Old 06-16-2017, 01:43 PM   #1
xpander
Human being with feelings
 
xpander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Terra incognita
Posts: 7,670
Default Reaper v5.50rc2 - June 16 2017

v5.50rc2 - June 16 2017
  • # Automation items: fix glue and other actions when there are multiple points at the very end of the automation item [p=1856112]
  • # Envelopes: fix crash when editing an envelope that has only one point [p=1856112]
  • # Envelopes: sort points if necessary after editing via action
Changelog - Pre-Releases

Generated by X-Raym's REAPER ChangeLog to BBCode
xpander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2017, 05:39 AM   #2
MRMJP
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 2,065
Default

Thanks for putting the direct link to the pre-release builds in this thread.
__________________
REAPER, just script it bro.
MRMJP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2017, 05:45 AM   #3
Bri1
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: England
Posts: 2,432
Default

Quote:
Thanks for putting the direct link to the pre-release builds in this thread.
"1. DO NOT REDISTRIBUTE ANYTHING FROM THIS WEBSITE
2. USE VERSIONS FROM HERE WITH CAUTION AND AT YOUR OWN RISK
3. DO NOT LINK TO THIS WEB SITE OR ANYTHING ON IT FROM ANYWHERE"

Go directly to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect £200.
Tsktsk
Bri1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2017, 05:45 AM   #4
jnif
Human being with feelings
 
jnif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,111
Default

What would be a typical use case where user would want to have the underlying envelope removed when inserting a new automation item?

The current behavior where underlyin envelope is removed seems to create many problems. What is the reason for this behavior?

Here is one simple example where the behavior seems strange:


I would prefer inserting new AIs to preserve all underlying envelope points. There could be a separate action to remove the underlying points.

jnif
jnif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2017, 06:07 AM   #5
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 24,790
Default

Try using the option to connect to AI from both sides. Everybody's happy. Then basically AIs become your envelope.

EDIT: On the other hand this might be a bug, since it's not creating a point where the old point was after AI is created, IF you start your AI collecting from the exact location of an envelope point?
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2017, 06:24 AM   #6
jnif
Human being with feelings
 
jnif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,111
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
Try using the option to connect to AI from both sides. Everybody's happy. Then basically AIs become your envelope.
But this is not the answer to the more fundamental question. Why someone would want the underlying envelope to be removed?
If you move the inserted AI, you can see that the underlying envelope is ruined. The same happens also with the "Both sides" connection preference. Why would someone want that kind of unexpected destructive behavior?

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
EDIT: On the other hand this might be a bug, since it's not creating a point where the old point was after AI is created, IF you start your AI collecting from the exact location of an envelope point?
Yes, it might be a bug it this special case, but there are many similar issues related to the same fundamental behavior.
Here is another example:

See also how the envelope shape is ruined in front of the AI where the curved segment started. The curved shape is changed to linear after AI is inserted. This, and many similar problems, would be easily solved by preserving the underlying envelope.

Edit: With "Both sides" connection mode, it is not so easy to solve this particular case. It might be impossible to make the curved envelope segment in front of the AI to be exactly the same as before inserting the AI. But with "Neither side" and "Right side" connection modes it should work if underlying envelope was preserved.

jnif

Last edited by jnif; 06-17-2017 at 07:20 AM.
jnif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2017, 07:20 AM   #7
Robert Randolph
Human being with feelings
 
Robert Randolph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 880
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnif View Post
But this is not the answer to the more fundamental question. Why someone would want the underlying envelope to be removed?
If you move the inserted AI, you can see that the underlying envelope is ruined. The same happens also with the "Both sides" connection preference. Why would someone want that kind of unexpected destructive behavior?



Yes, it might be a bug it this special case, but there are many similar issues related to the same fundamental behavior.
Here is another example:

See also how the envelope shape is ruined in front of the AI where the curved segment started. The curved shape is changed to linear after AI is inserted. This, and many similar problems, would be easily solved by preserving the underlying envelope.

jnif
FWIW, I reported this 3 times in earlier releases... I can't imagine any time where the curve break or the background ramp is useful.

There's also some instances where if you partially capture a curve, the resulting interpolation is pretty poor.
Robert Randolph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2017, 07:56 AM   #8
DaveKeehl
Human being with feelings
 
DaveKeehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1,966
Default

when will AIs be included in Reaper?
__________________
REAPER Contest
DaveKeehl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2017, 08:09 AM   #9
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 24,790
Default

Well, that is not possible without a LOT more work, which would completely break some other parts we all love and use (SWS, for example, even though a decent number of envelope actions in SWS are in fact broken now - they need updating, because the chunk for AIs is not taken into account). Having a whole new GUI area would also break SWS contextual toolbars, for example.

So this was really the best possible solution without introducing a completely new part of the GUI that is not related to envelope lanes at all. Also, AIs are required to work when envelopes are NOT shown in separate lanes, that makes your proposition quite implausible.
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2017, 08:05 AM   #10
ferropop
Human being with feelings
 
ferropop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,117
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnif View Post
But this is not the answer to the more fundamental question. Why someone would want the underlying envelope to be removed?
If you move the inserted AI, you can see that the underlying envelope is ruined. The same happens also with the "Both sides" connection preference. Why would someone want that kind of unexpected destructive behavior?



Yes, it might be a bug it this special case, but there are many similar issues related to the same fundamental behavior.
Here is another example:

See also how the envelope shape is ruined in front of the AI where the curved segment started. The curved shape is changed to linear after AI is inserted. This, and many similar problems, would be easily solved by preserving the underlying envelope.

Edit: With "Both sides" connection mode, it is not so easy to solve this particular case. It might be impossible to make the curved envelope segment in front of the AI to be exactly the same as before inserting the AI. But with "Neither side" and "Right side" connection modes it should work if underlying envelope was preserved.

jnif
I tried my hardest to stress this super early on I sincerely feel that AIs should be an expandable separate lane from the envelope, but collapsable to be viewable as we have them now. That way, inserting/deleting AIs does not require edgepoints, doesn't destroy other points (there's no points to destroy, they are alone in their own lane!), and would just simplify all of the bugginess and special cases.
ferropop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2017, 07:07 AM   #11
Bri1
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: England
Posts: 2,432
Default

Quote:
Here is one simple example where the behavior seems strange:


I would prefer inserting new AIs to preserve all underlying envelope points. There could be a separate action to remove the underlying points.
Seems logical here-the only thing that does not in that gif is when moved right-the new positioned points could be ramped- not a sharp cutoff like that squared shape?? no join or ramping there? Oh I guess that's just how it works..k.
If you want additions you can add stacked trims right?
Bri1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.