LumiaFusion 1.7 Update.

Carnbot

@skiphunt said:

@Carnbot said:

@skiphunt said:

@Carnbot said:

@skiphunt said:

I still hope they make it happen though eventually

Sometimes it's necessary to work that around for an edit, especially in film making with sound effects/ sound design. Not necessarily the finished master but you don't always want to hop back to a DAW to try something out..especially not on an ipad.

Unfortunately video playback in audio software is pretty crude. That's why desktop apps like Premiere support vsts etc, so no reason why Lumafusion shouldn't if it doesn't break the app.

Picture this... you've been working on a video edit for 5hours. You've got all the timing right, all the transitions nudged where you want them, your title animations are perfect, etc.

Then, you get the idea to try out a few AUv3s to experiment a little, and the whole thing crashes. The project file is corrupt and won't reopen. You panic, you're sending support emails to Luma... they scramble to figure out what's going on with their video editing code, etc.

Later, you realize it was that one rogue weirdo AUv3 audio effect that hasn't been maintained or updated in a couple years.

They might put it back in. Who knows. When they removed it, they said it was temporary, but I don't know if it'll come back. In practice, I didn't like the inclusion within their video editing interface. That's my opinion and my preference. I'm not "arguing" with anyone.

Agreed, that’s my preference too, it’s only worth it if it’s not crashing, and hosting audio takes up a lot of resources so they were right to remove it for now. I’d prefer to see more video options first anyway.

Agreed as well... I was hoping for layer effects this time. They're coming though. I'm also excited about external monitor support, even via airplay in near real time... and even without the latest Pro ipads. But, that's likely going to be an IAP.

It could also be their implementation of the AUv3 audio hosting within their interface could've been handled in a different way. I'm not an app interface designer, but I know from testing.... many devs find many genius ways to handle UI that I never would've thought of myself. Could be they find a great way to roll it back in at some point.

Ok right, I didn’t test it so never saw how it was done. Easy to get wrong though.
Video out will be great, although I’m not sure yet if I’ll buy it straight a way, as I heard it was going to be around £30 unless they changed their minds.

Hmtx

good points everyone. I would use AUv3, but I can see why it is perceived as an unnecessary burden for the Luma developers.

skiphunt

@Carnbot said:

@skiphunt said:

@Carnbot said:

@skiphunt said:

@Carnbot said:

@skiphunt said:

I still hope they make it happen though eventually

Sometimes it's necessary to work that around for an edit, especially in film making with sound effects/ sound design. Not necessarily the finished master but you don't always want to hop back to a DAW to try something out..especially not on an ipad.

Unfortunately video playback in audio software is pretty crude. That's why desktop apps like Premiere support vsts etc, so no reason why Lumafusion shouldn't if it doesn't break the app.

Picture this... you've been working on a video edit for 5hours. You've got all the timing right, all the transitions nudged where you want them, your title animations are perfect, etc.

Then, you get the idea to try out a few AUv3s to experiment a little, and the whole thing crashes. The project file is corrupt and won't reopen. You panic, you're sending support emails to Luma... they scramble to figure out what's going on with their video editing code, etc.

Later, you realize it was that one rogue weirdo AUv3 audio effect that hasn't been maintained or updated in a couple years.

They might put it back in. Who knows. When they removed it, they said it was temporary, but I don't know if it'll come back. In practice, I didn't like the inclusion within their video editing interface. That's my opinion and my preference. I'm not "arguing" with anyone.

Agreed, that’s my preference too, it’s only worth it if it’s not crashing, and hosting audio takes up a lot of resources so they were right to remove it for now. I’d prefer to see more video options first anyway.

Agreed as well... I was hoping for layer effects this time. They're coming though. I'm also excited about external monitor support, even via airplay in near real time... and even without the latest Pro ipads. But, that's likely going to be an IAP.

It could also be their implementation of the AUv3 audio hosting within their interface could've been handled in a different way. I'm not an app interface designer, but I know from testing.... many devs find many genius ways to handle UI that I never would've thought of myself. Could be they find a great way to roll it back in at some point.

Ok right, I didn’t test it so never saw how it was done. Easy to get wrong though.
Video out will be great, although I’m not sure yet if I’ll buy it straight a way, as I heard it was going to be around £30 unless they changed their minds.

I hope they change their minds on the video out too. There are some multi-cam things that are reported to be included, but I'd never use those. I just want to use an external monitor that isn't simply mirrored.

This was all before they did the Storyblocks deal though, so hopefully that relieves some pressure to have more revenue streams from new features. I don't know though.

JohnnyGoodyear

@Carnbot @skiphunt @Hmtx Interesting discussion. What it tells me more than anything is that Luma is for sure worth the time to work on, which I keep meaning to, but also keep thinking 'yeah but it's really just iMovie' which I'm guessing by the level of your discussion it really really isn't. For that, thanks. But I would like the Adobe export thingie

Carnbot

@JohnnyGoodyear said:
@Carnbot @skiphunt @Hmtx Interesting discussion. What it tells me more than anything is that Luma is for sure worth the time to work on, which I keep meaning to, but also keep thinking 'yeah but it's really just iMovie' which I'm guessing by the level of your discussion it really really isn't. For that, thanks. But I would like the Adobe export thingie

Yeah I feel it personally needs the premiere export and will helps sales if they put it in. Now that Adobe are making more moves towards the ipad, not sure how that will affect things though, whether Adobe can or would prevent it somehow? hope not.

Hmtx

@JohnnyGoodyear said:
it really isn't just iMovie [or something like that]

right, it is something about having all the bells and whistles. I'm not pro enough to actually need all the LumaFusion features, but it somehow makes video editing more fun for me even though all I've actually made could have been done in iMovie.

The main non-iMovie feature I love is key-framing for precise, controlled automation. so luxurious

JohnnyGoodyear

@Hmtx said:
The main non-iMovie feature I love is key-framing for precise, controlled automation. so luxurious

You make it sound like a sherry-filled bubble bath

Hmtx

@JohnnyGoodyear said:

@Hmtx said:
The main non-iMovie feature I love is key-framing for precise, controlled automation. so luxurious

You make it sound like a sherry-filled bubble bath

Precisely. Although the type of company I prefer to share my bath with is very different... no offense to you Mr. Goodyear. That said, do jump in to Luma Fusion and let us know how it goes. The second favorite feature is the ease of importing videos from within iOS Files app. Now you have no excuse not to

jwmmakerofmusic

I'm going to go in on the subscription at least for a month. It'll be good to have an ever-expanding media library. And if Lumafusion gets a cut, it'll support them too.

JohnnyGoodyear

@jwmmakerofmusic said:
I'm going to go in on the subscription at least for a month. It'll be good to have an ever-expanding media library. And if Lumafusion gets a cut, it'll support them too.

Be very interested to hear your feedback on it a week or two in...

boone51

@JohnnyGoodyear said:
@Carnbot @skiphunt @Hmtx Interesting discussion. What it tells me more than anything is that Luma is for sure worth the time to work on, which I keep meaning to, but also keep thinking 'yeah but it's really just iMovie' which I'm guessing by the level of your discussion it really really isn't. For that, thanks. But I would like the Adobe export thingie

For the average consumer, and not videographers, iMovie packs a great deal of functionality into a nice palatable UI that creates a very approachable video editor. It’s similar to GarageBand in that sense. Packed full of features, but quite limited to a person with an inclination to dive deeper. For myself, personally, I shoot quite a bit of video and with various devices. Those differing mediums create color issues that simply can’t be finely tuned in iMovie, at least not in a readily reproducible way for multiple clips going forward. Lumafusion nails this with their ability to finely tune chroma settings, AND then save hem as a preset. To the average person, this is fluff and extra settings in the UI they might find unattractive. Like anything else, the beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There is nothing as close to Premiere (the generally accepted gold standard in video editing) on an iPad as Lumafusion. It’s really kind of amazing, but if you don’t need it...you don’t need it.

LucidMusicInc

@skiphunt said:

@Hmtx said:
(by the way, why are we arguing about extra features? I'll never use Storyblocks, but I'm not going to complain about Luma adding in a feature that will be no doubt used by others... )

Because it can be a nightmare for the developer to maintain AUv3 hosting. Every time some AUv3 isn't working right they get a flood of support tickets claiming there's something wrong with Luma. It takes away from time spent making the video editing part of the software as stable and slick as possible.

The Storyblocks is an effort to keep their company sustainable without going the app subscription route. There's good stuff in the Storyblocks library and it's a good deal if you do a lot of editing. I wish you could use watermarked versions of the clips for client approval first though.

Also if they want to release more FX they can just sell their own proprietary plugins to us, although audio FX in a video app is something I wouldn’t need.

JohnnyGoodyear

@boone51 said:

@JohnnyGoodyear said:
@Carnbot @skiphunt @Hmtx Interesting discussion. What it tells me more than anything is that Luma is for sure worth the time to work on, which I keep meaning to, but also keep thinking 'yeah but it's really just iMovie' which I'm guessing by the level of your discussion it really really isn't. For that, thanks. But I would like the Adobe export thingie

For the average consumer, and not videographers, iMovie packs a great deal of functionality into a nice palatable UI that creates a very approachable video editor. It’s similar to GarageBand in that sense. Packed full of features, but quite limited to a person with an inclination to dive deeper. For myself, personally, I shoot quite a bit of video and with various devices. Those differing mediums create color issues that simply can’t be finely tuned in iMovie, at least not in a readily reproducible way for multiple clips going forward. Lumafusion nails this with their ability to finely tune chroma settings, AND then save hem as a preset. To the average person, this is fluff and extra settings in the UI they might find unattractive. Like anything else, the beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There is nothing as close to Premiere (the generally accepted gold standard in video editing) on an iPad as Lumafusion. It’s really kind of amazing, but if you don’t need it...you don’t need it.

Ah, but I do. Need it I'm often away and find i wrote more poetry on the road and take more footage too which I like to work on right there and then and usually until all hours. And yes sometimes on the laptop on Premiere, but I'm no pro with that either. The 12.9 comes with me everywhere however and I do want to make some progress so Luma tuts it is for me. I appreciate your comment, it was/is encouraging.

BiancaNeve

I was going to give the storyblocks a go but couldn’t even work out how to subscribe. I guess that’s why I always end up going back to Pinnacle though I know long term I should put in the effort.

Keenan

@BiancaNeve said:
I was going to give the storyblocks a go but couldn’t even work out how to subscribe. I guess that’s why I always end up going back to Pinnacle though I know long term I should put in the effort.

Click on any storyblocks clip that isn’t free and press the import arrow thing, the subscription window should pop up.

stemshade

I of course understand the stability issue but i wish au came back, once they sort it out. The ability to slap on an au compressor or limiter would be great. Actually went digging for it for my last video and couldn’t find it and was doubting my feeble brain. I know i can send it to auria, and i would for more fancy audio editing, but i grt so impatient with video editing as it is. I can tweak audio for hours on end, but not video.

BiancaNeve

How come it can see - but not import from my windows laptop (I get some strange smb error) , but doesn’t even see my Mac mini?

LucidMusicInc

@vpich said:
I of course understand the stability issue but i wish au came back, once they sort it out. The ability to slap on an au compressor or limiter would be great. Actually went digging for it for my last video and couldn’t find it and was doubting my feeble brain. I know i can send it to auria, and i would for more fancy audio editing, but i grt so impatient with video editing as it is. I can tweak audio for hours on end, but not video.

There are compressors limiters eqs and filters built in. Granted they don’t have attractive UIs but for removing some hiss or low end and getting the volumes evenly adjusted it does the job.

From a business perspective why should a company allocate resources on getting third party products to be compatible on their platform? Some small percentage of users would enjoy it but in the video realm it’s all about time efficiency in getting new content out quickly and consistently.

Video viewers don’t really listen for sound quality. Chances are a large percentage of them will play it on their device speakers or watch it in the background while doing something else. Sound quality doesn’t matter as much the video production process imho.

stemshade

@LucidMusicInc said:

@vpich said:
I of course understand the stability issue but i wish au came back, once they sort it out. The ability to slap on an au compressor or limiter would be great. Actually went digging for it for my last video and couldn’t find it and was doubting my feeble brain. I know i can send it to auria, and i would for more fancy audio editing, but i grt so impatient with video editing as it is. I can tweak audio for hours on end, but not video.

There are compressors limiters eqs and filters built in. Granted they don’t have attractive UIs but for removing some hiss or low end and getting the volumes evenly adjusted it does the job.

From a business perspective why should a company allocate resources on getting third party products to be compatible on their platform? Some small percentage of users would enjoy it but in the video realm it’s all about time efficiency in getting new content out quickly and consistently.

Video viewers don’t really listen for sound quality. Chances are a large percentage of them will play it on their device speakers or watch it in the background while doing something else. Sound quality doesn’t matter as much the video production process imho.

Yeah i get it, i’m just talking about my individual preference. The reason i purchase different compressors and limiters and reverbs or whatever is because i appreciate the differences and would rather choose.