Enscape Video Editor Complaints

I'm sorry to hear you're not happy with the current way our video editor has been implemented and how it's controlled - we're aware that some behaviours are not ideal at the moment and I have forwarded everything you wrote to our product management team as well. That's all I can really say/do for now, but if you like, feel free to note down any adjustments you'd like to see added ultimately and I'll forward that alongside your post too!

I don't have much experience with video editing software but I had just used Google Earth Studio and the video editor allowed you/gave you the option to move keyframes along the timeline and give you handles to control curve of attributes. It was quite refreshing. Do you think something similar could be achieved in Enscape Demian Gutberlet

Demian Gutberlet There have been a bunch of recent posts, myself included, about the failures of the current video editor. I hope at least some of these can be addressed as soon as possible. It gets frustrating having to install 2.9 to use a semi decent video editor and then reinstall the latest version for the new features.

That's the biggest thing. It's not like you didn't have a generally functional video editor before. Why did Enscape mess up what was working? Like Tearch says, you've had multiple reports to respond to, over multiple preview releases, and still nothing. Very frustrating.

I too am very frustrated with the video editor, I have used Enscape from the first day it became available for Sketchup, and back then when there was no material editor even, the video editor was better than the one we have today. Why fix something that was not broken is beyond me.

I will add as a general comment... please consider that is it not necessary to reinvent the wheel. There are many examples of fully functional timeline/animation/video editors all of which appear to all share many common conventions. I am 100% certain the reason they share so many conventions is because they are (reasonably) influenced by each other. Following commonly used conventions would address most of the concerns being raised.

Please keep any feedback going which you have - I have forwarded it all so far and will forward anything that is being shared in this or any other thread Video Editor wise. In the end, it depends on the general overall user feedback we received regarding what we'll change/revert when it comes to the Editor, so as mentioned, keep the Feedback coming, please. The more the merrier.

EGIE , I hope it's okay that I changed the title of your thread - this should make it easier for others to find it so they can share their thoughts/complaints as well!

I think ENScape tries to keep speed on similar level.. so if You add some key frames it extends the time stamps.. Was frustrating to me at first (Cos I know different setup for video editing) but I learned to work with it..
Add key frames to make Your path..

Set up Total Duration..
Give time stamp only where needed.. Where You want to speed up or slow down.. Don't overuse it..

Done..
I can even Say the way it works is very helpful cos You don't have to readjust every single frame if You decide late that You would like a bit slower video..
But..
Some mark on timeline indicating where exactly we are when previewing.. helpful.. I sometimes get lost about which frame I have to edit..
Being able to move key frames in the timeline would be good.. I guess it is not done because it breaks a steady velocity between neighboring frames..
I like the way ENScape readjusts every frame, I learned to use it to my aid .. Maybe except the last frame.. Total Time when set up It should stay.. Change rather the speed if new frames are added and let user decide if it is to fast.. He can make Total time longer..

Tomasz Drgas Yes, many of the behaviors of the editor in 3.0 are the same as before. It's the places where the behavior is different that's the trouble, as it requires extra keyframes to achieve what was possible before.

Regarding being able to use a visual editor - I was assuming the automatic adjustment would work the same, except that setting the timestamp would be visual, not needing to manually enter in each step. I would like to see what's possible, it seems like a wasted opportunity to not make full use of the shiny new GUI.

Yeah, really the video editor is the only reason I have not fully committed to 3.0. In its current form, 3.0 is pretty wonky to work with and not intuitive at all.

I found some workarounds to edit the keyframes and now manages to get more or less what I want. But it is slow and painful to do it.

You can set the full length of the film (the end key timestamp) when not editing any keys.

First set all the position keys you want and then select each key individually, checks Timestamp and adjust the transition times for each key until somewhat satisfactory. Then leave key edit mode and you are able to set the end key time on the main animation panel.

A main issue with the default timing on keyframing though is that loong distances ar soooo slow and small steps too fast. Unless you place keys on equal distances you will get wildly different speeds with small and big distances between keys requireing post editing of the time stamps.

Quote from JPM AEC

A main issue with the default timing on keyframing though is that loong distances ar soooo slow and small steps too fast. Unless you place keys on equal distances you will get wildly different speeds with small and big distances between keys requireing post editing of the time stamps.

+1

That's been an issue as long as I've been using the video editor. That is certainly another functional improvement that would be helpful.

Keyframe movement and rotation is not easy in any system. Interpolation always have some trouble at keyframes, turning too fast or moving jerkily.
It only ever works OK if you can choose out and ingoing principles separately for rotation and movement.

I will repeat here a suggestion I have made previously on more than one occasion.

A robust capacity to import camera animation from other packages would solve this for many advanced users. There are multiple free advanced animation packages (Blender, Unreal) and many users also own other paid packages (3dsMax, Cinema4D). Note that allowing the import of camera animation would not prevent further development on the internal timeline/video editor, but would allow another option for the many users with other animation packages at their disposal. The other *huge* benefit to this capability is the reliable compositing of elements rendered in other packages.... this would enable custom object animation (people, cars, special effects, etc) animation render passes produced in other packages to be incorporated with Enscape rendering passes easily.