows for some of those looping capabilities:

From the QuartzCompsoer release notes:

Quote
The new Feedback patch makes it easier to create feedback loops within your compositions by providing dynamically created outputs, which correspond to published outputs at the current level within the graph.

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 21 Sep 2012 07:02:01 -0400
As I understand, QC term "patch" refers to a native QC node, but what's a "macro"? Is it something similar to FF groups? A patch with sub-patches?

Also: as I see from googling, the Iterator does not allow to feed its output back into its input (which is, I think, something that the Feedback patch should be able to do). If so, the scheme I outlined above will have the capabilities of both Iterator and Feedback.

(Excuse me. I should stop asking stupid questions and go play with the thing myself).

James, Sun, 30 Sep 2012 08:55:41 -0400
You can do that with Lua if it's code based or even the new grouping feature and the ideas here seem really cool but i think but having a simple default Multi Transform node would still be very useful also as well as the more complex things.

So it would just have the standard transform options like offset, scale, rotate and skew all on one single node but also a repeat/steps amount input.

Then if set to 10 steps it's just like applying 10 transform nodes after each other etc but without the need for loads of nodes in a group etc.

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 01 Oct 2012 06:32:52 -0400
James, you cannot do that in Lua (unless your entire image-generation logic is within the Lua script and it doesn't rely on FF components whose inputs change their values between loop iterations).

Regarding the "Multi-Transform" idea: The generalized loop would be much more powerful than what you suggest, while requiring the same amount of work to implement it into FF. I just don't see why we should go the narrow specialization route when we can kill the whole flock with one well-generalized stone.

James, Mon, 01 Oct 2012 22:21:55 -0400
Yeah i see what you mean, i guess if i needed a Multi-Transform component now that FF4 has groups and if generalized loop gets added also then all i would have to do is group a few components and i could easily use that setup.

SpaceRay, Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:30:37 -0400

Quote
Vladimir Golovin Regarding the "Multi-Transform" idea: The generalized loop would be much more powerful than what you suggest, while requiring the same amount of work to implement it into FF. I just don't see why we should go the narrow specialization route when we can kill the whole flock with one well-generalized stone.

Quote
James I guess if i needed a Multi-Transform component now that FF4 has groups and if generalized loop gets added also then all i would have to do is group a few components and i could easily use that setup.

Yes I agree with Vladimir, it would be better to have a complete and generalized Loop component that could be used with any component you may want and multiply and apply this component a number of repeated times and do not have to keep with just the defined ones, just use ANYONE and do not have specialized ones.

Although perhaps it would be ALSO good to have 2 or 3 customized loop components in the way James have suggested, but seeing how FF have done the filter editor components thay do not like to make specific and specialized ones

So as in FF 4.0 will be groups you can make your own loop components groups customizations as you want

xirja, Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:41:00 -0400

Quote
Vladimir Golovin (Another reason why we should avoid making dongles gray: bitmap components. We can't just change blur radius per sample, that would invalidate all rendered cache blocks. Yes, Captain Obvious thinking aloud, but still.)

Quote
Vladimir Golovin (Also: bitmap component would kill dongle metadata. How to deal with this?)

Two mentions of bitmap components in the same post, oh yeah!

Copy Node or Clone Component

Burt — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 10:52:31 -0400

Burt, Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:11:46 -0500
I'm not sure if this makes sense but here goes.

I was working on a filter loaded with lots of little objects built from shapes and I realized that a lot of them could be built from parts of the same objects - for example I used a several ellipses as the base objects to build shells, a shrimp, sea urchins, plants and so on. I have connections going in every direction trying to reuse some of these shapes assuming that will be faster but it ends up being a crazy mess to work with.

Why not create a Copy or Clone Component that would allow you to take the result of a particular node, and copy or clone (instantiate?) it as the starting point of another. Doesn't instantiation have the benefit of being 'lighter' since you only have to store the object data once and 'mirror' it to the clones? Plus you could update the original node that the clone is based on and update the paired clones. The copy idea is similar except modifying one would not affect the others.

This way if you identify a basic shape that could form the basis of a several fish, plants, eel and other objects you could build the common shape, then add clone components which would be the same as that one, but add color, scale, offset and other details after to differentiate them. You would not need a connector to these either, just some color or symbol that indicated the node, and the clones were related so you could greatly clean up the connections.

SpaceRay, Mon, 11 Mar 2013 04:56:18 -0400

Quote
Burt Why not create a Copy or Clone Component that would allow you to take the result of a particular node, and copy or clone (instantiate?) it as the starting point of another

Sorry, that I do not understand what you mean, and what you are suggestting, perhaps is not you, it is me that do not have much experience and knowledge of FF too understand it.

Now, when you copy one component, you copy also all the settings that it already have (although you would have to copy also any control attached to it to keep them too) but I think that this surely is not what you mean

Skybase, Mon, 11 Mar 2013 05:03:36 -0400
I guess it's good for giant filters with giant structures but many of the filters here aren't very large and it rarely becomes huge. The current ability to just split outputs already works well, just mildly confusing if the single node produces 5 or 6 outputs.

The groups feature allows for instancing so I think part of the request's been covered. It's just not specifically covered as described.

Burt, Mon, 11 Mar 2013 10:52:31 -0400
Ok, I saw that after the fact so it seems it will be covered in version 4.0.

Delaunay triangulation

Crapadilla — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 05:44:43 -0400

Crapadilla, Sun, 08 Nov 2009 06:50:46 -0500
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaunay_triangulation
http://www.jonathanpuckey.com/project...ay-raster/

Awesome! :D

Kraellin, Sun, 08 Nov 2009 12:29:33 -0500
hmmm, that's kind of weirdly interesting. was there a program one can download with this or was that all internal and just for show so far?

Dmitry Sapelnikov, Thu, 21 Jan 2010 04:32:38 -0500
Hmm, very very interesting tesselations...
I'll probably examine it in my spare time. ;)

Betis, Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:20:12 -0500
You're trying to start this again Dilla? ;) :D

Crapadilla, Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:34:40 -0500

Quote
Betis wrote: You're trying to start this again Dilla?

It's not even finished! ;) :D

Quote
Dmitry Sapelnikov wrote: I'll probably examine it in my spare time.

That's what I'm talking about! :beer:

Crapadilla, Tue, 22 Nov 2011 17:07:58 -0500
Delaunay Triangulation in Lua:

https://gist.github.com/1009522
http://www.codeguru.com/cpp/data/mfc_...php/c8901/

Hmmmm... ;) :D

CorvusCroax, Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:18:40 -0500
FYI Did you guys know that there is an iPad app that does this?

http://itunes.apple.com/app/poly/id47...Id=1939386

http://digitaltools.node3000.com/blog...rawing-app

SpaceRay, Tue, 27 Mar 2012 22:57:43 -0400
Very interesting and would be really good if this Delaunay Triangulation would be possible inside FF.

I found this thread because CorvusCroax put it in this other thread

http://filterforge.com/forum/read.php...sage102393

uberzev, Sun, 01 Jul 2012 15:01:39 -0400
Bump

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/tres/id492560895?mt=8
http://www.creatogether.com/ai-delaunay-brush

SpaceRay, Sun, 01 Jul 2012 17:55:29 -0400
What would be needed to be added to FF to be able to make this beautiful Delaunay Triangulation ?

Vector support?

Because I suposse that is not probably not possible to make with the available toold ans components.

uberzev, Mon, 02 Jul 2012 01:29:17 -0400
http://www.creativeapplications.net/p...rocessing/
http://www.leebyron.com/else/mesh/

Very cool interactive flash tool:
http://browse.deviantart.com/flash/?q...y#/d2hdzyu

uberzev, Mon, 02 Jul 2012 01:58:51 -0400
FF totally needs some implementation of this, even if you can't manually choose where the points are located.

Drew this in about 5 minutes...

uberzev, Mon, 02 Jul 2012 02:41:14 -0400
http://dmesh.thedofl.com/

SpaceRay, Mon, 02 Jul 2012 04:06:55 -0400
I do not have a smartphone, nor an Ipad or a Mac, and do not have Illustrator, so I CAN´T use any of the softwares available options to make this cool and weird Delaunay Triangulation :(

So for me the only available and usable way is the great and very well done FLASH tool, but this from Deviantart is ONLY 480 x 600 images :(

Below is my own example with a colors texture instead of a portrait or detailed photo

Quote
uberzev wrote: Very cool interactive flash tool

http://browse.deviantart.com/flash/?q...y#/d2hdzyu

Quote
uberzev wrote: Drew this in about 5 minutes...

Well done and very good that you have been able to "draw" the triangulation this way

HOW you have done it, it was with this flash tool or in any other way ?

SpaceRay, Mon, 02 Jul 2012 04:12:02 -0400
What would be needed to be added to FF to be able to make this beautiful Delaunay Triangulation ? :?:

Is this below? (from this web page by Lee Byron)

Quote
Delaunay Diagram fro triangulation A Delaunay Diagram is an optimal triangulation of a given set of points. This is very helpful for applying mesh textures, or creating structures for physical simulation. Voronoi and Delaunay Diagrams are duals. For every edge of a Delaunay diagram, an edge of a Voronoi diagram perpendicularly bisects it.

Would be really possible to make this in FF ?

Because if it needs to be interactive I do not think that it would be possible, unless the interaction is made through the FF settings

Here is another example of another texture with Red, Black and White made with the Flash tool

uberzev, Mon, 02 Jul 2012 04:19:21 -0400
The flash tool. Just took a random image of Obama and started fooling around.

SpaceRay, Mon, 02 Jul 2012 04:38:30 -0400
It would be very good if there could be available any software like the DMeshbut available for Windows and not only for Mac, Iphone or Ipad.

Quote
uberzev wrote: The flash tool.

Thanks for the answer, good to know.

SpaceRay, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 04:09:01 -0400
Anyone knows if there is something new like this Delaunay Triangulation available in Dmesh for Windows and not only for Mac ?

Skybase, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 04:24:21 -0400
I think I saw a nice processing version of it. Processing can run universally. Although I don't know any other thing :(

I know John Dalton the author of Studio Artist is working the thing into the next version (maybe) of the program. http://happyislandmusic.blogspot.jp/2...-face.html

SpaceRay, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 04:35:20 -0400
Thanks Skybase for this good news and a very good addition to Studio Artist would be, although it will not be available until the first quarter of 2013, as I have email him asking about Studio Artist 5 and he told me that.

Also in the London Olympics 2012 they have used this Delaunay Triangulation to show images of some of the sports in some news and commercial advertisements

Betis, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 10:58:37 -0400
I was just re-reading this thread this morning and had an idea because I saw someone mention it being related to Voronoi noise. I plugged in the image to a Cells component as both Noise and Background input, then set settings to Solid Fill, Non-Flat, and Formula to Avg(F1-F2-F3-F4), with Details and Roughness set to 0.

At first I thought I could control the "point density" by setting roughness to a map of an "edge detected" version of the image, but it doesn't seem to work like that. Adding details and roughness just blends octaves instead of increasing density.

Here are some results with the Scale parameter changed, along with variation of course.

SpaceRay, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 11:09:35 -0400

Quote
Betis Here are some results with the Scale parameter changed, along with variation of course.

I am very sorry to tell that this you have done is NOT all the same in any way like the Delaunay Triangulation, at least from my point of view, as ALL MUST BE TRIANGLES and ONLY triangles, and can´t be any other polygons or other kind of lines

In fact, I have already made a filter similar to the one you have and that even have better results than this, BUT as said is NOT like the delaunay effect, so I have not said anything about this.

Sorry to say this.

ThreeDee, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 11:47:44 -0400
This is clearly going to be another scripting filter.

Betis, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 19:35:13 -0400
Thank you for your valuable input spaceray :)

ThreeDee yes, probably something along the lines of choosing three random points with a density map (edge detector input) and choosing the average color in the center of them (and then filling in the inscribed pixels with that color). What if scripts could access group nodes? And then you could make a 3-point fill node or sub-script... idk this seems like a very non-automated filter which is why it's so interesting. Doesn't mean it's not possible though, just stubborn ;)

ThreeDee, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 01:54:13 -0400
Betis,

The method in one of the links Crapadilla provided (this one) has the most straightforward approach to the triangulation algorithm.

Yes, some sort of edge detection or local contrast (i.e. detail) detection to drive the probability of corner-point placement. I don't think it needs to be massively accurate, as you can change the variation and see it it comes out better.

Automatic placement of points is the way to go. I don't see any sense in trying to figure out custom input of points. The program just doesn't have any good way of doing it, the only multiple-input Control component being the Bezier Curve input.

Fill color: Either the color at the center, or average of a few samples should do. I also like the gradient fill style in the Jonathan Puckey examples.

Script access to group nodes: By this I assume you mean back-and forth exchange between the script and the group? Perhaps with the upcoming iterators, but I can see it getting real slow real fast.

A single script runs much faster than a number of separate connected scripts, so I would try and do it in all in one.

Betis, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 10:39:56 -0400
Wow that algorithm/psuedocode is neat, tempted now to do some spin-offs in processing :D

Betis, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 15:41:05 -0400
Just had another idea: the script would only have to generate lookup coordinates that you would use by (guess what) the lookup component for colors. I'm sure it's still mostly the same scripting but again just a thought

Crapadilla, Tue, 18 Sep 2012 06:28:34 -0400

Quote
Hmm, very very interesting tesselations... I'll probably examine it in my spare time.

I'm still my keeping fingers crossed that Dmitry (aka Egret) will surprise us with a most-efficiently-implemented version of Delaunay Triangulation one day...

Crapadilla, Wed, 19 Sep 2012 03:26:11 -0400
Vlad,

from a developer perspective, do you see any chance we'll get a dedicated Tesselation or Triangulation component that covers 'Delaunay' in the foreseeable future, or do you see this as a community scripting task?

Vladimir Golovin, Wed, 19 Sep 2012 07:48:52 -0400
I had a very brief look at this, mostly because I read that it is related to Voronoi patterns. However, it is not clear to me at the moment if we can implement it as an endless procedural texture (as opposed to a finite set of points). The algorithms I found by googling weren't very encouraging in this regard. We'll need a more thorough investigation.

Crapadilla, Wed, 19 Sep 2012 10:12:34 -0400
Alright, I read that as 'Interesting, but incredibly low priority for the foreseeable future'. ;)

Looks like someone will have to script this.

Community challenge -- The prize: Life-long upgrades? :)

SpaceRay, Fri, 21 Sep 2012 04:30:49 -0400

Quote
Betis Thank you for your valuable input spaceray

I am sorry Betis I have written this and I apologize for what I have said, I was wrong and did not knew really well what I was writing. Now I have read it back again I feel ashamed :blush: that I have put this as I have confused things, sorry.

Quote
Crapadilla Vlad, from a developer perspective, do you see any chance we'll get a dedicated Tesselation or Triangulation component that covers 'Delaunay' in the foreseeable future, or do you see this as a community scripting task?

YES, this would be very interesting, helpful and useful to have implemented in FF, and I do not mean only the Delaunay triangulation, I mean the tesselation and triangulation component.

Quote
Vladimir Golovin I had a very brief look at this, mostly because I read that it is related to Voronoi patterns. However, it is not clear to me at the moment if we can implement it as an endless procedural texture (as opposed to a finite set of points). The algorithms I found by googling weren't very encouraging in this regard. We'll need a more thorough investigation.

Very good that you are interested in this and had a look at this.

I have found much information about this and there some very complex articles from the developers point of view that I do not understand at all, but seems that this could be possible for a skilled and knowledgeable persons like you or the FF team.

SpaceRay, Mon, 11 Mar 2013 05:21:51 -0400
I have been already searching much for another different software that is already made and programmed to be able to make this Delaunay Triangulation effect and it may be very complex and difficult to make as there are NONE of them available for Photoshop, Studio Artist or any other similar software.

And as standalone software is it only available just one and only, wich seems to be very good and full featured that is the one uberzev have said DMESH but the very bad thing is that this is ONLY for the MacOS :( :cry: :cry: and I can´t buy a new Mac computer to be able to use this, and have not yet found the way to use a possible MacOs emulator inside Windows.

And there are also available some apps for ipad but not for desktop windows, and it could be now some apps converted to the new Windows 8 apps, but seems that there is no plan to make it.

Skybase, Mon, 11 Mar 2013 05:44:43 -0400
Yeah well... I always thought about bringing it up but never bothered and the thread died. See the thing is there are ways you can produce the points but whats most powerful about Delaunay Triangulation is that you can put points down manually, and user input is part of the power driving the design of it. Automatic input is kinda useful, but not sufficiently cool enough in my view.

Image below just shows you how cool things can get with user input. That was an image for an album cover.

Be able to move and organize the filter presets in 4.0

SpaceRay — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 05:16:11 -0400

SpaceRay, Tue, 14 Aug 2012 09:40:14 -0400
Please, Please, Please, I think that this would be really very useful and very handy to have and will be much better to create your own presets.

I want to be able to move the preset I want to a determined place that I want, if I have it in the position 19 and I want to put it in the number 2 and then change the number 3 to place 6 and...

I want to be able to arrange and organize the presets as you want and customize the position they are.

This could be done in different ways

* Drag`n`drop Click on preset you want to move and drag it to the place that you want it

* Copy and paste Copy one preset and then paste it in the place you want

* Move it with Keys As it happens in the "Order of controls" inside Filter Editor, be able to move the presets with the cursor keys.

Or any other way you may think of

BUT please I wish this could be possible in FF 4.0

SpaceRay, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 04:31:04 -0400
I think that this is very important and is a great problem (at least for me) and would be really good if this could be done in some possible way FF inc. could think of and would be helpful and great.

I have been trying much to make this through XML editors but is really a big pain to do it this way :( :cry:

PLEASE, PLEASE, make something about this

THANKS A MILLION

SpaceRay, Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:24:28 -0400
Does the new filter manager and customization of filter browser also will include some kind of customization for the filter presets?

This is much needed and would be really verry helpful and useful

Crapadilla, Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:23:16 -0400

Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote elsewhere: Groups are the second-biggest rewrite of FF codebase (the biggest one was the Mac version), so let's fix the bugs first and add convenience stuff later.

The quintessential FF4 Beta quote! ;) :D

SpaceRay, Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:41:34 -0400
Thanks Crapadilla this is right, but I am suggesting this for the final version of FF 4.0 and not only for the next beta version, or any other, I just want that this will be possible in the final FF 4.0 version whenever this is released possibly next year.

Morgantao, Sat, 22 Sep 2012 00:26:21 -0400
I think what Vladimir was trying to say is that groups will provide FF team with enough work to last untill FF6 :D Not just the next beta stage.

Crapadilla, Sat, 22 Sep 2012 02:11:32 -0400
Here's another quote that's really helpful in understanding how Vlad approaches software development:

Quote
"I don't like to think in terms of 'features' -- I usually concentrate on systems that make features possible. Systems are the core, features are a byproduct." -- Vladimir Golovin

When you look at all the past betas you'll notice that the focus always was on the solid implementation of new systems, and adding only the features that are strictly necessary.

All the 'would-be-nice-to-have' and 'convenience' stuff was always on low priority, simply because Vlad is working to make FF "feature-complete". Making it "Convenience-complete" is really something for FF10 or later.

Personally, I tend to agree. I'd always prefer "feature-complete" over "convenience-complete". First and foremost, I want to be able to "do more" with FF, meaning I'd like FF to expand its image-generation capabilities.

Hate to burst SpaceRay's bubble, but - judging from my past experience - "convenience stuff" like this is really very unlikely to be implemented anytime soon, simply because there is a finite number of programmers and much more important stuff that needs coding.

SpaceRay, Sun, 23 Sep 2012 17:57:56 -0400

Quote
Crapadilla Personally, I tend to agree. I'd always prefer "feature-complete" over "convenience-complete". First and foremost, I want to be able to "do more" with FF, meaning I'd like FF to expand its image-generation capabilities.

I personally ALSO agree with you and also prefer to be able to "do more" with FF, meaning that it could have more features and interesting and useful to use that could help much in the image manipulation or self-generation BUT

This is why I have asked

Quote
Does the new filter manager and customization of filter browser also will include some kind of customization for the filter presets?

The filter manager is already a full feature and the presets are INSIDE the filter manager, so I think is not a crazy idea and a thing aout of place to think that rebuilding and making the new filter manager COULD also add new options to the presets part of the interface.

SpaceRay, Mon, 24 Sep 2012 02:07:07 -0400
I have just seen that the 3D software "Cinema 4D" HAS already included ALL my wishes and suggestions as I would like for the presets inside the "Materials browser" and is done in a very good way.

You do NOT see the preset moving physically as this is not needed at all, what you see, and is well done, is only the selection and the target for the thumbnail with a line.

Quote

CINEMA 4D software way of handling the presets

1 - You can click on one preset and drag it to another place to be inserted between others presets.

2 - You can select different presets anywhere in the list with SHIFT key hold down (AND that they are not placed toghether) and move them all to be placed toghether and inserted where you want them to be.

3 - You can select one preset and then with SHIFT key hold down you can select another preset and then all the presets in the middle will be selected too.

They also have the naming of the presets included BUT although this could be good is not something really needed and something I care much about.

Having this 3 possible actions with the presets as shown here above would be the best dream come true for FF 4.0

Although as already said in the first post, there could be other alternative possible to make the same in another way that could be perhaps easier or better for FF Inc. to implement this in FF and if they make the same thing I would agree too, I just want to be able to move and organize the presets in whatever way, and NOT have them fixed as they are now.

Carl, Mon, 24 Sep 2012 02:27:25 -0400

Quote
Crapadilla wrote: Hate to burst SpaceRay's bubble, but - judging from my past experience - "convenience stuff" like this is really very unlikely to be implemented anytime soon

:cry:

SpaceRay, Mon, 24 Sep 2012 02:40:00 -0400

Quote
Hate to burst SpaceRay's bubble, but - judging from my past experience - "convenience stuff" like this is really very unlikely to be implemented anytime soon

I will not :cry: until someone from FF Inc. confirms that this would not be possible in any way for FF 4.0

I really do not understand WHY this can´t be possible, I am not asking or suggesting to make some really BIG, complex and very difficult changes, and I do not think that this would be SO HARD and time consuming to be able to add this to FF 4.0.

I do not think (although really do not know) to make a huge modification or change and this would help really much and would be very useful to have.
-----------------------------

Here below is the Materials window inside Cinema 4D

Carl, Mon, 24 Sep 2012 02:46:04 -0400
I know nothing about coding and have no interest in it, but maybe it isn't that simple and that it would take many man hours to do :?:

Skybase, Mon, 24 Sep 2012 08:58:52 -0400
Can't arrange my presets in a rainbow!

SpaceRay, Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:27:07 -0400

Quote
Carl I know nothing about coding and have no interest in it, but maybe it isn't that simple and that it would take many man hours to do

I also do not know about coding and have tried to learn something but do not like it at all.

Yes, is probably not something very simple, BUT do not think that this would be very complex thing, specially when they are already making a new filter manager, and I think that the presets are included in the filter manager, although perhaps not in the same way.

ONLY MANY HOURS? It depends on HOW MANY hours would it mean, 10 or 100?

Quote
Skybase Can't arrange my presets in a rainbow!

Morgantao, Tue, 25 Sep 2012 19:15:22 -0400
SR, I can't know for sure, but I think the filter manager and the presets have nothingn to do with eachother.
Think of the new filter manager as windows explorer. It can move files from one place to another, it can delete files, it can create shortcuts to files, it can make new folders or remove existing folders. But it can't edit files. To edit a file you need notepad.
FF works in the same way. The filter manager will be able to help you organize your filters, but it can't edit them. To rearange presets, you need to edit the filter's FFXML file. That's something only the filter editor can do.

In terms of coding, it probably not a terrible ammount of work to make a preset aranging feature, but consider that fact that FF inc doesn't have hundreds of programers, the have their hand full with other things, like the grouping feature, and the slew of bugs it brought with it.
That's why a low priority feature like that will have to wait.

SpaceRay, Wed, 26 Sep 2012 02:09:57 -0400

Quote
Morgantao SR, I can't know for sure, but I think the filter manager and the presets have nothingn to do with eachother.

Yes I agree and you may be right that they are not related and are shown on the same place but do not work toghether and do not do the same things as one is to organize the filter library and the other is only related to the presets of the filters, so you would need a preset manager instead of a filter manager ;)

Quote

Think of the new filter manager as windows explorer.

It can move files fr om one place to another, it can delete files, it can create shortcuts to files, it can make new folders or remove existing folders. But it can't edit files.

To edit a file you need notepad.

FF works in the same way.

The filter manager will be able to help you organize your filters, but it can't edit them.

To rearange presets, you need to edit the filter's FFXML file. That's something only the filter editor can do.

I agree much with all of this and is true all and is right BUT I do not agree and think is wrong that you NEED the filter editor to edit and rearrange the presets.

Why? Because in the main interface of FF, outside of Filter Editor you can already EDIT the presets with the options available of:

Add Preset Modifies the FFXML file
Apply Preset Read the information from FFXML file
Update Preset Modifies the FFXML file
Delete Preset Modifies the FFXML file

Following your well example and as far as I know to Add or update a preset you NEED to edit the filter´s FFXML file of the filter to be able to change or add the new information of the preset, so this is not only done in the filter editor.

ADD COPY AND PASTE PRESETS INSTEAD OF DRAG AND DROP OF THE PRESETS

So, as said, if you already CAN update the presets and with this edit the FFXML´s filter and can read from it from outside the Filter Editor, there could be possibly easily ADD a two new options to that menu that could be COPY PRESET and PASTE PRESET

COPY: would read the information and be able to paste this information in another position of the preset list, and the ONLY change for this is just to change the number position of the preset, and also think it would also need to change the position of the others presets involved as you would be inserting this in the middle of others.

PASTE: To select the place wh ere you want to paste the copied preset you could just select the preset thumbnail wh ere you want to paste it and this new preset would be added to the right or to the left (always one of the two) of this preset selected

Would this option of copy and paste be so really complex, hard and difficult to make ?

As said it would be good to have a drag´n´drop option better, BUT if this is not possible and is much work a more simple copy and paste would be able to do the same and would not mean making a preset manager

SpaceRay, Wed, 26 Sep 2012 02:33:14 -0400
If the Drag´n´drop filter presets option would be more difficult to make, here is shown a simpler alternative and is what I have descibed above and what I mean in a graphical way

Skybase, Wed, 26 Sep 2012 03:36:43 -0400
I'd rather see just drag and drop management of presets, it's a logical step forward compared to copy-and-paste. And "copy-and-paste" partially exists if you just add preset without changing the settings around. It'd be duplicate functionality in a way.

SpaceRay, Wed, 26 Sep 2012 06:00:16 -0400

Quote
Skybase I'd rather see just drag and drop management of presets, it's a logical step forward compared to copy-and-paste

Of course that I would also like much more to have drag´n´drop rather than just a simple copy and paste, and it would be better but I suggested this considering that perhaps the copy and paste would perhaps be easier to implement and faster than the drag´n´drop.

Quote
Skybase And "copy-and-paste" partially exists if you just add preset without changing the settings around.

Well, yes and no. I mean that now there is only an awkward way, in wich you CAN´T paste any preset where you want, I mean you CAN´T insert the preset between two presets, so the only way available is to REPLACE one of the existing presets (considering it is not a factory preset) with another preset, which is not a good way.

In this way you have to apply the preset you want to replace to the preview window, and then add this preset to rhe list so you will have a copy, and then apply the other preset that is the new one to the preview window and the go to the preset you have just "copied" and click on update preset.

BUT the problem is what to do with the previous preset? Now it is at the end of the list and what happens if you want to have it next to the one you have just replaced?

The way that is now is bad and needs a lot of work and much time

Skybase, Wed, 26 Sep 2012 06:12:06 -0400
Basically what I mean by "partial."

SpaceRay, Thu, 27 Sep 2012 02:22:08 -0400

Quote
Skybase Basically what I mean by "partial."

Yes, I agree and is true, BUT this is very bad, awkward and awful way to make it, and is tiresome and difficult to organize any preset this way, and not something to move more than one or two, and not possible for organizing at all the position of many presets.

So, as it seems that in FF 4.0 the motivation is to renew again the way the interface works and make it easier with the filter manager, I wish REALLY much that FF Inc. could find some way to make easier to organize the presets.

I do not think that you need to use rocket science to be able to make this, and would not be so much difficult to do and would be a really GREAT HELP and a very good and lovely thing to have.

Skybase, Thu, 27 Sep 2012 22:27:19 -0400
I vote drag and drop if this were going in.

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 28 Sep 2012 10:31:08 -0400
Some quick notes on presets:

1. Copy/Paste, as an interface idiom, isn't applicable to presets because it presumes the ability to copy / paste presets between different filters, which is impossible due the difference in control signatures. A "Duplicate" command would be a more logical solution, but it's redundant since you can already do the same via applying and adding a preset without changes.

2. Drag and drop is a logical solution, but there's a catch: when you're looking at a filter presets from the main window, some of the presets, namely the factory presets, a) aren't modifiable and b) are always sorted to the top of the list. So there will be a "no-drag" zone at the top of the preset area, which could confuse users. Added: This "no-drag zone" makes the drag-and-drop unlearnable / undiscoverable. Imagine a new user who has just installed FF Basic for the first time. He tries to drag presets around, but since he hasn't saved any user presets yet, all presets are undraggable. After a couple of tries, the user assumes that presets can't be dragged and never tries it again. Added2: Having said all that, I still think that drag-and-drop + multi-selection is the most logical solution.

3. If we decide to rewrite the presets UI, we will be doing that in one big chunk, not as a dozen of features scattered across releases. Naming / labeling, reordering (a.k.a. drag and drop), duplicating, indicating what preset is currently shown in the preview, et cetera et cetera -- either we go the whole hog, or we don't touch it.

Vladimir Golovin, Sat, 29 Sep 2012 10:53:44 -0400
/mod hat on.

Removed "please, please" from the topic title.

/mod hat off.

Skybase, Sat, 29 Sep 2012 11:44:07 -0400
I kinda laughed at that. :D

SpaceRay, Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:31:41 -0400

Quote
Vladimir Golovin /mod hat on. Removed "please, please" from the topic title. /mod hat off.

:D :D :D

Quote
Vladimir Golovin 1. Copy/Paste, as an interface idiom, isn't applicable to presets because it presumes the ability to copy / paste presets between different filters

Well I never thought to copy and paste presets BETWEEN filters and as said it would be impossible to do that, it would ONLY be for inside the same filter of course.

Quote
Vladimir Golovin 2. Drag and drop is a logical solution, but there's a catch: when you're looking at a filter presets from the main window, some of the presets, namely the factory presets, a) aren't modifiable and b) are always sorted to the top of the list.

Of course that it would be MUCH better and more logical to have the drag´n´drop than the "cut and paste" I just said that IF it would be more easier and with less work, but I like much more the drag´n´ndrop solution.

And also of course that you should let the factory presets be FREE, and so they are no longer always at the top and without being able to be moved and so avoid any possible confusion, although you could still have the little triangle on user presets VS factory presets without the triangle.

Quote
Vladimir Golovin 3. If we decide to rewrite the presets UI, we will be doing that in one big chunk, not as a dozen of features scattered across releases. Naming / labeling, reordering (a.k.a. drag and drop), duplicating, indicating what preset is currently shown in the preview, etcetera et cetera -- either we go the whole hog, or we don't touch it.

OH YES, this would be really wonderful and great and I agree with you to make it much better in this way and change it in whole and having available all the possible features, although this would mean more time and much more work, although would be surely worth it.

SpaceRay, Mon, 11 Mar 2013 05:09:44 -0400

Quote
Vladimir Golovin 3. If we decide to rewrite the presets UI, we will be doing that in one big chunk, not as a dozen of features scattered across releases. Naming / labeling, reordering (a.k.a. drag and drop), duplicating, indicating what preset is currently shown in the preview, et cetera et cetera -- either we go the whole hog, or we don't touch it.

Fr om my personal point of view, now that the whole filter list is going to be changed by the new and much better filter manager, it would be a even better idea and step forward to ALSO upgrade and make the presets of the filters better, and so surely would be a great and big reason to upgrade to have this available and not keep using the frozen, static and fixed presets as it ia in FF 3.0 wh ere you can´t organize and reorder, or name, label, or number the presets.

I have made some filters that have around 50 presets, and is really hard to add presets in ORDER and have similar presets joined together as they are all mixed and is difficult to find what you want and use them easily, and to organize them by copy and paste is really a great pain to do.

Skybase, Mon, 11 Mar 2013 05:16:11 -0400
. . yeup. Now I feel like I should design a filter with no presets at all.

Control Locks in V4???

StevieJ — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 05:02:19 -0400

StevieJ, Mon, 01 Oct 2012 14:01:30 -0400
Please tell me there are going to be control locks for use in randomization in this release??? :|

SpaceRay, Tue, 02 Oct 2012 04:01:11 -0400
Keep seated waiting for an answer for FF 4.0, it has been already six years without an answer, and I have already put older threads related to this very interesting, helpful, useful and very needed topic but it seems that Vladimir have ignored them totally and have not given any answer.

I do not know if this is because this is not going to be included in FF 4.0 or they do not know if this has some priority for this version or they will not have time for this and so Vladimir does not want to say nothing about this until he can have a possible answer.

Quote
Vladimir Golovin One ingredient for this is still missing (on the GUI side). If all goes well, we will introduce this ingredient in the next beta. (this is refering to FF 3.0 Beta and it never happened, so this is why I think now he do not want to tell until it will be possible)

THREADS already about this long and much requested topic JULY 2006!! and we are now in OCTOBER 2012 :( already MORE THAN SIX YEARS waiting for this and there is still no news how much we will have to wait for having this very needed and very useful feature.

I have found TWELVE THREADS requesting this feature since 2006 and still in 2012 there is no news about this

How many more threads and request are needed to have this included in FF ?

Randomize Options July 2006

Lock Controls On Randomize October 2006

'Randomizable' option for controls April 2007

Steve's Most Wanted :) September 2007

Top 5 "Fixes"...... January 2008

Wishlist: Randomize ON/OFF for each setting. May 2008

Randomizer Locks April 2009

Control Locks for Settings April 2010

CONTROL LOCKS!!! April 2011

*cough* CONTROL LOCKS!!! *uncough* August 2011

Please, which features from the WIKI are the most wanted by you ? November 2011

Top 3 Features Wanted!!! January 2012

SOME COMMENTS ABOUT THIS TOPIC

Quote
StevieJ It's not possible to suggest this feature too much.....it's an obvious feature that should be with this program...

Quote
StevieJ The "benefits" of this are actually two fold... Not only would you be able to efficiently utilize randomization towards zeroing in on desired results...but you would also be able to use it towards troubleshooting and zeroing in on problems in filter construction...

There are LOTS and LOTS more comments by StevieJ :D for more of them see the the threads

Quote
Kraellin i'd like a little 'lock' that i can toggle on and off on each control in the browser to allow or disallow this control to be randomized when i hit the 'next variant' button. there are just sometimes that i dont want a certain slider/control randomized when i hit the 'next variant' button.

Quote
Crapadilla Time to bump this... + 1 Filtrillion

Quote
CorvusCroax Yes... PLEEEEZEEE include this in 4.0!!

Quote
Morgantao +100000001

Quote

beekeeper

My word, good Sir, I thank you for mentioning the subject. Many has been the time when I have DESPERATELY wished that such a feature existed especially when working with filters with a large number of variables, as you yourself mentioned in a previous post.

Personally I think it would cut down a lot of 'fiddle' time when trying to find that elusive perfect combination when working with filters, particularly the ones with a kazillion Controls.

So I most heartily echo Morgantao's +100000001.

Quote
Orteil I shall plus this also.

Quote
Totte + π*10E31

Quote
Sphinx +1 here (and its an easy one to add..looking forward to it)

Quote
lipebianc Man, that's a MUST HAVE feature!!!

Skybase, Tue, 02 Oct 2012 06:52:58 -0400
... that last post was 100% unnecessary. [Edit] Ok fine not that it is 100% unnecessary. it's like just huge loads of recaps and reposts. No need to super post things. The message is clear, I'm sure voices are heard well enough at this point.

SpaceRay, Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:17:51 -0400

Quote
Skybase ... that last post was 100% unnecessary.

Well this is your own personal opinion ;) :D

I do not think so. I did not start this thread.

I agree with StevieJ and I want to help him AND all the other that have been requesting this since 6 years ago in 2006

Quote
Skybase The message is clear, I'm sure voices are heard well enough at this point.

Well now after I have added my super post is really clear :D

Are you sure that the voice are heard ??? :?: :?: :(

They have not been heard since 6 years ago, why would be different now if I do not show how much this has been requested?

It seems that they are really not heard enough as there has not been any answer to this even when GMM and Vladimir must have seen it.

And although I do not know what would be needed to make this, I do not think it would need a huge load of work and lots of time to be able to make this request, AND this would really be very useful to get a much better use of the randomizer and get much more from it IF you could choose WHAT to randomize, on some filters this would not do much, but on many of them this could mean a big difference.

Skybase, Mon, 08 Oct 2012 06:09:49 -0400
<off topic>
aye dude I was directing the word at your response. I'm really just saying keep posts simple. So when you have quotes like: "+100001" these only have power in their original threads. Besides quotes like "+ whatever number" can be anywhere so no need to recap on that. The point is this, post what's necessary and meaningful to others. Keep the post simple, short as possible, and clean. All you really need are links to relevant threads and some opinions for what makes the feature awesome. Just because there are no official responses, it doesn't mean voices are being ignored.

It's really a life lesson learning how to get people to respond to a question or suggestion. You shouldn't over say and over do things, otherwise it becomes a nuisance and you lose respect like that. But you also can't do too little and expect things to happen because they won't. There's this good, middle-ground of what's appreciated over what's not. Took me years to learn that through talking to a variety of respected individuals in the graphics, film, and marketing industry. (That's one life lesson I learnt it the harsh way heh)
</off topic>

NOW, so back to the actual thread topic. So I've also been begging to see this feature too. Would love to hear a response anyway. :) I vote this thread up.

GMM, Mon, 08 Oct 2012 07:27:22 -0400
No confirmation doesn't really mean we do not listen or ignore your requests :)

StevieJ, Mon, 15 Oct 2012 15:49:12 -0400
That wasn't a flat out "Nooooooo!!!", right??? lol... :D

Just want to clarify ramdomization locks on the lighting controls too...which would be a huge help as well...

Good job, SpaceRay!!! :devil:

SpaceRay, Wed, 17 Oct 2012 03:34:47 -0400

Quote
GMM No confirmation doesn't really mean we do not listen or ignore your requests

I know that you may read it and KNOW about it BUT as there is NO answer or ANY comment we can´t know if you really care about it or not and if you will want to make something about it or not.

I understand very well that of course you CAN´T agree and make all the requests for FF and I would not expect that at all, BUT for something that has been already requested during 6 YEARS, I think we could have a little more information about it.

Quote
StevieJ Good job, SpaceRay!!!

Thanks, we both want to have this very important and useful feature in Filter Forge and I also want to help you and others to keep requesting for this.

StevieJ, Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:52:53 -0400
I personally would like to see little buttons that toggle red for locked and green for unlocked...much more contemporary than the open and closed padlocks...and much easier to see...

Just say'n... :devil:

SpaceRay, Sat, 20 Oct 2012 13:29:46 -0400

Quote
StevieJ I personally would like to see little buttons that toggle red for locked and green for unlocked...much more contemporary than the open and closed padlocks...and much easier to see...

YES! I agree with you that it would be much better to have red and green icons or buttons instead of the padlocks and I would like it this way too, BUT really I do not care much HOW they do it, what is important is that THEY DO IT AND COULD BE AVAILABLE IN FF 4.0!

I do not know WHY is so difficult to have this that seems to be something simple.

StevieJ, Mon, 22 Oct 2012 10:44:48 -0400
I agree, SpaceRay...just so long as they do it...but if they're gonna do it, might as well go all the way and do it right... :devil:

CorvusCroax, Wed, 24 Oct 2012 11:21:18 -0400

Quote
I personally would like to see little buttons that toggle red for locked and green for unlocked...much more contemporary than the open and closed padlocks...and much easier to see... Just say'n... Steve

FYI Actually, many UI designers try to avoid red/green dualities: color blind people can't differentiate them. (I forget the statistics, but it's actually a surprisingly high level of the adult male population.)
A lot of UI's will have 2 differentiating features: text AND color for example. Stoplights use color AND position.

Just sayin

SpaceRay, Wed, 24 Oct 2012 13:29:00 -0400

Quote
CorvusCroax A lot of UI's will have 2 differentiating features: text AND color for example. Stoplights use color AND position.

Well in that case we can have the simple and old padlock open and closed as shown here

OR

we can have the same padlocks open as above with green and padlocks closed in red, so even color blind people could know and differentiate them easily.

Skybase, Thu, 25 Oct 2012 02:51:12 -0400
One of these days....

CorvusCroax, Fri, 26 Oct 2012 17:54:29 -0400

Quote
Well in that case we can have the simple and old padlock open and closed as shown here

Which I made many, many years ago. :D

SpaceRay, Sun, 28 Oct 2012 02:43:50 -0400
Here below I have made the conversion of your great design of the padlocks with the red and green colors suggested by StevieJ

And for me surely looks better and easier to identify with these red and green, but as already said I really do not care much HOW FF INc. could do it, what is important is THAT THEY DO IT !

Quote
CorvusCroax Which I made many, many years ago

Thanks very much for making it as it is really very good and well done

And as it happens with many things in Filter Forge requests, you request or suggest something and it can happen that must wait many years until it perhaps can be implemented and really be inside Filter Forge, EVEN if it is something simple and VERY needed and useful like this and that would bring a whole new way of randomizing and would be much more useful and interesting.

Skybase, Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:49:22 -0400
... are we subconsciously being reminded of Christmas?

If I were designing the UI, I'd shade the whole parameter with a deeper color or change the BG color of the numerical area to indicate what's locked and what isn't. Just colors on the locks will throw people off.

Cierra, Sun, 28 Oct 2012 14:01:01 -0400
Why not just a simple column of on/off boxes on the left, like the one used for Seamless Tiling, with a header "Lock". The ones you want to lock will have an X after you click on them. No need to use icons or colors.

Skybase, Sun, 28 Oct 2012 14:24:45 -0400
I mean that works, but you do have to remember that it has to be visually representative of its functionality. In the case described, it mildly lend its hand to visually show what's happening, but it would become confusing when you have large filters with tons of parameters. (Fortunately, you don't see many of those.) Basically a list of checkboxes, as much as it is a decent solution, doesn't fully visualize the locked parameters.

This is why just slightly highlighting the value boxes with some color (or whatever shade) will show which parameters are locked and it will emphasize at what value it'll be locked at. When you have a list with some highlighted and some not, it becomes more visually evident what you've pressed and what you haven't.

Now highlighting won't fully work with color-inputs. That's where you just have to figure stuff out.

*Lesson learnt after designing my first scripted UI with locked params for Maya. Even in the most subtle manner, people would rather be told visually what's what and the clearer you make it, the better it is.* :p

I also hate how messy stuff gets quickly lolol. Not like anything here may end up anywhere... haha. Mockup below's... just whatever. LOL you guys say whatever. I don't know anymore. I'm writing and explaining this at 4 am in the morning and I had nothing better to do. :p

SpaceRay, Mon, 29 Oct 2012 03:02:39 -0400

Quote
Skybase are we subconsciously being reminded of Christmas?

:D I have just made the suggestion made by StevieJ :D

Quote
Skybase Just colors on the locks will throw people off.

I do not see why, and if you do not like these colors it can be changed or made in another way

If you do not like it, you could make your own mockup and suggest what you think would be good and best

Quote
Cierracat Why not just a simple column of on/off boxes on the left

As I have alread said I really do not care HOW they do it, it can buttons, checkboxes, padlocks, colored padlock, icons, or whatever FF Inc. considers good, what is really important IS THAT THEY MAKE IT AND INCLUDES IT IN FF 4.0

SpaceRay, Fri, 02 Nov 2012 05:51:26 -0400
There is still NO news about this from FF Inc.

Quote
Cierracat Why not just a simple column of on/off boxes on the left

Following this suggestion I want to suggest more ways to make it if perhaps could be useful or help

I have found this examples when searching for "Checkbox UI", "Checkbox HTML" and "Checkbox" in Google images

Here are 9 examples in random order

Number 1

Number 2

Number 3

Number 4

Number 5

Number 6

Number 7

Number 8

Number 9

And as I have already said I do not care WHICH way is done meanwhile it will be available for FF 4.0

GMM, Fri, 02 Nov 2012 06:35:15 -0400
The screenshot no.8 gives me nostalgic feelings. This is Internet Explorer 4.0 or even 3.0.

StevieJ, Mon, 19 Nov 2012 02:27:13 -0500
Whooooo Hooooo!!! I'm psyched!!! Thanks GMM... :)

SpaceRay, Tue, 20 Nov 2012 22:34:23 -0500
As my post here has been lost I put it again

Yes, GMM you are right I did not notice this until you have told it and I have seen that it has the very old IE logo and also the windows style is old too, I have only seen the checkboxes :D

I think that we will not have any news about this if this is going to be included in FF 4.0 or not, until it happens or not.

StevieJ, Fri, 30 Nov 2012 03:01:58 -0500
GMM said it was happening...and I'm sure GMM doesn't want the wrath of a SpaceRay and StevieJ "GMM LIED TO US ABOUT CONTROL LOCKS" string... lmao... :dgrin:

SpaceRay, Fri, 30 Nov 2012 06:27:36 -0500
I really hope and wish that Vladimir will really consider including this in FF 4.0 as it is very handy, useful and needed thing to get the most of the filters and to be able to have more possible ways to get variation in a customized and controlled way.

Please, Please, Vladimir be so kind to include this

Quote
StevieJ GMM said it was happening

I have not seen that GMM have told anything about this topic and this was "happening" or that it will be included in FF 4.0, so he did not lie (at least I did not see where he has said something about this)

StevieJ, Fri, 30 Nov 2012 13:58:35 -0500
Whoah!!! GMM deleted his post saying that control locks were going to be implemented in this version... It was right above my post thanking him... That was an underhanded thing to do without an explanation... Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy about being involved here... :?:

Skybase, Fri, 30 Nov 2012 21:15:53 -0500
hahaha I see what happened here.

You know, part of the reason why companies don't want to spell everything out is that they don't want to make empty promises. :p This is something I learnt from just doing business on a regular basis. Just gets nasty when things don't happen. See, if I were planning to make a GPU-based graphical development toolkit, I'm not going to say that until I have something. And if I say it during the planning phase or even during any alpha stage, but the software becomes vaporware I'd get a mob.

See, if SpaceRay's begging for answers in bold with "please please" in the sentence... then FilterForge has done a very good job keeping people excited. hahaha Patients isn't just a virtue, it's also practice.

And I doubt answers will be coming out anytime soon. And hey, if it does, that's cool too.

StevieJ, Sat, 01 Dec 2012 15:00:42 -0500
What are you going to do... I'd like to knock some sense into FF...and get them to take care of these easy ones that should have come out with the first beta... With high number of controls on most filters, Randomization can't effectively and efficiently used without control locks...

I also wish they would get a grasp on making this program easier to author filters for all skill levels by providing a huge library of base noise pattern components... For some reason, FF thinks everyone is going to obtain the ability to manipulate the existing Noise to get what they want...and why should they do this when the community can provide them... Think FF should take a page out of Genetica's handbook here...

SpaceRay, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 02:58:16 -0500
I agree with StevieJ in his last post here.

We are not asking something really very difficult and that would take a huge amount of time and development to make. I am not a programmer and do not know really how easy or difficult it can be, BUT limiting the data the randomizer can get from the settings in the filter, can´t be too much difficult.

I do not know if there could be any other possible technical reason or any other thing why this has not been done already in the the 3 versions available, but I hope that in the FF 4.0 this will be possible. And adding some kind of checkboxes to the UI does not need an high engineering master degree to make.

It would be a pity that this continues to be the same in FF 4.0 without any possible control and customization of the randomization.

Please consider adding this feature

Thanks very much

And begging even more I can say "Please" in more than 270 languages

Skybase, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 05:59:12 -0500
Aye, one way or another we'll find out. ;)

By the way, SpaceRay (this is totally off topic from the current discussion) when you write "please please" it makes it sound as though we're trying to appeal to authority. That weakens the argument for something we'd want. I suggest when you want something or when you need it, you should just ask for it directly without inducing a presence of jurisdiction inadvertently. It's good business practice too! :) I kinda pick on you all the time on these forums but believe me, I wouldn't suggest without good intent.

ANYWAY I wouldn't doubt it's been in the plans. I just don't know why it hasn't been done for all this time. ;) We'll never know what happened. I kinda wish we had more explanations for stuff.

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 09:08:06 -0500
Oh man, not this again. Spaceray, is it really necessary to post these endless repetitions of the same thing over and over and over and over? If anything, it makes things worse by creating an impression that "X is a feature requested by a single overly vocal member of the community" as opposed to "a feature requested by many different people".

I repeat again, SpaceRay, we know what features people request. I ask GMM and he compiles forum digests for me. Your endless posts make his job harder, because he has to filter out your comments and threads.

Some of your posts that have actual novel content in them may simply get mentally tagged as "another repetitive post with little substance", so you may want to consider improving your signal to noise ratio, just to get your ideas noticed.

Also, we know how to design checkboxes. We know how to google "checkbox UI", and how to use Google in general: I've been a white-hat SEO in one of my past careers. Please don't assume that the absence of urgent attention to a Feature X is a result of our inability to use Google or our inability to implement said feature in general. As for the examples you posted, they are all unusable for us because we follow native platform UI guidelines on Mac and PC, so our checkboxes have to have a native platform look. No need to reinvent and repaint the wheel here. (Let alone the fact that a checkbox without an explanation, next to a parameter name would be a bad interface for randomizer lock).

<official hat off>
P.S. And on a personal note, I'm an introvert, a rather extreme one, and my brain simply shuts down when it has to endure even lesser amounts of verbal overload. I apologize for stating this bluntly, but I just skim through your posts and heavily discount their value, and sometimes the value of the entire thread as well (unless GMM thinks the thread is indeed valuable).
<official hat on>

P.P.S. We definitely need a threaded forum with a karma system.

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 09:18:58 -0500
As for the topic of the thread, I currently have a couple of design directions for the randomizer lock.

The "little lock" variant on the right is pretty straightforward: you move the mouse over a parameter name, it gets underlined or perhaps a semi-transparent lock icon appears on the left near the parameter, which gives you an idea that clicking it means some kind of "lock". You click it, the parameter locks, and now we have to somehow explain the user what does the lock mean, perhaps through a yellow notification popup.

The "dropdown menu" variant on the left is potentially more flexible. It can be used for implementing any per-parameter actions, not just the randomization locking. For example, you could specify randomization strength for each parameter. Hovering over the parameter name would underline it and make the little triangle more apparent. After a click, a dropdown menu would appear, so there would be no need for explaining the commands to users because the menu will state them in plain text, e.g. "Lock randomization" / "Unlock randomization" etc... But on the other hand, I currently foresee no per-parameter options other than those related to randomization lock, so perhaps this approach would be wasteful and less clear for users.

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 10:31:59 -0500
Another remaining question is where to store the locked/unlocked flag: per filter or per preset?

Skybase, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 10:56:28 -0500
Per-preset sounds pretty nice actually. When I think about it, each of those presets are typically used as starting points, but having the ability to save locked down parameters means I can develop each preset like a tool of its own. So people can hit the next variant button safely without destroying the preset looks.

I would have said that per-filter would be enough since I feel as though control locks would be something the end-user would define, rather than the author. I guess per-preset sounds more like I'd take advantage and build filters accordingly... but will most others? :(

Although, given the way I just mentioned that, it sounds like people would develop filters that have 10 distinctly separate features and save 10 presets with their respective sliders locked so it acts as a multi-filter... filter. That sounds ugly and unwelcome. haha

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 11:04:34 -0500
Here's a rather strong flavor of the "little lock" approach I described above. When the mouse hovers over a parameter, it sort of turns into a button. If the parameter was unlocked, a "ghost unlocked lock" icon appears on it, and if the mouse cursor lingers for a little longer, a yellow tooltip pops up, with a stem pointing at the lock and a text explaining its meaning.

Turning the parameter name into a button is somewhat too strong, because it will be a bit annoying when scrolling long list of controls. On the other hand, if we remove the "buttoning", the link between the lock and parameter name will become less reinforced, and if we remove the on-hover behavior, the entire thing becomes much less discoverable.

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 11:07:00 -0500
Skybase, the control lock will definitely be adjustable by the user, not just the author. However, authors will be able to provide the default state of the locks, just as they do with control values.

Casual Pixels, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 11:15:48 -0500
Both are interesting UX questions.

First, which of the two options: "transparent" button (right example) or drop-down menu (left example). As you note, the drop-down UI option (left example) is nicely extensible. I'd recommend that direction IFF you have an actual intention to make use of that capability. If there aren't any, on the other hand, then definitely the lighter load of the simple on/off switch.

Second, though, is if you do go with the drop-down menu, there needs to be some visual indication of the fact that one or more non-default choices have been made under that item. Simplest would be a mini-icon to the left (a bullet, star, whatever) to the left to indicate that one or more non-default values have been selected.

<possibly unwarranted>
Another possibility would be to somehow indicate which item has been selected (as opposed to the simple option which simply indicates THAT an item has been selected).

So perhaps if "Parameters is not randomized" is selected, then an orange border or background is drawn around / used for the value field. If you also include an "always use filter's default value for this parameter" (an invented parameter -- not a request :-) then perhaps the entire parameter appears greyed out.

Finally I can imagine some menu items which are actions rather than state (e.g. "Reset to Preset Default") and so would not require specific GUI representation.
</possibly unwarranted>

Your second question is more interesting as obviously whichever answer you choose will not fit all use cases (and therefore guaranteeing some grumbles).

I happen to be one of the people who, years ago, made a request for the ability to suppress randomization.

Then, and now, I could actually live without persistence entirely.

For myself, anyway, I don't see this as some associated with either a particular filter or a particular preset within that filter. It's more of a particular state I'm in in terms of exploring a filter.

Then (and now) I expect I would use this to explore a downloaded filter. Start with a preset and start monkeying around with individual parameters, resetting to the default after toying with various values.

At that point, I have a decent idea of which respond in an interesting manner to variation and which are the ones I want to stay put. I'd like to then lock those down and start banging away on the Randomize button. As I go, I'd be likely to lock additional parameters down as the randomizer finds values I like.

So from one point of view, attaching the lock to the filter is reasonable: it potentially signals a parameter which doesn't necessarily respond well to random values. On the other, attaching the lock to a preset signals a SET of parameters which together define the style, with the unlocked parameters being potential variations within that style (e.g. Colour or Scaling)

Really the obvious suggestion is to allow both Filter level locks and Preset level locks. It moves you into the left-hand-side design, but then that would allow things like "Reset to Preset Default" and possibly others you have imagined.

Crapadilla, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 11:32:55 -0500

Quote
Another remaining question is where to store the locked/unlocked flag: per filter or per preset?

Control locks should be per-filter, and only per-filter, IMO.

The randomizer settings affect randomization globally (i.e per-filter), and so should control locks. Conceptually, they're a part of the randomization system.

If you start storing control locks per-preset, then randomizer settings should also be stored on a per-preset basis. That would be overkill and unnecessary, IMO.

Quote
[...] the control lock will definitely be adjustable by the user, not just the author. However, authors will be able to provide the default state of the locks, just as they do with control values.

+1.

Btw, the "little lock" approach (the minimal variant posted first) looks perfectly acceptable to me. The balloon popup would be awesome for a per-control help text or documentation though.

Skybase, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 12:15:17 -0500

Quote
Control locks should be per-filter, and only per-filter, IMO.

That was my initial say but I also just can't let go of a possibility of developing some filter that behaves like a little tool pack. haha. FilterForge for control freaks.

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 13:44:40 -0500

Quote
Btw, the "little lock" approach (the minimal variant posted first) looks perfectly acceptable to me.

Dilla, they are the same. The second screenshot I posted, the one with the yellow tooltip, shows the state when the cursor is placed over a parameter name AND has been there for half a second to trigger the tooltip. If you move the mouse outside the area with control names, it will look exactly the same as my earlier minimal variant.

Quote
The balloon popup would be awesome for a per-control help text or documentation though.

Very good point. I agree, it would be a shame to waste the tooltip on the randomizer lock alone.

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 13:54:36 -0500

Quote
Then, and now, I could actually live without persistence entirely.

Gilles, yes, but I think you'd still prefer that your randomization lock settings were retained at least for the current session. That is, when you lock some controls in a filter, switch to another filter then back to the first one, you'd see all your locks still in place.

Technically, the per-session persistence of filter settings is currently implemented by saving a temporary memory-only preset when you switch from one filter to another, and when you switch back to this filter again, FF applies that preset and you get your original settings back. Otherwise, you'd lose all your settings as soon as you switched to another filter.

So, presets, in their current implementation, are a natural candidate for storing the locks.

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 13:57:49 -0500

Quote
Control locks should be per-filter, and only per-filter, IMO. The randomizer settings affect randomization globally (i.e per-filter), and so should control locks. Conceptually, they're a part of the randomization system. If you start storing control locks per-preset, then randomizer settings should also be stored on a per-preset basis. That would be overkill and unnecessary, IMO.

That was my first reaction when I thought about this. However, I'm not sure that storing locks per filter follows from the randomizer being per filter. I don't see a logical connection here.

Also, a correction: the randomizer stores its settings globally (which you got right), but that doesn't mean per-filter, that means per-program, like Options.

So far, I have no strong opinion on the per-filter vs per-preset storage, so everyone feel free to influence me :)

Sharandra, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 15:14:33 -0500
Well I´m happy if we get control locks at all, but I can see how per-preset storage could add nice options, especially in complex filters. If it can be done that way, why not add it. :-)

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 16:40:36 -0500

Quote
Just want to clarify ramdomization locks on the lighting controls too...which would be a huge help as well...

StevieJ, yes, obviously, Lighting controls will be lockable too. The main lighting control would have a single lock affecting the sphere, the point lights and the ambiance settings together. The rest of the controls (Environment, Brightness and Saturation) will have their own separate locks.

On the main Settings tab, we'll likely make Size and Variation lockable as well, instead of having people toggle this in Randomizer Options.

I'm undecided about randomizing / locking the Seamless Tiling checkbox. On one hand, randomizing it doesn't make any sense, but on the other hand, having a single non-randomizable control is not very consistent.

inujima, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 16:40:59 -0500
I vote for per-filter +1.
I hope to keep control parameters when change to other preset.

For example, my filter Patterned Dithering has many controls. This filter controls can be categorized to 3 parts (Color pallets, Pattern controls and Pre-adjustments). When I used this filter, I often thought that want to change only Color Pallets with keeping Pattern controls and Pre-adjustments. Per-preset cannot have usage like this.

I think this usage is more practical than randomizer locks.

xirja, Mon, 03 Dec 2012 19:02:41 -0500
How about in 'Filter > Overrides' having a button to make locks either per filter or per preset. When they are per filter, every preset takes the 'default' values, and when changed to per preset, they are flexible. Gold locks to indicate per filter, silver locks to indicate per preset? I've had cases where both would be ideal.

Vladimir Golovin, Tue, 04 Dec 2012 03:15:26 -0500
inujima, If I understood you correctly, you are proposing a modification lock, not just a randomization lock.

So, when a parameter is locked, it cannot be modified manually, it is not affected by randomization, and it is not affected by applying presets. A locked parameter has its control completely disabled / greyed out.

Of course, it has to be per-filter, because its being per-preset would invalidate a major use case, that is, protecting some parameters from changes while applying presets.

Potentially, this is very interesting. However, I wonder what are the downsides?

Vladimir Golovin, Tue, 04 Dec 2012 03:21:15 -0500

Quote
How about in 'Filter > Overrides' having a button to make locks either per filter or per preset.

xirja, that would mean two separate code paths for us developers and two separate "understanding paths" for users. We generally avoid such decisions, because that would be shifting responsibility and cognitive burden to the customers.

Crapadilla, Tue, 04 Dec 2012 04:16:42 -0500

Quote
[...] I'm not sure that storing locks per filter follows fr om the randomizer being per filter. I don't see a logical connection here.

Control locks are supposed to help users fine-tune the randomization, acting as a per-control on/off switch for the randomizer, do they not? That's all they do: influence randomization. Consequently there appears to be a strong logical connection between the randomizer and control locks. To me, control locks appear to be an extension of the randomization system.

While there is no strict logical reason that control locks must be per-filter just because randomizer settings are stored globally, there appears to be a conceptual one (which I stated above).

I'd like to add - and this is purely my personal opinion - that per-preset control locks strongly smell of total overkill. I do not see any case wh ere I'd have a use for them. Enabling per-preset control locks might lead to strange jack-of-all-trades-type filter beasts (as Skybase stated above), and that would be regrettable.

Global Detail Override

Crapadilla — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 04:58:04 -0400

Crapadilla, Mon, 18 Feb 2013 12:31:27 -0500
I propose a Global Detail Override option, preferably implemented as a control slider on the Settings tab of the filter controls (where the Size, pixels, Variation and Seamless Tiling controls reside).

This slider would seamlessly blend between 100% noise detail (as defined inside the filter by the author) and 0% noise detail. It would affect all components that have a Details parameter (i.e. all Noise components).

The rationale behind this control is the following: Many library filters are not fine-tuned for Noise Detail. When left at unreasonably high values, too much noise detail results in long render times, even for basic 600x600 images. On high resolutions, this becomes excessive.

The proposed control sliders would give users the option to tune down the noise detail without diving into the guts of the filter, and thus provide the ability to effectively balance render time vs. noise quality. This could be potentially very handy for users that routinely render very high resolutions.

Sharandra, Mon, 18 Feb 2013 14:34:41 -0500
Great idea! :-)

It would be also useful for quick previewing of complex filters.

I admit I´m very guilty of using lots of high detail noise in my filters. :P
I check if roughness has any beneficial effect, if not I turn details to zero. Otherwise I usually leave it at 100 or whatever the default was. I guess I should look more into the fine tuning :S

SpaceRay, Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:07:29 -0500
+1000

I totally agree with this idea and would be very good and useful to have

SpaceRay, Mon, 11 Mar 2013 04:58:04 -0400
Any possible news about this useful feature?

Switch on/off or activate/desactivate settings inside Groups in FF 4.0

SpaceRay — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 04:38:10 -0400

SpaceRay, Wed, 06 Mar 2013 05:08:20 -0500
SUGGESTION FF 4.0 GROUPS SWITCH ON/OFF FOR SETTINGS

So I have thought that an easy way to separate settings and activate or desactivate settings according to a group of selected components could be using the FF 4.0 Groups.

I think that one good way and easy to make this would be to use the FF 4.0 Groups and that all the included settings from that groups could be switched ON/OFF if this group is selected and used by the filter, and become desactivated if it is not used. This could be with a simple switch component.

So if you have 3 FF 4.0 groups attached to a switch component, ONLY the settings and controls from ONLY one of this groups would go through the switch component and ONLY this group would be shown in the settings panel

I EXPLAIN NOW WHY THIS COULD BE INTERESTING AND USEFUL

in FF 3.0 ALL the settings that you add to the filter will be shown in the settings panel even if they belong to different parts of excluding option inside the filter, ANYTHING you add as a setting or control component will be added always to the settings panel.

Although this is good, there are sometimes that you wished that this would NOT happen, when you want for example to have 3 possible different effects inside the filter that have different controls each one and they are exclusive to each effect and will not work in the other two, and having them ALL in the settings panel is confusing

I wish that the settings could be hidden when they are not used when using a switch component

From the above example I want that with this filter that have two very different effects and that when going to the settings panel and when you have:

* the switch unchecked it would ONLY show in the settings panel the setttings applied to the RED group of components AND NOT SHOW the settings of the BLUE group

* and when you check on the switch it would ONLY show in the settings panel the settings from the BLUE group and do not show the ones from the RED group.

There is no point of having Mortar and Mortar width settings if you have choosen to use the first effect, as it will do nothing on the first effect and will not work at all, and would be confusing for customizing and knowing what can be used and will work.

And also the opposite, and if you only want the second effect, the others setting from the first group would not work or show any change.

SpaceRay, Mon, 11 Mar 2013 04:38:10 -0400
Perhaps the title of the thread is not very well done or showing what I really mean with this.

I do not want really to have a manual checkbox switch box on each group, ONLY want that the SWITCH component is updated so if a two groups are attached to it, you could be able to decide wich settings and controls go through that switch, if it would be only one of the groups (the one selected) or be both.

Seeing that there has not been any answer yet.

Nobody thinks that this would be great, handy and very useful to have?

I think it would be very good for when you want to have different alternatives and excluding options for your to choose and do not have mixed settings components ALL showing at the same time in the settings panel.

And now with the FF 4.0 groups I think that would be much easier to make than before with FF 3.0 that could be complex and hard to define which components and controls would be needed to hide and wich to show.

Camera

Burt — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 21:12:12 -0500

Burt, Thu, 07 Mar 2013 12:29:57 -0500
With all the landscape type filters coming out it would be nice to be able to add a simple Camera component. At the end of the render chain you might use the camera to zoom into a specific area that has been rendered. Or render sequential frames while incrementing the zoom so that you can animate a flythrough. I know you could probably build one with scripting and lots of FF magic but a simple one that you could drop in and set the target depth (maybe using a depth map?) and size of the frame would open the doors to new creative possibilities.

Indigo Ray, Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:35:14 -0500
I posted this once before. This filter lets you control the camera's movement in all directions and two types of rotation (I still can't figure out how to "pitch" the camera). If you look at the filter in the editor, you'll see that "roll" is attached to the end of the render chain, but the rest of the controls are all built in earlier. I also posted somewhere a version for filters that use a "smudge" component for height.

Burt, Thu, 07 Mar 2013 15:30:09 -0500
Gosh I should have guessed someone did it -eager to try this out. :) I guess when 4.0 is out some of these can be rolled into components if I understand right. Thanks.

Burt, Thu, 07 Mar 2013 21:12:12 -0500
Well I couldn't use the whole camera but I was able to use some of the ideas from your sample to add a simple 'camera mode' to the filter so thanks. Now if I can just get this thing to upload ....

Add a search in the Filter Editor Components panel to search by name?

SpaceRay — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 03:04:49 -0500

SpaceRay, Mon, 04 Mar 2013 22:00:55 -0500
When you open the filter editor and then open the components panel it appears at the top the components categories to choose one of them and then the components inside that category appears below.

Well, the problem I find is that I know the name of the component I want but I do not remember always in wich category is stored and so sometimes I have to open many categories to find it, or click on the "all" and find it somewhere in the list.

My suggestion would be if it would be possible to add a search box at the top to be able to search any component you may need without having to open any category, and so it will open directly the category that this component is and you can select it and drop it to the workspace, OR if it would be possible to make the search and the component would be placed already in the workspace.

OR keyboard key based search instead, also another possible suggestion if the above one is not good and to have an alternative, is to do already as it is now, that if you click on one letter that belong to the beginning of one of the categories, this one is selected and shown, so the suggestion is that if you click for example "T" all the components that would begin with "T" would be shown

Many of you that have lots of experience and know really well FF is not needed, but for beginners or ones like me that do not remember things, I think it could be useful and handy.

Thanks

Skybase, Mon, 04 Mar 2013 22:17:03 -0500
:p I suggested this several times.

I suggested a keyboard shortcut command to bring out a small search box to type-instant-search components.

I typically just tap the first letter of the component several times in the list and quick search the list. You know?

SpaceRay, Mon, 04 Mar 2013 22:32:46 -0500

Quote
Skybase I typically just tap the first letter of the component several times in the list and quick search the list. You know?

:?: Is this possible? How?

OH, YES!!! I found it how, I have just tried it now and YES, you are right that this is possible already, I did not know, because for this work as you say you MUST click first on one of the components inside the ALL category (or any other category) to highlight it and so you are inside the panel

Then after having this selected, when you tap on one letter, the first component that begins with that letter will appear and be selected, and if this is not the want you want, just tap again and it goes to the next one, and so on. :) :ff:

Thanks for letting me know it and that in some my second sugesttion above is already made and working inside FF 3.0.

if anyone does not know what I mean, I have put this screenshot here

Skybase, Tue, 05 Mar 2013 22:01:09 -0500
Feature's been around since 1.0 I think :p

Well see I still would want a search bar and/or a quick access tab+command (default in some other node based programs) to search components.

SpaceRay, Wed, 06 Mar 2013 03:04:49 -0500

Quote
Skybase Feature's been around since 1.0 I think

Well, if it has been since 1.0 I have found it and discovered 5 years later in FF 3.0 :D

I do not think that this is covered and said in the FF manual, although I may have missed it if it is there.

Quote
Skybase Well see I still would want a search bar and/or a quick access tab+command (default in some other node based programs) to search components.

I agree also, it would be good to have a search bar to search for components using more than one key, I mean that when you tap the key "C" for example, there are many components beginning with that letter "Cells, Checker, Color control..." and in the search bar you could put "Ch" and then it would appear probably "Checker"

Proper batch tools = instant FF4 upgrade

Spaz8 — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 15:01:35 -0500

Spaz8, Tue, 09 Oct 2012 09:39:29 -0400
I need the ability to point filter forge at a folder of images and have it apply the current filter settings to every image and render that out, perhaps in a different render target folder.

I don't care about doing 5 processes to 1 one image ( the current batch tools focus). I want to do one, or several passes on a folder. Ie, an image sequence (rendered animation) or a bunch of resources for other use. Ideally FF could be told to do multiple passes on the same folder rendering out multiple images as a result of each process ie. filter1 + settings, filter2 + settings results in 2 rendered image files with the original left intact in its original location.

Give me a proper GUI interface to pic folders and filter settings, not a command line.

There is a 3rd party one for osx is cool, but again only allows me to work on 1 image file at a time, which is pretty useless. An After fx plugin would be nice, but being able to process a folder of images through FF does that and more. It is far more flexible than what what I could do with just a AE plugin.

Please put this in FF4, as soon as I see a hint of this feature you'll have a ton of people upgrading.

The current implementation and lack of GUI based flexible batch tools really handicaps FF's usefulness and application into other markets.

Betis, Wed, 10 Oct 2012 02:39:42 -0400
+1

SpaceRay, Wed, 10 Oct 2012 03:00:50 -0400
Welcome to the forums!!

I know that you are new, and surely do not know about the history of request of Filter Forge.

Batch rendering is another of the things that has been already request since 6 YEARS ago in 2006! so this is nothing new :D

It seems that there are some features MUCH requested in all these years and there are many threads about this tpica and requesting the same thing BUT FF Inc. still think that this is a low priority and not something important to do.

And regretably from the last news from FF Inc. in FF 4.0 there will NOT be any updated or be included any kind of batch rendering other than the ALREADY AVAILABLE Command-Line Renderer, although all is not bad news as there is that wants to make an external tool utility that could be able to make this batch rendering with a GUI and interface to use with a mouse instead.

SO I think that you will not have any "instant upgrade" unless FF Inc. could change their idea of not changing anything about batch rendering.

GMM SAID NO BATCH RENDER MODIFICATION IN FF 4.0

This is what GMM have wrote about this topic in this thread here

Quote
GMM I can confirm there will be no additional automation tools beyond the command-line renderer in FF 4.

THERE IS AVAILABLE NOW THE SJEITI´s FF BATCH

see in the first post here

Or directly going to the tool here --> ffbatch by sjeiti

Also I have made this other thread Questions about using Sjeiti´s FF Batch online application

Quote
Sjeiti Filter Forges command-line batch rendering is great but a bit too difficult for people to use. It only renders the presets of an ffxml plus you need to make an extra xml file discribing what to render exactly.

I agree much with you that the command-line batch rendering may be great BUT is too difficult to use unless you have experience on this and know how to use it

ALSO AVAILABLE ALREADY FOR MACOS X the TOTTE´S FFBATCHMASTER

FFBatchMaster for Mac OS X by Totte

JADE SKAGGS WANTS TO MAKE A BATCH RENDERING EXTERNAL TOOL FOR FILTER FORGE

Quote
Jade Skaggs I think I could fairly easily make a Windows application that does just this by simply automating the FF software.

For more information see the first post of this thread here

MY SUGGESTIONS FOR A BATCH RENDERING FEATURE IN FF

In this same thread above from Jade Skaggs I have suggested the following

Quote

SpaceRay

Well if you are going to make a application for making this batch processing I could use the donation button and agree to pay for your work

1 - Be able to tell which filter and which preset (or presets if want to have more than one) do you want.

2 - Be able to tell wh ere is the source of the image that is going to be applied with a button to sel ect the source and do not have to copy the path.

3 - Be able to apply the same filter and preset to a whole folder of images, so this way would be a real batch processing.

4 - Be able to apply 2 or more different filters with the same presets to the same image. I mean that first apply the first filter, and then after apply the second (or more) to the same image (or images if it is a folder instead of only one) and so it could be like stacking filters.

5 - Be able to apply the same filter but with 2, 3 or 4 (or more) different presets, so you would have 2, 3 or 4 (or more) different images (using the same source image) with this 2, 3 or 4 (or more) presets applied.

6 - Be able to change the resolution of the result so it does not depend and is related to the same resolution as the original source image

LIST OF OTHER THREADS ABOUT THIS TOPIC

Simple Batch Rendering November 2006

Opening multiple instances of Filterforge for batch rendering March 2008

FF animations March 2007

One the good threads about this topic is this although is oriented to animation of the filter result and not really beatch rendering a folder of images.

batches for all July 2009

Ideas for Filter Forge Made in 2009

Please, which features from the WIKI are the most wanted by you ?

Quote
CorvusCroax 5) Simple batch utility with a GUI. (Some simple tweening would be nice, also.) Simple keyframing & Batch render. (Command-line batch render is available, but it does not support keyframing) [12]

Batch Render !!!November 2009

Trigger a sequence/batch of filters September 2011

Q: Batch processing script and Open Image June 2012

In this thread above I suggested

Quote

YES, it would very good if FF could have a "Batch Process..." option in the File Menu and not ONLY do the renders with just the loaded imaged.

1 - It would be good to be able to apply a filter with same preset to a folder of images

2 - And also would be good to make a Batch Process of applying different presets of the same filter to the main image loaded.

3 - And if it would be possible to have, ALSO an option to be able to choose and sel ect a group of filters and then apply all of them to a single image with the same preset. I mean I choose 10 different filters and want to batch apply all of them to the same image without having to open and load each image inside FF, render and then save it and repeat again the same with the next filter.

Quote

MOrgantao wrote:

Quote
SpaceRay 1 - It would be good to be able to apply a filter with same preset to a folder of images

Please, please, please, PLEASE add this to FF4. This is a very important thing to have!

Quote
SpaceRay 2 - And also would be good to make a Batch Process of applying different presets of the same filter to the main image loaded.

This is exactly what the batch renderer does. Still, would be nice to be able to do it fr om the main gui too.

Quote

SpaceRay
3 - And if it would be possible to have, ALSO an option to be able to choose and sel ect a group of filters and then apply all of them to a single image with the same preset. I mean I choose 10 different filters and want to batch apply all of them to the same image without having to open and load each image inside FF, render and then save it and repeat again the same with the next filter.

Yep, that would be magnificent! Like a filter that just calls a list of filters. Would be very helpfull.

Batch Render request fr om the FF Beta 3.0 forum part by Deskar June 2012

From this other thread there is an answer from Morgantao

Quote
Morgantao +189786756 fr om me. I want a way to apply a filter with the same settings on a whole folder of images. I don't even care if there's a shiny GUI or not, I can handle a command line, I just need something that will let me do that.

Automating filter generation and save August 2012

From this thread above here

Quote

WHAT WOULD BE GOOD TO BE ABLE TO DO AS BATCH PROCESSING IN FILTER FORGE

For example I have one single image and want to:

* be able to select a group of filters ( for example 20 filters) and apply all of them to this same image, also it would be needed to be able to choose which one of the filters preset will be applied, so the result will 20 images.

* be able to select a group of filters (for example 5) and a group of presets of these filters (for example 20 filters and choose 3 presets of each filter) and apply them all to this same image, so the result will be 100 images.

* be able to select a group of filters and a different amount of presets fr om each filter, perhaps 2 presets fr om filter 1, 4 presets fr om filter 2, 1 preset fr om filter 3, etc. and apply all of them to the same single image so you will have lots of different versions of the same image with different filters and presets.

For example I have 40 images in a folder and want to:

* be able to apply the same filter and same preset to all the 40 images. Result 40 images

* be able to apply a group of filters, with one preset each one, to all the 40 images. Result 40 images

* be able to select a group of filters (for example 5) and a group of 3 presets to each, and so you will get as result 600 images.

* Be able to select (as above already described) a group of filters and a group of presets and apply all of them to all the 40 images.

Skybase, Wed, 10 Oct 2012 05:19:59 -0400
Mother of god that was one monster post. +10 for feature.

Spaz8, Wed, 10 Oct 2012 07:26:34 -0400
I just hope the developers realize that the command-line batch process doesn't even do the type of batch processing that is desired by probably 90% of people that want to batch process with FF!

Making a script that does 8 things to 1 image is pretty much like having no batch tools at all to me, this is not the behavior I am looking to automate. I want to process 8 images just 1 time through FF would be a huge start.

I hope they realize by not allowing the software to process a folder of images they are limiting the tool to just photographers and still imagery.

If you could process a folder of images you would see use in Film, Video, Motion graphics, and the Video game industry.

They are really holding back the potential of the software.

GMM, Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:00:58 -0400

Quote
I need the ability to point filter forge at a folder of images and have it apply the current filter settings to every image

What's the problem with doing this with the current batch renderer?

Quote

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<Tasks>
<Task>
<Image value="D:\Sources\1.jpg" />
<Selection value="" />
<Result path="D:\Targets\1.jpg" />
<Filter value="c:\Users\GMM\AppData\Roaming\Filter Forge 3\System\Library\Library_227-2.ffxml" />
<Preset value="1" />
</Task>
<Task>
<Image value="D:\Sources\2.jpg" />
<Selection value="" />
<Result path="D:\Targets\2.jpg" />
<Filter value="c:\Users\GMM\AppData\Roaming\Filter Forge 3\System\Library\Library_227-2.ffxml" />
<Preset value="1" />
</Task>
<Task>
<Image value="D:\Sources\3.jpg" />
<Selection value="" />
<Result path="D:\Targets\3.jpg" />
<Filter value="c:\Users\GMM\AppData\Roaming\Filter Forge 3\System\Library\Library_227-2.ffxml" />
<Preset value="1" />
</Task>
</Tasks>

Skybase, Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:41:41 -0400
Nothing, but I'd rather see it as a feature with a GUI, nicely packed inside FilterForge instead of me editing xml files.

SpaceRay, Thu, 11 Oct 2012 01:32:31 -0400

Quote
Skybase Mother of god that was one monster post. +10 for feature.

monster post? :?: I do not know whhy you say this because this is a "short" and "tiny" compilation of 6 years of requests ;) :D

thanks for +10 for feature.

And it seems that FF Inc. will not do nothing about this amount of requests and so this will keep growing and growing another 2 years more until FF 5.0

Quote
Spaz8 I hope they realize by not allowing the software to process a folder of images they are limiting the tool to just photographers and still imagery.

I do not think they will realize, and they will only do what they think is important and have a priority even is something is requested very much since long time ago, I asked some time ago a similar question like this with another topic, and said they could not do it for all the markets.

Quote
GMM What's the problem with doing this with the current batch renderer?

Because this is a mess and akward way to do it

There is already English, Spanish, Swedish, Turkish, Irish and now FilterForgish as shown by GMM ;) :D well the right name would be XLMish

Do you a have a Filtergorgish to English translator ? ;) :D

This is a boring, horrible, aukward and tedious way to do the batch processing!!!!

AND FOR 120 IMAGES TO BE PROCESSED ???? :?:

What happens if you have 120 images to process ??? How do you do it ?

do you have write by hand and repeat this text below 120 times :?: :cry: :(

<Task>
<Image value="D:\Sources\1.jpg" />
<Selection value="" />
<Result path="D:\Targets\1.jpg" />
<Filter value="c:\Users\GMM\AppData\Roaming\Filter Forge 3\System\Library\Library_227-2.ffxml" />
<Preset value="1" />

GMM, Thu, 11 Oct 2012 06:23:46 -0400

Quote
do you have write by hand and repeat this text below 120 times

What you're requesting here is a text autoreplacement tool. Don't you think this is beyond the Filter Forge scope? :) You can easily google up some tools that allow you to automate such kind of tasks.

<COMPLETELY UNOFFICIAL MODE>

Quote
This is a boring, horrible, aukward and tedious way to do the batch processing

The command line is exactly the right way to do batch processing. If you don't like the UI you can write your own front-end — like Totte has already. This actually gives more freedom than a fixed set of graphical buttons and sliders.

</COMPLETELY UNOFFICIAL MODE>

Sharandra, Thu, 11 Oct 2012 06:32:28 -0400

Quote
GMM: The command line is exactly the right way to do batch processing. If you don't like the UI you can write your own front-end — like Totte has already. This actually gives more freedom than a fixed set of graphical buttons and sliders.

Well If only I knew how to write my own...
Don´t you think that´s a bit arrogant? Some ppl here are just artists and not coders. And seriously I have a lot more important things to do than editing some f...ng files. :-)

GMM, Thu, 11 Oct 2012 06:50:24 -0400

Quote
Don´t you think that´s a bit arrogant? Some ppl here are just artists and not coders.

I don't mean to offend anyone :) I'm not a programmer either and haven't written a line of commercial code. But if I have a tool I could spend some time learning how to use it.

I think these are very different types of requests: "give us vector support", or "give us randomizer locks" or "give us a Loop component" — it will allow us to do something we cannot do now.
And quite another thing is "I don't like the look of the CMDrenderer, make it fancier".

Sharandra, Thu, 11 Oct 2012 07:07:49 -0400
Sorry that my post was maybe a bit harsh, I shouldn´t post before having coffee :S

Well, if I make a filter, I try to make it so that everyone can use it without studying ancient chinese first ;-)

I got so many other things to learn that have a much higher priority. All I want is a button that will render out all my maps in one go, and even if it has a lower priority than other things, I hope that sometime in the future it will be implemented.

Skybase, Thu, 11 Oct 2012 07:14:38 -0400
Actually part of the truth is that if you're doing animation in Maya, by default you'd be using "Batch Render" which in the end for more specific options are available externally under command line which you have to make .bat files for. This is pretty "industry standard" as my buddies in business practically do this every time they need to hit a couple renders. (The mac version of Maya handles things slightly differently.)

Surely the most powerful option is at the base level which in any case FF's command line render is as powerful as anything really gets. The issue here is we're dealing with people who basically don't have the knowledge / skill dealing with xml files on a regular basis. I know they're not hard to deal with, not hard to write one at all and in fact it's more readable and writable than most people assume. The catch is, who uses it. As much as I don't have issues making these xml files a bunch of people would rather see some nice UI with sliders and selectable things instead of huge loads of text. FilterForge is extremely visual until you reach it's extremely powerful, but little understood, cmd line renderer.

So regardless of what power the actual thing has, people are better off with something they can better associate with: better known as "something with a clickable interface."

The bottom line: Oh come on... why not.

Spaz8, Thu, 11 Oct 2012 09:38:51 -0400
I tried to hack through the XML batch files, and read the docs and couldn't get things to work. I then found the 3rd party option above - bless him for doing that (which is only available for OSX) and It did not have the functionality I needed, to process a folder of images. I assume 80% of people see there is only a command line option and give up there. I'll be generous, call myself dumb and say %50 of those people are able to get the xml script working. I've worked in the film industry, and have been in the games industry for the last 8 years. I've written the odd python script, and have been doing computer animation for about the last 20 years. I lean more towards your docs blow. The current batch tools are written for people that have a lot of free time, enjoy coding, and have tiny microscopic tasks to batch process (less than 10 files?)

The kicker is even if I could get the xml script to work, it would still be a horrible tool. FF is not a production tool in its current state. It is like Zbrush was 10 years ago, a toy. Before Weta etc told them how to improve things.

I'm looking to process 100's if not 1000's of images in a go. What if the file locations change? what if the files are renamed? I get to write a and edit a 10,000 line xml script every day.

"The command line is exactly the right way to do batch processing" - clearly you know your users needs.

GMM, Thu, 11 Oct 2012 09:47:27 -0400

Quote
"The command line is exactly the right way to do batch processing" - clearly you know your users needs.

I clearly know my own needs, and that message was clearly marked as a personal opinion.

ThreeDee, Thu, 11 Oct 2012 12:00:18 -0400
If you have Photoshop, you can batch process a folder with Photoshop actions. Record the filter into a Photoshop action and batch process a folder that way.

As I recall, Filter Forge will always run the last filter used (and not the actual filter that was recorded) when done this way, so you can't actually store separate filters in separate actions, other than that works fine.

James, Thu, 18 Oct 2012 14:21:09 -0400
If i ever need to process lots of images i have a huge xml i wrote once. It took a while to make the first time (About 5-10 mins of copy/paste and value edits) but now all i have to do is delete any extra outputs, place the images to process in a folder and run it which takes all to 10 seconds. ;)

SpaceRay, Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:16:54 -0400

Quote
ThreeDee If you have Photoshop, you can batch process a folder with Photoshop actions. Record the filter into a Photoshop action and batch process a folder that way.

well, this can be a good idea, using adobe bridge you can select an amount of images and then go to Tools--> Photoshop --> Image Processor and then in the end of there is a part for adding your own action to be applied to all the images selected

and you can choose the output size in this image processor and the destination folder

Now I have to make the action for this as I have little experience on this, although is NOT difficult to make.

Here I have found this very good and useful tutorial for making actionsGuide to Automating Photoshop

Quote
ThreeDee Filter Forge will always run the last filter used (and not the actual filter that was recorded) when done this way, so you can't actually store separate filters in separate actions, other than that works fine.

YES, is true, you can ONLY use this with the last filter that has been Rendered (not just used) into photoshop and will use the same settings, so you must prepare Filter Forge previously with your choosen filter and settings and render one example into photoshop and so have it ready.

APPLY DIFFERENT FILTERS TO HAVE DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE SAME IMAGE

Although this can work great and fine for applying the same filter and settings to many images, one thing I would really like also is to be able to choose an amount of filters and make different versions of the same image, and this can´t be made with the Photoshop actions.

I do not mean to apply one filter over the other in stack, I mean to have different versions of the same image and how it would look after it was applied

SpaceRay, Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:20:02 -0400

Quote
James If i ever need to process lots of images i have a huge xml i wrote once. It took a while to make the first time (About 5-10 mins of copy/paste and value edits) but now all i have to do is delete any extra outputs, place the images to process in a folder and run it which takes all to 10 seconds

Well this can be good if you already KNOW how to make the script in XML and know how to use right and be able to choose and select the folder of images and configure it, regretably I do not know how to do it, and it can be fast and simple for you, but not at all for me, perhaps if you can explain HOW you have done it and HOW you use it would be good and useful.

SpaceRay, Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:37:26 -0400

Quote
GMM The command line is exactly the right way to do batch processing. If you don't like the UI you can write your own front-end — like Totte has already. This actually gives more freedom than a fixed set of graphical buttons and sliders.

I agree that the command line can be a right way to do it and it can work right and well IF you know how to use it and know how to make a script right that it makes what you wants as James have told above, but not for artists that are not coders and do not have knowdlege of XML, and I am sorry to tell that the instructions already given in the FF Help are not enough to know how to use it, sorry.

AND if I do not like the UI I can´t in any way write my own front-end because as said I am not at all a coder and could never make my own software like Totte have done and if I could I would have already done it and shared here in the forum.

Quote
GMM I think these are very different types of requests: "give us vector support", or "give us randomizer locks" or "give us a Loop component" — it will allow us to do something we cannot do now. And quite another thing is "I don't like the look of the CMDrenderer, make it fancier".

I agree with you that these are different type of requests AND that more important, useful and interesting are things that will ALLOW to make things in FF that you CAN´T in any way do now and I agree that these are more important and priority to this other request of having a graphical UI for the CMDrenderer.

And if I have to choose I prefer that Filter Forge developers spend the time on making and adding things that will allow to have vectors, randomizer locks and loop component and any other thing THAN having this batch render graphical UI.

BUT then what I want is TO KNOW how I can use the CMDrenderer in the right way

This is why I have made this thread below to ask HOW to use it in a good way and NOT request for a better CMD, just to know how to use it.

Please, could there be a tutorial on how to use command-line renderer

Quote

GMM

Quote
SpaceRay do you have write by hand and repeat this text below 120 times

What you're requesting here is a text autoreplacement tool. Don't you think this is beyond the Filter Forge scope? You can easily google up some tools that allow you to automate such kind of tasks.

:?: a text autoreplacement tool ?? :?: Sorry I do not understand why I would need this to make the XML script.

I could google up tools that allow me to automate this kind of things IF I KNEW what to search for and what would be really needed, if you could help to tell me WHAT I should would be good.

I have found these commercial XML editors that have a GUI and that they make the XML code for you and the script BUT even then I do not how to make it :blush:

Liquid XML Studio - XML Editor

and also

Stylus Studio: Powerful XML Integrated Development Environment (XML IDE)

I have also already been searching for XML batch script generator and automating tasks and found some that are for the MAYA software

Batch Script Generator 1.3.0 - Provides a user friendly interface to create batch files for rendering multiple Maya scenes

and here is another different one

Batch Render Script Generator 0.01

Quote
from the link above This is a simple utility that generates batch render scripts for Maya (currently), but could easily be adapted for any other software that accepts command line execution.

I do not know if this could mean that this could be adapted to use with other software like the FF Command line Renderer that could aceppt command line excution from a script like this.

Although even then I would not know HOW to do the conversion and adapt it.

Skybase, Thu, 18 Oct 2012 21:21:18 -0400
Now I'm starting to think this thread's getting extremely personal and less of a feature request.

You seriously don't need xml editors, it won't make your life easier in this case since the xml file is super super easy to understand to begin with. Use notepad!! Besides you aren't making xml for other purposes so don't bother finding new software.

As for the Maya batch editors, they look nice but don't really do much other than make file operations easier. Batch render script gen looks promising but I wouldn't bother with it. It'll be a huge waste of time dealing with it since the xml file's easy to understand to begin with. You'd rather spend the time just filling in the gaps appropriately in each <task> element.

Does cmd line render need a tutorial after all? I'm getting the sense that having a basic tutorial on this would make life a bit easier.

I still vote for the feature anyway. But if it won't happen then I'll work with what I have. <--- people should have this type of philosophy with creative software.

CFandM, Thu, 18 Oct 2012 21:33:34 -0400

Quote
Skybase said: I still vote for the feature anyway. But if it won't happen then I'll work with what I have. <--- people should have this type of philosophy with creative software.

SpaceRay, Fri, 19 Oct 2012 02:31:36 -0400
As I have said already I do not expect or want to have a batch render feature in FF 4.0 if this is going to take time from making other more interesting and useful features that could be oriented to making things that you CAN´T do now in FF.

I am NOT requesting that FF makes this Batch render and modify the Command-Line Rendereras GMM have already said that they will not do it.

Quote
Skybase Does cmd line render need a tutorial after all? I'm getting the sense that having a basic tutorial on this would make life a bit easier.

YES!! This is really what I am requesting and asking for as in Please, could there be a tutorial on how to use command-line renderer

I am very sorry that I do not understand or know how to use with the only information given by this Command-Line Renderer help page

Quote
I still vote for the feature anyway. But if it won't happen then I'll work with what I have. <--- people should have this type of philosophy with creative software.

I also still vote for it BUT I know that FF will most probably NOT make it for FF 4.0 (well surely 99%) so what I want is USE WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE, I mean to learn to use in the right way the Command-Line Renderer

And the way I want to use it most would be to select an amount of different filters and be able to apply all this filters to the same image and see the results so I would not have to wait for the rendering time when I am working and could leave it making it in the background.

GMM, Fri, 19 Oct 2012 06:42:02 -0400

Quote
and do not have knowdlege of XML

SpaceRay, do you confuse XML with Chinese? :)
An XML file is plain text, it is meant to be human-readable. Open it up in Notepad and see what it is constructed of.

Quote
BUT then what I want is TO KNOW how I can use the CMDrenderer

SpaceRay, please don't take offense but this looks like "teach me how to use Filter Forge". Just use it and you'll learn while using. We have a sample XML shipped with the program (and I have made a more streamlined version for you in this thread) – just render it and see what happens, then adjust some parameters and see what has changed – you can't actually break anything :)

If you have specific questions please ask them in the other thread.

GMM, Fri, 19 Oct 2012 07:08:23 -0400

Quote
SpaceRay do you have write by hand and repeat this text below 120 times GMM What you're requesting here is a text autoreplacement tool. SpaceRay a text autoreplacement tool ?? smile:?: Sorry I do not understand why I would need this to make the XML script.

This can be useful to automate creation of the task file so you don't have to repeat the task 120 times. In good old DOS batch script it will look similar to the following:

[CODE]
FOR /F %%i IN (*.jpg) DO (
text_replacement.exe batch.xml source.jpg %%~ni.jpg
text_replacement.exe batch.xml target.jpg %%~ni_target.jpg
FFXCmdRenderer-x86.exe batch.xml )
[/CODE]

The exact code will vary depending on the text replacement tool used, but the idea remains the same: it loops through all the JPG files in the current folder, replaces the substrings in batch.xml with the current filename, then runs CMDrenderer.

CorvusCroax, Fri, 26 Oct 2012 19:40:41 -0400

Quote
YES, is true, you can ONLY use this with the last filter that has been Rendered (not just used) into photoshop and will use the same settings, so you must prepare Filter Forge previously with your choosen filter and settings and render one example into photoshop and so have it ready.

That's not the case: you can save calls to specific filter forge filters inside photoshop actions. This is actually a great feature IMHO, which I've used to do all kinds of automation for large #'s of files. (and... I just tried it and it still works.)

So, you could have one action run FF filter A, and then have another action to run FF filter B. It appears to remember even which preset you used (although you could put a hold/input step in there, if you wanted).

(Note that in Pshop you can you can have actions which reference other actions: so you can have Action A, which calls Action B, does pshop stuff, then runs Action C, etc. )

CorvusCroax, Fri, 26 Oct 2012 20:08:33 -0400
I have to agree with the sentiments of the original post, by Spaz8:

Quote
I don't care about doing 5 processes to 1 one image ( the current batch tools focus). I want to do one, or several passes on a folder. Ie, an image sequence (rendered animation) or a bunch of resources for other use.

Totally agree: if I want to do a series of processes / FF filters to a stack of images, I write a Pshop action for it. And I DO in fact do this: to hundreds of images at a go.

Quote
Give me a proper GUI interface to pic folders and filter settings, not a command line.

Completely agree. By and large, FF users are more artists than programmer.
It takes almost as much time to write the batch as it does to just do it by hand.

Quote
The current implementation and lack of GUI based flexible batch tools really handicaps FF's usefulness and application into other markets.

The big missing link, IMHO, for Filter Forge is accessing the filter controls during a batch. (right now, from pshop actions it can't change the random seed, for example, without user input.)
What I need is a little interface, running inside FF, which:

1) Runs for a set # of times.

2) Exports out all the maps to a selected location, with my specified naming system. (e.g.: "Texture1_bump.png")

3) Can roll another random seed.

4) Can access the randomizer.

5) Each control can be tweened from one value to another value over the series of steps. This would allow simple animation of filters. Each control could be tweened like this, if needed. This would be automatic, not requiring the user to go in and calculate all the settings and write up XML. Ideally, the user could define the rate of the tween using FF's curve interface - allowing non-linear rates. (for example, for a blinking light.)

This would allow some really seriously useful animation and automation capabilities ... and which would rival or exceed those of other (unnamed) competing products out there.
AHEM...1
COUGH...2

SpaceRay, Sun, 28 Oct 2012 02:55:25 -0400

Quote

CorvusCroax

Quote
SpaceRay YES, is true, you can ONLY use this with the last filter that has been Rendered (not just used) into photoshop and will use the same settings, so you must prepare Filter Forge previously with your choosen filter and settings and render one example into photoshop and so have it ready.

WOW!! You are right I have been able to make it as you have said and IT WORKS VERY WELL and I was doing it wrong before, and thanks to you I knew that this IS POSSIBLE and I had to know HOW could this be done

I have just done this Mini Tutorial for using FF filters Batch render with Photoshop Actions to let know how to do it if anyone wants to know.

BUT with the actions you still can not do what I put here below

CAN A PHOTOSHOP ACTION RUN DIFFERENT FF FILTERS OVER ONE IMAGE AND HAVE DIFFERENT RESULTS?

This is in reference to this I have said already above

Quote

SpaceRay

APPLY DIFFERENT FILTERS TO HAVE DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE SAME IMAGE

Although this can work great and fine for applying the same filter and settings to many images, one thing I would really like also is to be able to choose an amount of filters and make different versions of the same image, and this can´t be made with the Photoshop actions.

I do not mean to apply one filter over the other in stack, I mean to have different versions of the same image and how it would look after it was applied

SpaceRay, Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:39:09 -0400

Quote
Spaz8 I need the ability to point filter forge at a folder of images and have it apply the current filter settings to every image and render that out, perhaps in a different render target folder.

Do you have Photoshop ? As instead of point filter forge at a folder of images, you can point a Photoshop action to a folder of images and then be able to apply the current filter settings to every image in that folder and have it saved in another folder and this is already possible in FF 3.0

As I have said in my previous post above here

I have just done this Mini Tutorial for using FF filters Batch render with Photoshop Actions to let know how to do it if anyone wants to know.

SpaceRay, Tue, 11 Dec 2012 02:52:08 -0500
Anyone else have tried to make batch render with actions in Photoshop?

I would like to share your experiences and ideas about this and so could be possible to get the most of it as it seems that Vladimir will not change this in FF 4.0 and we will have to wait until another version.

I am learning how to use better the Photoshop actions and how to use them in a more productive way

SpaceRay, Fri, 01 Mar 2013 15:01:35 -0500
As there has not been any answer to my last post I repeat it again here

Please, anyone else have tried to make batch render of images with actions in Photoshop?

How do you do it?

Do you have a better way than mine (shown the link above) that I do not like it much

Thanks very much for your help

Offset Helper

Burt — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 22:19:29 -0500

Burt, Sat, 23 Feb 2013 22:19:29 -0500
I was trying to precisely place some coral polyps on top of points from a Smudge filter. It's close but not exact and I was thinking it might be good to have a helper component (like Particle Adapter) that you could attach to the output of Smudge or perhaps other filters that result in an offset that don't give specific X Y amounts and calculate or average the movement so that offset data could be available to other components.

Force Seamless Tiling Option

Crapadilla — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:06:23 -0500

Crapadilla, Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:59:02 -0400
A tiny little convenience function I would love to have in the Filter Forge main window: An Option to force Seamless Tiling for filter rendering. This should override the setting embedded in all filter presets, and could be conveniently grouped with the Anti-Aliasing and Render Maps options in the Filter menu.

Vladimir Golovin, Sat, 28 Oct 2006 06:22:15 -0400
Thought about this myself some time ago. Added to the long-term list.

Crapadilla, Sat, 28 Oct 2006 06:42:43 -0400
Sweet! :beer:

This would make evaluating presets and their soon-to-be look on the web filter library much more convenient.

Crapadilla, Sat, 28 Oct 2006 11:40:24 -0400
While we are on the topic of render overrides: Correct me if I am wrong, but the anti-aliasing options appear to be linked to the presets too. Would be nice to have a global override here as well that generally turns off the anti-aliasing pass.

Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam, Sat, 04 Nov 2006 23:12:58 -0500
I, too, would appreciate this feature

jffe, Sat, 15 Sep 2007 20:09:47 -0400

Quote
Crapadilla wrote: Correct me if I am wrong, but the anti-aliasing options appear to be linked to the presets too.

----Your are correct, hours/days later, I just realized this was causing me big probs too, this needs to be changed BADLY, please, global anti-aliasing control. :D

jffe

StevieJ, Sun, 16 Sep 2007 12:12:32 -0400

Quote
Crapadilla wrote: Would be nice to have a global override here as well that generally turns off the anti-aliasing pass.

+ 100 a pain having to do each preset individually if you want to change the settings.....

.....and since where on the subject of "Global Control".....it would be nice to have it for lighting as well ;) :)

Kraellin, Sun, 16 Sep 2007 14:59:43 -0400
very good ideas! i'm in favor of these globals also!

Crapadilla, Sun, 16 Sep 2007 15:07:02 -0400

Quote
StevieJ wrote: "Global Control".....it would be nice to have it for lighting as well

Result Component > Filter Type: Simple Filter ;) :D

StevieJ, Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:56:53 -0400
Let me re-phrase it ;) :D If you want to change a lighting value shared by all your presets, then you could just select all presets and change them all at once.....instead of having to change each preset individulally.....

Crapadilla, Mon, 17 Sep 2007 03:55:00 -0400
But why would you want to have all your presets use the exact same lighting? Lighting brings variety...

MysticBlueRaven, Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:04:07 -0400
I agree with Crapadilla, I just wish we had more control over the lightiing.

StevieJ, Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:26:54 -0400

Quote
Crapadilla wrote: But why would you want to have all your presets use the exact same lighting? Lighting brings variety...

Very true..... Almost all of my surface result filters use just one lighting scheme.....because it is impossible to avoid bad areas in randomization (which is why I wish you could set lighting parameters and choose which lighting to include).....and because I want the user to stay in the best lighting for the best effects without the chance of being misled and stuck in a less desirable lighting scheme. I probably shouldn't do it, but I do approach the least experienced user with my filters.....

Anywho, even though I only use one lighting scheme, they still seem to be very useful with many turning HU.....but I hear what you're saying by all the Editor's Picks that I have ;) :D

Quote
MysticBlueRaven wrote: I just wish we had more control over the lightiing

I agree 110%.....would make it much easier (for at least me) to include other lighting for more variety as Dilla stated......

Crapadilla, Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:09:27 -0500
In the light of recent render speed discussions, I thought I'd bump this, and reiterate.

[*] Global Force Seamless Tiling Override
[*] Global Anti-Aliasing Override

These are just... a necessity! :D

SpaceRay, Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:06:23 -0500

Quote
Crapadilla In the light of recent render speed discussions, I thought I'd bump this, and reiterate. Global Force Seamless Tiling Override Global Anti-Aliasing Override These are just... a necessity

YES, YES !!! I totally agree with you, it would be really good and a very useful thing to have and so be able to override the presets values, great suggestion and request

Apple Magic Mouse: Previews/Filter Editor MAC

dutty — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 04:21:56 -0500

dutty, Thu, 14 Feb 2013 11:52:59 -0500
Another one not on the list :)

Scrolling with the Apple Magic Mouse does not work as expect. Horizontal scrollbars are indicated, however, performing a horizontal scroll on the mouse results in a zoom. This is OSX standard behavior and should really be implemented.

GMM, Wed, 20 Feb 2013 04:21:56 -0500
Moving this to the Feature request forum.

Multi Offset

Burt — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 01:59:04 -0500

Burt, Tue, 19 Feb 2013 01:59:04 -0500
I'd like to know if it would be possible to create a MultiOffset filter that allowed arranging multiple inputs -say with a 2x2 or 3x3 grid to then feed into the Bomber or other components. Maybe this is just a Grid component though an offset or 'jiggle' within a particular grid square would help with the appearance of randomness. Ideally you would also be able to place them in a specific square via the input or at least have an option to randomly place - so they could be all lined up or if you put less than the allowed inputs -ie only 5 in a 3x3 grid- some would have spaces between them to appear more random.

Compare the image on the left, 3 ellipses fed into all 5 particle channels on the Bomber, with the image on the right, the same 3 ellipses combined using 3 Offsets and the Multiblend so they are fed into 1 particle slot. To my eye it appears more random and much fuller and would alow you to 'stack' more objects into a single Bomber in creative ways. There appears to be no difference in the rendering speed between either method.

Custom colours - The ability to save them.

PixelCat — Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:43:39 -0500

PixelCat, Mon, 09 Jan 2012 12:26:09 -0500
I would love to see a custom colours palette -- where I can save colours I have used in other textures creation. It'd be a lot easier than keeping a notebook filled with RGB numbers. :)

Thanks!

primitivedesign, Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:43:39 -0500
I guess this suggestion didn't get much support, but I've been finding this a much-needed missing feature in the program for quite a while now. Here is how I envision it to look:

The current color picker would simply be expanded to include a palette of colors. They could be pre-populated with some primary colors on the left half, and the ones toward the right side would be left empty/white.. As you work with a specific render, instead of having to constantly copy-paste the RGB values for the same colors over and over, you would be able to just drag the current color from the selection at the top, onto any of the boxes on the bottom. Essentially, the boxes at the bottom would be re-useable and over-writeable.

The eyedropper on the right side would be used to capture any color from the current render or perhaps the entire desktop, and it could then be dragged from the top to one of the palette boxes below as well.

Workspace Rendering Times

Betis — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 16:54:08 -0500

Betis, Sun, 05 Oct 2008 17:17:02 -0400
I think that above each component there should be a little yellow box that says how many seconds it takes to render it. This would be very useful for optimization, and finding out which parts of your filter aren't very optimized.

There would obviously be an option to turn these off, or have them only appear on hover, or something, that's FF's choice. But the main thing. :)

(Click this for full size)

Kraellin, Sun, 05 Oct 2008 21:17:07 -0400
+1 on this.

jffe, Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:16:50 -0400
We suggested that back in the beta days, seems like if I recall Vlad basically said to RTFW (W = wiki) or something along those lines, if you wanted to learn to make more efficient rendering filters haha :P Plus, the render time at each component isn't always the same-for-the-same-component, it can depend on other factors like what's plugged into it, and how many blur/noise components are chained behind it etc. So there's some cpu wasted there just calculating your wasted render time if you want a read out of it on the screen. Plus for each change then, it has to recalculate those times, wasting more time, granted not much time, maybe 1 or 2 seconds or something but it just slows things back down and is kind of counter-productive really.

jffe

Betis, Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:23:52 -0400
I see what you're saying, and it is meant to be based off of what's plugged into it.
Besides, it is Optional, I would keep it on, even if it takes an extra second, it takes that long to get to different parts of the filter anyway.

Kraellin, Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:27:32 -0400
you know, i still think this is a good idea. but you dont base it on the component; you base it on how long that component preview/thumb image took to render. you could even do it as a component where you simply inserted the 'Time' component into your algorithm anywhere you wanted and it would simply return a value. it would be a good way to debug a slow filter or speed up an average one.

jffe, Sun, 05 Oct 2008 23:19:03 -0400
It's not a bad idea, I just think Vlad already axed it way back, but it can't hurt to ask again especially with a mock-up screen pic of it. :)

jffe

Carl, Mon, 06 Oct 2008 02:55:04 -0400
I think it sound a good idea ;) :)

CorvusCroax, Tue, 14 Oct 2008 15:00:58 -0400
+1

Some kind of feedback system for render times would be very helpful, IMHO. As it is now, we're sort of groping in the dark as to the benefits of constructing one way vs another. Some kind of feedback on render times would help users learn better filter construction.

Just some way to benchmark your filter... Even if it was a little 'tool' you ran inside the filter editor, which then output the time at each step (ie not always-on). Or even if was just a 'total weight' of the components.

Betis, Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:32:35 -0400
Better filters mean less Low Usage Filters, More High Usages, and overall good appeal in the face of Filter Forge! :D

Crapadilla, Wed, 15 Oct 2008 05:52:59 -0400
Betis, we've discussed something like this here. :)

Betis, Wed, 15 Oct 2008 07:31:46 -0400
It seems you have! At first it was different than mine, samples and whatnot, but at the very end Craig posted something about seconds, and that I agree would be the same here.

The overall idea about speed reports about your components is a good one. I think Vlad should get in here and talk to us about it.

Vladimir Golovin, Wed, 26 Nov 2008 11:53:28 -0500

Quote
Betis wrote: I think Vlad should get in here and talk to us about it.

I'm watching but I'm not willing to talk at this point :D

Crapadilla, Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:07:41 -0500
Vlad, how about providing a separate compile that provides the render troubleshooting & analysis functionality we talked about here and in the other thread linked above?

This way, the average user would not have his renders slowed down by the additional 'analytical code', but a filter developer could - if necessary - launch the "troubleshooting" executable to get under the hood... ;)

Kraellin, Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:41:52 -0500
sort of like having the 'render time' option we already have in the main gui? turn it on, turn it off, dilla? that could work.

Betis, Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:36:00 -0500
I like Dilla's idea.

Maybe not a separate exe though, like Kraellin is saying.

Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote: I'm watching but I'm not willing to talk at this point :D

And what point would you be thinking about joining? ;) :D

Crapadilla, Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:20:37 -0500

Quote
Kraellin wrote: sort of like having the 'render time' option we already have in the main gui? turn it on, turn it off, dilla? that could work.

I was remembering something that Vlad posted a while ago regarding render diagnostics, but it turned out to be in another thread than the one I linked to above:

Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote elsewhere: This would require at least one conditional jump in the innermost cycle, which we definitely wouldn't like -- it will slow the rendering down for everyone, even for people who have the console turned off.

So, the idea was to provide a separate executable (say 'FilterForgeDiagnostics.exe Vs. FilterForge.exe) that features render diagnostics. According to Vladimir this won't be an option inside the regular FF compile since it would slow down things for everyone.

Betis, Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:44:47 -0500
Oh I see. I wouldn't be too opposed to having a separate exe anyway. A bit of an inconvenience, yes. But nothing too bad. :)

Crapadilla, Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:57:36 -0500

Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote: I'm watching but I'm not willing to talk at this point Big grin

Quote
Betis wrote: And what point would you be thinking about joining? Wink Big grin

I bet he's got something up his sleeve that he's going to spring on us at a most unsuspected time! ;) :D

Betis, Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:35:42 -0500
I can only wait... :( :| :D

SpaceRay, Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:50:08 -0500

Quote
Betis wrote in 2008: I think that above each component there should be a little yellow box that says how many seconds it takes to render it. This would be very useful for optimization, and finding out which parts of your filter aren't very optimized.

This is a very good idea for optimization of filters, and to be able to test many different components and combinations and be able to see and test which one would be the fastest.

But do not know if now 4 years after, Vladimir could have changed of idea and willing to talk about this or keep only watching :D

SpaceRay, Wed, 06 Feb 2013 16:54:08 -0500
In February 2012 I have posted about this 2008 thread fr om Betis, but it was not the moment for Vladimir to talk about this

Now one year after, in February 2013 is already making the FF 4.0 and I want to bring back this topic that Betis started as I think it would be really helpful and useful to optimize and build the filters in a better way and get faster render results KNOWING wh ere there could be some time rendering problems between the filter components and links.

This could perhaps help much to solve possible problems like the one Morgantao found in this thread --> FF math: 30+1=163

I have seen that the same as it happens here, it can happen also with others combinations of filters that are good separate and when joined in one filter, the render time is much higher than the sum of the two

save image as' defaults to preset's name

ronviers — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:47:43 -0500

ronviers, Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:47:43 -0500
Since we will probably be able to name our presets on the next release, it would be a convenient starting point for naming the saved image if the first default name offered up by the 'save as' command presented the preset's name - then the previously used name any time after that.

I'm not really up on things so sorry if this has been made nonviable by something already happening

thanks:)

Dear FilterForge

Skybase — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:22:03 -0500

Skybase, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 02:35:04 -0400
Dear Filter Forge,
Hello. I need you to do something that will save me and probably others A LOT of time. Please consider adding initial states for each component. Sometimes, you have components like the 3 color gradient which already comes with colors and values that's valued little to our needs for our effects and generators. It will also give us the opportunity to reset components immediately if something doesn't suit us right while we're tweaking values.

- Sincerely yours, a long time user.

Skybase, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 02:49:27 -0400
I actually think this would be very very useful.

SpaceRay, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 02:58:42 -0400
If I understand well you want to be able to set your own default values for each of the components and not have this useless values that they have usually now on most of the components.

Quote
Hello. I need you to do something that will save me and probably others A LOT of time. Please consider adding initial states for each component.

YES, I agree with you that this would be able to save A LOT of time, specially when adding big components like bomber or the annoying controls that default to a useless 30 value

Please, be able to define components default, change or duplicate them

Quote

One thing I find annoying, time wasting, and bad fr om my point of view, is that when you apply a component, much specially the controls Slider and IntSlider components they have a value of 30 as default and this gives many errors when added the components unless you correct it and reduce it to 0 or rise it to 100.

I know that there can´t be a single default that will work for all but at least it could have a default that is 0 or 100 and not 30. What is the reason that is 30?

Please, read the full post on the link as there is much more as you can see here (each one is detailed and explained)

Quote
I have thought some suggestions and ideas that could help for this 1 - Component autodetect where is attached to and configure itself 2 - Be able to define your own single default value 3 - Be able to have presets values for the components 4 - Be able to duplicate a component to have copies with different default values

This would be REALLY helpful and useful to have in FF4.0

Skybase, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 03:04:29 -0400
I thought I'd bring up the ancient suggestion in a different form.

Well here's another one that's a bit more trivial!!

Skybase, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 03:22:59 -0400
Suggestion forum but with pictures! Ok I'm done.

ThreeDee, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 03:55:37 -0400

Quote
Skybase wrote: Please consider adding initial states for each component.

This would be very good.

To get around this in the meanwhile, you (as in "the user") could make a "filter" that had your default settings for all the components that you want and always start with that filter as a base -- sort of like a template. I know it is not ideal, but perhaps worth considering.

Sharandra, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 04:08:35 -0400

Quote
Skybase wrote: Please consider adding initial states for each component.

Skybase, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 05:47:11 -0400
Let me bring this up again :p

uberzev, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 06:04:55 -0400
Very nice ideas. 8)

Morgantao, Sat, 18 Aug 2012 15:38:18 -0400
Some great suggestions!

SpaceRay, Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:00:00 -0400
Very well done and interesting thread for FF 4.0 if at least something of this would be possible

Great ideas and suggestions

SpaceRay, Fri, 02 Nov 2012 06:19:18 -0400
I agree in that it would be very good and timesaving to be able to do this (If I understand right what this is) as suggested by Skybase above

Skybase, Fri, 02 Nov 2012 09:42:58 -0400
Yeah, as far as I understand the reasons after some discussion (elsewhere) for doing that, is so you can see it actually working. Which, if you're a first-time user would see some values doing what they're meant to do. This actually makes sense and it's agreeable. Once you kinda go through the program, it does become a mild hinderance.

Several other patch-based programs that I use do have "working state" and "init" state as part of it's function. For example, in Propellerhead Reason they have synthesizers, drum machines, and other objects that load with already pre-configured patches. But the catch is they have a reset menu via right click.

So functionally, it would be handy to have functionality like right-click ---> initialize component.

SpaceRay, Sun, 18 Nov 2012 09:24:37 -0500
Sorry to ask but what you mean with "initialize component"

Would it mean that all the values are going to be zero, or have the default values?

Skybase, Sun, 18 Nov 2012 10:44:40 -0500
The 3-color gradient should default to Position 1 = 0, Postion 2 = 50, Position 3 = 100 and the lightness value for each color should correspond to positions (so black, gray, and white.)

For the 5-color gradient default should go incrementally by 25. So 0, 25, 50, 75, 100 (most logical to divide per number of sliders.)

The definition of default here is that it follows a certain type of logic, in my case, I vote more for numerical sequences that equally distribute the gradient rather than zeroing out every value. (This does depend on a component basis).

For any editor, zero-values tend to throw us off. You basically have to reset every value manually to what they were. So you have to have to pick reasonable values that don't force you to do more work.

Sharandra, Fri, 07 Dec 2012 06:59:13 -0500

Quote
So functionally, it would be handy to have functionality like right-click ---> initialize component.

+1
What I would also like to see is the option to reset individual values by rightclicking on the control somewhere.

SpaceRay, Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:22:03 -0500
+1
+1
+1

Live Paint Heightmap / Bumpmap

Burt — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 15:45:50 -0500

Burt, Mon, 21 Jan 2013 15:45:50 -0500
On some of the textures - say brick walls or flagstones- the realism could be improved by selectively 'pushing' some bricks/stones (vines, wires etc) and features higher or lower with a heightmap. If there was a livepaint tool that could be used on a final heightmap component just before final render, so you could paint using a simple 'lighter' or 'darker' brush to 'push' sections up or down. I guess you could manually do this in Photoshop but you could see the results immediately in FF.

Organizational Tools

DaliGiger — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:24:37 -0500

DaliGiger, Wed, 04 May 2011 16:24:22 -0400
These have probably been mentioned many times before, but implementing them would increase the workflow of FF greatly.

1. Grouping nodes

Imagine if you have 100 nodes in a filter. Even looking at the node structure will instantly be daunting, let alone another user trying to understand it. Imagine if you have 20 nodes that are only creating a painterly effect. Simply drag and select those nodes, right click and choose "Group" or Ctrl+G, and those nodes pop into a "group node" which you name "painterly effect." Then you can click on "+" on the group object, and it will pop open all the nodes instantly, which you can edit, then clck "-" and it will close again. Grouping will instantly give FF a a flexible and organized workflow. It doesn't seem too hard to implement either, you don't need to expand the entire window or create a new window, it can simply be a box of grouped nodes.

2. User Comments or Sticky Notes

User notes or comments are an essential part of any workflow, whether it is programming, 3d, film, design, or any digital media. Adding a simple comment box or sticky note node will allow the creator to have a more fluid workflow and allow users to understand how a filter works much easier. Imagine trying to figure out how a website works without allowing blocked out comments on the CSS or HTML. I know filter forge uses nodes, which is visual and pretty simple, but with dozens of nodes it gets very confusing. Some users already use the scripting node for this, but that's really just a work-around and not meant just for simple notes. When you use a scripting node, the text is not visible, and it just clutters up the node structure. For example, you have to first find the node named "curve (or map) script", click on it, and click script, and then you can finally see the text, and you'd have to repeat this for every instruction you want to add, so you'd end up having multiple script nodes with script errors which might slow down the filter. Imagine being able to add a "comment" node or "sticky note" and just type in a sentence, and have it next to your bundle of confusing nodes.

3. Search Components

All the component window needs to be perfect is a simple search bar. Some categories cross-over and sometimes it can be hard to find the component you're looking for. Also, starting to type it in will only find the first letter of the category, and not component itself.

xirja, Sat, 19 Jan 2013 11:03:58 -0500

Quote
2. User Comments or Sticky Notes

Bump

Having the 'About' tab is helpful, but not that much if you need to reference its contents while manipulating any controls in the 'Settings' tab. So why not a new comments/notes window that can be open while Settings are being set.

Below is an image of a custom Mathematica Command-Line Renderer interface with purpose, attributes, and notes fields as an example.

xirja, Sat, 19 Jan 2013 11:06:08 -0500
oh, and preset notes and control lock fields, cough. :D

GMM, Mon, 21 Jan 2013 05:11:26 -0500

Quote
1. Grouping nodes

I suppose you haven't looked at the FF 4.0 beta yet?

Quote
2. User Comments or Sticky Notes

There is a good workaround: use the Map Script component and rename it to Comments or whatever.

Skybase, Mon, 21 Jan 2013 06:01:07 -0500
;) The original message is from 2011

GMM, Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:53:31 -0500
Skybase, we've got our office teapot broken today — I'm unable to work sensibly without coffee :)

xirja, Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:05:36 -0500

Quote
There is a good workaround: use the Map Script component and rename it to Comments or whatever.

In the editor this is good, but regarding notes for usage, I'm suggesting that the about tab, or something like it, can be torn off or windowized so that I can see notes while toggling controls as a user.

GMM, Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:24:37 -0500

Quote
I can see notes while toggling controls as a user.

This is a good suggestion - I hope we'll see Settings, About and other tabs as floating panels someday.

Endless Base Noise

StevieJ — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:38:34 -0500

StevieJ, Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:01:48 -0500
I'm tell'n ya...create as many base noise pattern components as you can...making it much easier for all skill levels to create what they want...wider range and diversity of submitted filters from the primarily beginner/novice authors...and so they do not have to acquire the advanced skills for scripting and manipulating the existing Worley noise components...

Even a noise component with user formula/algorythm input, chart of different algorythms for different patterns, etc would work...

Skybase, Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:28:01 -0500
I think the grouped components will cover that. There's been discussion regarding sharing grouped components several times, so we can end up with a giant noise library if we worked at it all together.

StevieJ, Sat, 12 Jan 2013 02:42:30 -0500
I know...I've read it... It will probably be that way...but I don't believe the community is going to produce them... I think they should just make it simple...and provide all known noise in components... This is the one program that should have the most extensive noise library of all time...

Skybase, Sat, 12 Jan 2013 03:38:56 -0500
I think the thing is, if grouped component sharing is ever implemented, it'll open a load of doors. The key here is the way it gets implemented. Depending on that, there will be new methods of doing something. That typically will generate itself a community. So to me, it's just a matter of how grouped components become something worth more, and the key is in sharing them. I think good products typically foster good communities, like this program itself has. So I personally don't doubt more community involvement as long as stuff's done right.

So I just like to think that one day the magical feature will happen and suddenly we get the noise library and everything else awesome.

I doubt there will be any movement anytime soon. Gotta stay humble sometimes.

I think in the mean time, there can be a fresh new version of the old noise thread where the rules are to post the ffxml file instead of just images teasing people. :p

Crapadilla, Mon, 14 Jan 2013 08:08:28 -0500
Steve,

we've already discussed this quite extensively here, as I'm sure you're aware of. Vlad agreed to most of it, and I walked away with the feeling that he shared the vision of an online sharing system for user-created Component Groups.

This WILL happen eventually, but an infrastructural change like this affects most systems inside FF, so it will take time. I'm expecting this around FF5, no earlier, along with a total redesign of the Filter Library, website, Filter EULA, etc...

Patience, patience, patience! ;)

Crapadilla, Mon, 14 Jan 2013 08:30:14 -0500

Quote
[...] but I don't believe the community is going to produce them...

Why do you think so?

The only thing that keeps me from submitting my noise lab experiments is the lack of a simple, elegant, easy-to-use, easily searchable and thus time-saving infrastructure for sharing Custom Components, preferably from inside the Filter Editor.

Once this is in place, the very time-consuming hassle of creating, testing and submitting a full-blown filter is removed and the floodgates will be opened. However, as it currently stands, the effort-to-benefit ratio of submitting noise snippets is just out of proportion.

Of course, attaching ffxml files to forum posts is easy, but doing it like this results in an inelegant, unstructured mess that tends to get buried in the forums quickly.

The purpose of my original noise lab thread then was to point out some of the methods behind the madness of noise experimentation, i.e. to get people to experiment for themselves. It was meant to get them to realize that all the building blocks are laid out before them already and that they would just have to get into the proper 'FF mindset' to utilize them. I specifically posted images and not ffxml files for that very reason.

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:44:46 -0500
Dilla and Skybase are correct: we're not going to implement non-basic components. The proper way to do that would be to allow the community to do that, which would involve a new submission / approval path for Grouped snippets, a way to download and use them in the Editor, a way to keep them updated and versioned, legal arse-coverage (changes to the EULA and possibly a new submission agreement), ability to rate and flag these snippets from within the Editor, retirement of the Snippets category from the Library etc etc.

Vladimir Golovin, Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:48:47 -0500

Quote
I know...I've read it... It will probably be that way...but I don't believe the community is going to produce them...

Don't underestimate communities. When I designed FF, I estimated the number of submitted filters at approximately 100 per year, and if I remember correctly, we were well over a thousand in the first several months. Also, I severely underestimated the sheer ingenuity of filter authors. There are filters in the Library that I wouldn't believe could be made with FF if you told me that 6 years ago.

Also, Wikipedia.

StevieJ, Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:04:42 -0500
Skybase, Dilla, and Vlad... I agree with what you are all saying... I think the difference in what I'm saying is to provide them as regular FF noise components so Joe Beginner can just drag them out and get going on whatever they want... Simplify it and kill the steep learning curve of this program...

Unless what you are talking about with the groups comes under a "Component Creater" where inputs, controls, profiles, formulas, etc can be set up under the same FF component interface??? :devil:

There are some amazing authors...and alot of amazing ideas have trickled in over the years... I don't like saying this...but to be perfectly honest, submissions aren't anywhere near what they used to be...unique and amazing ideas are few and far between now...and pretty much just getting beginner and novice variants of existing filters... Therefore, I don't think FF is going to get this filled by the community...

This brings me right back to my idea of re-vamping involvement and the rewards system...but I won't re-state all of that here again...

If Dilla submits a new filter...I'll match it... ;) :D

Crapadilla, Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:13:01 -0500

Quote
Unless what you are talking about with the groups comes under a "Component Creater" where inputs, controls, profiles, formulas, etc can be set up under the same FF component

That's exactly what we're talking about: Custom components, which are enabled by the Component Grouping in FF4.

For example: What is now the filter "Noise Lab: Fabric" would become a single custom component.

Crapadilla, Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:00:57 -0500
Regarding the perceived lack of filter submissions:

Yes, there are fewer filters being submitted by experienced authors, but that does not mean that their involvement in the community is lessened. Look at the amazing techniques and unfinished proof-of-concept type filters posted in the 'Creating Filters' section (by ThreeDee, Sphinx, uber and others). These techniques are just waiting to be mined by up-and-coming filter authors!

Since the initial gold rush era of FF1, the focus of the long-standing filter authors has simply shifted away from creating filter products to providing filter creation techniques. To me, this appears to be somewhat inevitable. No matter how good your reward system, people are going to exhaust it.

I would argue that quick & easy-to-use online sharing of custom components is EXACTLY what is needed to bring experienced authors back into the submission loop. It could very well become the preferred method for sharing and polishing filter creation techniques and - if properly structured - will automatically benefit new filter authors as well, facilitating more efficient filters and easing the learning curve.

Crapadilla, Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:14:12 -0500

Quote
If Dilla submits a new filter...I'll match it...

Well, there is a certain filter I'd really like to finish one of these days, but this will only be possible once each and every feature request I ever made has been implemented...

:devil:

StevieJ, Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:06:02 -0500
I like that... leverage for features... ;) :D

Crapadilla, Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:38:34 -0500
Steve has seen the bright future of Component Grouping and will cease to request full noise libraries henceforth. Rejoice! :D ;)

New Control Type: Neutral Slider

Betis — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:01:15 -0500

Betis, Mon, 29 Oct 2012 22:40:13 -0400
Maybe is a checkbox in the regular slider control.

Is every bit a regular slider except has a -100 to 100 range that defaults to 0 in the center.

Useful for biasing or balancing and stuff like that. Gamma, exposure, offset, temperature, position, time, etc.

Yes, the Value control achieves this but it is also boundless and only appropriate in certain situations.

Skybase, Mon, 29 Oct 2012 23:41:32 -0400
You mean Bi-polar sliders? :D +200

Betis, Tue, 08 Jan 2013 03:29:49 -0500
bump! 8)

Crapadilla, Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:03:06 -0500
How about introducing Upper Limit and Lower Limit options to Value control components? Wouldn't that do the trick?

Betis, Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:01:35 -0500
yes! that would be even better! :D

Vladimir Golovin, Tue, 15 Jan 2013 23:17:08 -0500
It could be implemented as a cosmetic option for the existing Slider control.

Also, there's no such thing in FF as "defaults to 0": it defaults to whatever the filter author specified in the default or other preset for this control (the only exception being the creation of a new Slider in the Editor).

Crapadilla, Wed, 16 Jan 2013 05:11:17 -0500
A cosmetic option for the existing Slider control would be great.

That solution would also be more intuitive and "visually correct" than a range-limited Value control.

Betis, Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:01:15 -0500
looks like he snagged that before you did Dilla ;)

Retain Edges

Burt — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 10:51:00 -0500

Burt, Thu, 10 Jan 2013 13:14:44 -0500
Wacky idea but sometimes when I create textures in Photoshop I will retain a 'frame' and remake the middle. This will allow you to create multiple seamless terrain tile or brick wall variations (see attached) and they will all tile well together. So a component that allowed you to 'freeze' a certain amount of pixels of the edge then generate a new 'middle' or some way to generate multiple tiles with matching edges or the ability to generate transition tiles might be useful.

Sharandra, Fri, 11 Jan 2013 12:44:38 -0500
Lol you beat me to this tip! I was just gonna post the same thing :D

Burt, Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:20:58 -0500
Well that's ok then because some of my other suggestions turned out to be existing features. :blush:

Sharandra, Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:01:31 -0500
Hehe, well if they are already features that means they are good suggestions! :-)

I just reread your original post and realised that it was a feature request and not a tip.

You can do this in a filter like in Photoshop by masking out the middle pretty much in the same way using a frame or gradient. Then connect a slider to the middle components variation.

Sharandra, Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:15:21 -0500
example

Burt, Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:49:00 -0500
Ah, ok I see. I wasn't sure that the edges would blend but the gradient frame edges ease the transition. I guess with bricks it could work too. Not sure if stone or plaster would but now that I know it can be done I will test it - and I guess I'll stop adding feature suggestions for a bit. :blush:

Sharandra, Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:01:34 -0500
well I didn´t blend the bricks themselves, but the color variations and the damage details. That was enough in this case.
But yeah, I guess this trick doesn´t work in every case. I have yet to make more filters using it to be able to tell what works and what doesn´t.

your example from above should work tho, if you have the hole in the middle and just change its shape.

Sharandra, Wed, 16 Jan 2013 08:29:24 -0500
Masking out bricks:

I think this also works with noises which have solid fill.

Burt, Wed, 16 Jan 2013 10:51:00 -0500
Great example! Will play with it when I get back home. :)

Rendering complete notification audio.

kmega00 — Sat, 12 Jan 2013 06:16:17 -0500

kmega00, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 07:50:43 -0400
Filter Forge is in my opinion the best node based texture filter program available. Sometimes things can take a while to render especially at 64 samples but thats not a problem for me.

The visual rendering complete message box is good but some kind of audio notification complete option would be super nice. Any kind of audio notification option would be excellent.

Having to continuously look at a computer monitor waiting for something to render is not allot of fun :( but with audio notification myself and others would be able to turn up the computer speakers and go do something else during long rendering periods :) .

I'm not sure if this request have already been made, I apologize if it has.

Thanks.

dactilardesign, Sat, 12 Jan 2013 06:16:17 -0500
Yep, would be very useful.

Spawn Tool etc

Burt — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 21:09:41 -0500

Burt, Thu, 10 Jan 2013 15:13:35 -0500
Sorry full of random ideas today it seems. This is an old idea I had which might be a cool system for FF. I picture this used mostly for particle and noise controls.

What about a set of tools that 1) allows a 'spawn' point so that particles or noise originate at that point and are drawn out in a user selected arc and distance and fade ie 0 45 90 etc? The other two tools would be a 2}repulse tool, to place locations that 'repulse' drawn objects in a user selected arc (like a force field) and range from the location of the tool and 3) the reverse a pull or magnetism type tool that would pull objects closer and cause them to bunch or clump with a user set distance and arc of effect.

So you could perhaps 'attract' dirt or grass to be drawn more clump more in an area of texture or use the 'repulse' to 'protect' an area of texture you don't want objects to be drawn to heavily on on and spawn to draw flames or smoke or fake light from a specific area,

Hastily drawn graphic during my lunch break which hope helps to clarify. Back to work ...

Indigo Ray, Thu, 10 Jan 2013 20:07:09 -0500
I though about this when the Bomber component was added during the V2 Beta. As far as I know, you can't shift particles around like that. They stay where they spawn. However, you can choose where particles are more likely to spawn and where they aren't by using the chance controls on the bomber component.

Your 360-degree "attract" tool is just a Free Ellipse component plugged into the chance control, where the ellipse is brighter in the middle. "repel" is the same ellipse, but darker in the middle. And you don't have to use an ellipse; you can use any input you like (ex. a sweeping arc like in your "spawn" tool).

Burt, Thu, 10 Jan 2013 21:09:41 -0500
Ok, well will have to play with the Bomber component - haven't used it much yet. :)

Run Preset in Editor

Burt — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:44:01 -0500

Burt, Wed, 09 Jan 2013 18:44:08 -0500
Not sure if this has been requested but it would be nice to be able to run a preset from the editor or open the editor with the selected preset.

Sometimes I've seen preset that has some very unusual or intriguing result and might want to explore the settings for it to spin off a new filter.

Skybase, Wed, 09 Jan 2013 22:03:17 -0500
You can access presets by clicking on "Filter Controls" tab found below the result node in your editor. ;)

Burt, Wed, 09 Jan 2013 22:32:54 -0500
Has that always been there? I can't believe I didn't notice it before?!?

Sphinx., Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:14:05 -0500
yes ;)

Burt, Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:44:01 -0500
Gosh, too late to delete this thread or will it remain as a testimonial of my stupidity? :$ ;)

Fractional Numerical Imput

uberzev — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 23:28:00 -0500

uberzev, Sat, 18 Nov 2006 15:36:53 -0500
For example it would save time to be able to enter 100/7 instead of needing to bust out a calculator and then enter 14.2857

Crapadilla, Sat, 18 Nov 2006 16:50:06 -0500
Seconded.

Numeric entry fields should 'understand' basic arithmetic operations.

Vladimir Golovin, Fri, 24 Nov 2006 10:32:02 -0500
We prefer to spend our resources on adding things that cannot be done in other software, rather than reinventing the wheel by adding stuff that can be done with thousands of other programs, many of them free.

Crapadilla, Fri, 24 Nov 2006 18:42:27 -0500
:hammer: :D

Zone12, Fri, 18 May 2007 09:39:11 -0400
I think this feature could be more important than it is made out to be. Instead of entering a calculation into the input, there could be another set of components that perform simple maths calculations. Some very funky things could be done with this, including setting up our own curves on a graph.

Betis, Wed, 09 Jan 2013 23:28:00 -0500
well I can right click in my OS to bring up a context menu, does that mean Filter Forge shouldn't have that because it's already done? FF also shouldn't have blend modes because photoshop already has that... along with many other software. Blurring is also already integrated into many successful programs... wouldn't want to have that in FF either I guess!

It's a quick functional way for filter authors AND users to quickly input values they need. If you take any feature a program has, and go to its roots, it's to save time. Why not just paint every pixel in MS Paint?!

Arithmetic Input

Betis — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 22:21:02 -0500

Betis, Tue, 08 Jan 2013 03:34:55 -0500
Adobe After Effects has this neat feature where when you go type in a value for something, you can do basic math as a shortcut.

For example if I want to do some cool blends where I need precise mathematical values, I have to go to the calculator and do the operation, copy and paste or memorize the value.

What if I could just be like 100/7 and it would calculate it and put 14.2857... instead? Or even just 3*72 if I needed to. I would love typing 1/3 instead of 0.33333 and it just puts it in I don't have to worry so much about float precision and whatever

It would be most helpful for things with division just for quick input.

CorvusCroax, Wed, 09 Jan 2013 12:56:22 -0500
Revit (Architectural design software) has a similar function. When drawing a building, when a dimension appears, you can just type in "6*3.1457/11 + 1 ", and boom it just calculates it.

In Revit, this is also how you program in parametric intelligence into your objects. At a dimension you can plug parameters (aka variables) in instead of hard values. So, you might have HEIGHT = <TopHatHeight> + (<Coat> / <#Buttons>) - <Beard Height>

It's a great system and is very powerful. I wish FF could do something similar for working with input values just as text (i.e. without converting to maps).

Betis, Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:13:42 -0500
:D

Input Math would be so sweet too!!

Skybase, Wed, 09 Jan 2013 22:21:02 -0500
Arithmetic input was previously shot down: http://www.filterforge.com/forum/read...essage6067 :(

But I see input math is a definite necessity actually. I guess the thing is, we kinda have methods for doing math in FilterForge, but they're kinda still disconnected from doing "input math" with them, since RGB math components don't connect to control inputs. So we have to work around the system to get math into the controls.

Closed Curves and Follow

Burt — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 18:33:22 -0500

Burt, Wed, 09 Jan 2013 18:33:22 -0500
Well I am not a programmer so not sure if I will describe my thought well but here goes. It might be interesting to have a "Use Shape as Curve" (using circle, polygon, ellipse or some other closed curves and then simulate extruding along a path. So you could use Techno, for example, to generate a path for some pipes and a Closed Circle or Polygon curve would follow this to render realistic pipes, jewelry, veins, towers and other things. I guess you could also create a path component that would take noise and other components and render out a simplified path to do this if that would be easier on the rendering.

'Randomizable' option for controls

Crapadilla — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 19:32:35 -0500

Crapadilla, Mon, 23 Apr 2007 09:35:13 -0400
I often find myself wanting to 'hard-wire' certain sliders to be non-randomizable...

Kraellin, Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:16:47 -0400
well, i'd just change them if you did ;) :D

StevieJ, Mon, 23 Apr 2007 15:24:24 -0400
yeah, so you could also randomize lighting and not the controls.... :)

jffe, Mon, 23 Apr 2007 15:47:02 -0400
I could be wrong, but I *think* that's on the list, like for in the preset view, for when users want to hit *variation*, but not change certain aspects. Obviously, you want it internally, and I'm fine with that too, just saying about the other way already being on the update list I think. :)

jffe

Crapadilla, Tue, 24 Apr 2007 03:49:01 -0400
Yes, locking filter controls in the main UI has already been requested, but I'd like to have the option of locking sliders 'by default' via the filter editor (as shown above).

There are often cases when sliders are not really meant for randomization. I often build a 'Global Detail' slider into my high detail textures for example. Having it randomized influences preview behaviour in an undesirable way.

Another case would be checkboxes that put filters into 'special' modes. Take 'Cast Shadows' for my 'Aqua Buttons Galore' as an example. Locking 'Cast Shadows' from randomization would greatly enhance the performance of the filter while browsing 'variations', as turning it off results in much faster previews. Having to turn it off manually after hitting 'next variation' every now and then is slightly annyoing. Hence my request. It's a usability feature from authors for users... :D

Kraellin, Tue, 24 Apr 2007 09:09:36 -0400
yup, options for control are always good.

James, Fri, 27 Apr 2007 04:34:23 -0400
Speaking of randomizations and controls i still think it would be great to have 2 mini boxes by the side R and I for randomize and invert, i for one find randomizing helpful when making textures as it helps provide great starting points to edit.

IONclad, Mon, 30 Apr 2007 02:50:44 -0400
James, yeah... remember Kia's power tools? there was a randomize tree that you could click on, which would randomize your filters to X amount. Nothing that fancy mind you, but your "R" button would be really cool to explore the node's possibilities in a fun way.

Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam, Fri, 11 May 2007 00:44:47 -0400

Quote
Bongo51 wrote: Kia's power tools

Kai's Power Tools are awesome!! There are some great blend modes in KPT2 that got lost along the way to KPT3 :(

ddaydreams, Sat, 05 Jan 2013 19:32:35 -0500

Quote
Kai's Power Tools are awesome!! There are some great blend modes in KPT2 that got lost along the way to KPT3 smile:(

I keep an old photoshop 7 just to run Kai's Power Tools 3,5,6 and effects.
I was not aware of Version 2. I'll have to google that.

EXIF

piiax — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 17:54:07 -0500

piiax, Thu, 03 Jan 2013 17:54:07 -0500
I didn't notice this in the Sticky about new features, but it would be great if like in digital photography an EXIF file could be included in the saved image indicating the filter used and the exact filter settings for that image. I for one try so many different filters and settings on a photo or a drawing that it's virtually impossible to write everything down for reproduction of an effect weeks or months later.

Sequential Filter Render

Betis — Sat, 22 Dec 2012 09:02:59 -0500

Betis, Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:58:58 -0400
We should be able to set up a simple chain system that takes an image, and applies the filter onto the bitmap output of the last, so we don't have to do it manually... you know, when you are making heavily processed photos?

Sign Guy, Sun, 13 Sep 2009 22:55:46 -0400
That's one of the distinct benefits of the competitor's product ... being able to group nodes and save them. Then just hook up groups to do what you'd like to do.

Betis, Sun, 13 Sep 2009 23:53:01 -0400
That's not what I was talking about though. I'm talking about a list of complete filters to automatically (with supplied settings) apply on top of ones before.

GMM, Mon, 14 Sep 2009 03:16:19 -0400
Betis, I think this is feasible with the batch renderer.

Betis, Mon, 14 Sep 2009 07:08:37 -0400
That is interesting to know, although that would be a nice feature for people that don't know anything about things like that.

Totte, Wed, 16 Sep 2009 01:45:59 -0400
One of my wishes reminds of this, and that was to have a "Result component" with an output.

I use my "wet stones"-filter as an example, you first render the stones, with height mapping and all, then you use that complete output, and apply a water surface with a new height map, over that first render. I can see multitudes of uses for this, being able to create "meta filters" that is either a chain of filters or filters that internally have output steps passed to the next chain.

OK, nothing you run on the average single core machine, but on the other hand, this might prove faster as you can avoid some techniques used today to create something similar but is very cycles-consuming.

Betis, Wed, 16 Sep 2009 07:41:43 -0400
I too have often dreamt of filters with this exact thing. One of my used would be to render a Surface filter, and then apply a glow to it.

xirja, Sat, 22 Dec 2012 09:02:59 -0500
Would this be something to include in version 4?

Two filters that take 20 and 30 seconds, when combined into one filter take 150. In this case the batch processing is/would be helpful.

Also to have an evaluation block to freeze cache at certain components, and have a reevaluate button, would be time saving.

To be able to switch from Surface to Simple filter type for a faster 'preview', and to use Surface->Simple, as Betis mentions for post processing, would be great.

Maybe these issues are already addressed in the 'loop component' and 'script component' threads?

600+ components

JesusSheep — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 21:56:13 -0500

JesusSheep, Tue, 11 Dec 2012 22:28:25 -0500
The number components Artimatic Has.

Skybase, Tue, 11 Dec 2012 23:44:55 -0500
Yeah it's because Artmatic has to develop like that. See, in FilterForge you can make almost anything Artmatic does with ease. There are a couple which aren't possible, but around 70% of the things in those 600 components is clearly doable in FilterForge. Artmatic works also with Artmatic Voyager, so they added components for that tool. In basics, the point is this: artmatic may have 600+ components but most of it is doable in FilterForge no problem. In Artmatic, because of the way they developed it, they kinda need to continuously add new components, where in FilterForge, you can just put your own together. I mean they've been making that software for over 10 years now.

Likewise there are a ton of good things that are in Artmatic that FilterForge doesn't have. For example native fractal components, iterators, recursive components, components that have Z depth (volumetric stuff), and quite a variety of interesting noise patches.

CeleriedAway, Wed, 12 Dec 2012 23:41:21 -0500
Could you post link to this software, please? I couldn't find it in google.

Skybase, Thu, 13 Dec 2012 00:01:22 -0500
http://www.artmatic.com/ <--- tada!

Been using the program for 10+ years now

Vladimir Golovin, Thu, 13 Dec 2012 05:16:43 -0500
A possible reason why Artmatic has so much components is their limit of 3 parameters and up to 3 inputs per component (if I understood their interface correctly). If we imposed a similar limit, a single Filter Forge component would explode into dozens of components.

For example, instead of a single Bomber component we'd have dozens, or perhaps even hundreds of components like Single-Particle-No-Chaos-Rotational-Bomber-With-Additive-Particle-Mode-And-High-Particle-Density.

As for the recursion / loop / iteration capability, I certainly hope to see that eventually implemented in FF: http://www.filterforge.com/forum/read...#nav_start

Crapadilla, Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:10:34 -0500
Component Groups in v4 beta = "600+ components" ;)

Skybase, Thu, 13 Dec 2012 08:15:09 -0500
See, the one thing I know FIlterForge just can't do is generate sound based on the given node structure. I feel like that's how it makes the entire program really fun to use.

SpaceRay, Fri, 14 Dec 2012 16:14:55 -0500
Artmatic is ONLY AVAILABLE FOR MAC :( :cry: :cry:, so there is no way that I could use it unless I find a way to use MacOS on Windows 7.

Quote
Skybase Been using the program for 10+ years now

Could be possible to see some examples of what you have done in all this years with this software?

Skybase, Fri, 14 Dec 2012 21:56:13 -0500
There's no cheaping out with Macs. ;)

I wish I archived my works properly so I don't have to collect links. The first spot is obviously my blog but that doesn't have 10 years worth of work: http://skybase.wordpress.com/category/artmatic/ the second is my deviantART page which I've been using forever: http://skybase.deviantart.com/gallery/ that has quite a load of stuff I did mostly for fun. The next place is on Tumblr, http://skybase.tumblr.com/tagged/artmatic/ that's my "dumping ground" for art in general.

So for all these galleries: if you see anything that looks or resembles fractals, you have a 80% chance of that being made by Artmatic. If you see geometric work, that could be Artmatic, if you see anything that's a mountain-landscape picture as long as that's not a photo, it's Artmatic Voyager.

I got rid of most of my old ones... in favor of new stuff.

;)

Besie curve as a default input

CeleriedAway — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 23:58:10 -0500

CeleriedAway, Wed, 12 Dec 2012 23:58:10 -0500
Hello Everyone.

I have suggestion that aimed to make work with components with curve inputs easeir. If you make a group you can't adjust default curve outside but you can do it inside group as is shown on screenshots. I think it is a bit strange.

So it will be great to edit besie curve as a default input in groups, script components and other components with curve inputs, perlin noise for example.
What do you think?

PS Ooops, sorry for errors in the topic title.

been away

JesusSheep — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 21:56:55 -0500

JesusSheep, Tue, 11 Dec 2012 21:56:55 -0500
My defination of batch if being able to use wild card to process several files for input program can read the xml filter look like you can not process several files with 1 filter.

Double registration required

Xyzzy — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 03:13:01 -0500

Xyzzy, Wed, 05 Dec 2012 03:13:01 -0500
Hi,

After FF installation as an administrator I entered my license key, but after I logged to my work account (limited user) I had to enter license key again. I believe the second action should not be needed.