Workflow-discussion: Lumiera Workflow Proposals (draft v2)
Chapter 2 (about the timeline) is now complete.
- extend discussion regarding trackless
- add section about Tools / Modes / Views
- section: Adding clips to the timeline
- section: Selecting clips
- section: Arranging clips
- section: Trimming clips
- section: Splitting and merging clips
- section: Removing clips
- add subchapter regarding sections of the timeline
- Adding and editing transitions
- Changing timeline clip properties
===========================================================
Remark from Ichthyo(committer):
Converted from PDF to raw text with
pdftotext wouter250629v2.pdf WorkflowProposals.txt
Images extracted with
pdfimages -png -j wouter250629v2.pdf wouter/wouter250629v2
Images required no cropping;
the white background images were omitted.
Again adding the images separately to the Website-repository,
in order to save storage space in the main repository....
This commit is contained in:
Wouter Verwijlen
parent
262fe7f3bb
commit
68633de53b
1 changed files with 638 additions and 88 deletions
|
|
@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
|
|||
Lumiera Workflow Proposals
|
||||
==========================
|
||||
:Author: Wouter Verwijlen
|
||||
:Date: 3 April 2025
|
||||
:Date: 29 June 2025
|
||||
:TOC:
|
||||
|
||||
I would like to share a first version of a collection of workflow ideas for Lumiera. These ideas come
|
||||
|
|
@ -9,6 +9,10 @@ from having cut hundreds (or possibly thousands) of videos over the past 20 year
|
|||
editor, working in Avid Media Composer, Adobe Premiere Pro (from before it was called "Pro"),
|
||||
Lightworks and DaVinci Resolve.
|
||||
|
||||
This document focuses on analysing the behaviour of Non-linear Editors (NLE's), in other words
|
||||
software in which a user can edit films and videos, in order to discuss possible solutions for the
|
||||
design of Lumiera.
|
||||
|
||||
The main ideas behind these proposals are:
|
||||
|
||||
* Editing should feel as organic as possible. An editor should perceive the NLE as an
|
||||
|
|
@ -20,7 +24,7 @@ certain learning curve. Some new concepts might take a while to master.
|
|||
that part is not within sight (in other words: when it's offscreen). This includes throwing
|
||||
things out of sync, losing transitions, or overwriting clips.
|
||||
|
||||
* Interaction with a NLE shouldn't depend on a specific device. It should be possible to
|
||||
* Interaction with an NLE shouldn't depend on a specific device. It should be possible to
|
||||
operate Lumiera with only the keyboard, only the mouse, other peripherals or a combination
|
||||
of these. We can nudge people towards ways of working we think are optimal, but we
|
||||
shouldn't dictate how to use this application. Many different editors work on many different
|
||||
|
|
@ -114,7 +118,7 @@ conquered the rest of the media industry. It became clear that no single NLE wou
|
|||
all people and all purposes. They each had their own sets of strengths and weaknesses, and therefore
|
||||
each would find its own audience.
|
||||
|
||||
While NLE's evolved in de 2010's, differences between them grew.
|
||||
While NLE's evolved in the 2010's, differences between them grew.
|
||||
|
||||
Media Composer and Lightworks were already very powerful NLE's, specialised in the core editing
|
||||
process, mostly for longer format productions. They offered many configuration options and in turn
|
||||
|
|
@ -144,7 +148,7 @@ social media content, most notably CapCut. It took FCP's idea of easy to learn e
|
|||
offered many one-click visual effects, automatic subtitles and mostly: a lot of effect presets and
|
||||
assets (titles, other graphics, music) available within the application.
|
||||
|
||||
Right now we're witnessing the early stages of the introduction of AI in most NLE's. This expands
|
||||
Right now we are witnessing the early stages of the introduction of AI in most NLE's. This expands
|
||||
the possibilities for manipulating video and audio without requiring much technical knowledge.
|
||||
Voices, music, video clips and even rough cuts can be generated. Audio issues can easily be fixed,
|
||||
mixing and mastering can be done automatically, tracking en keying becomes a lot easier than it
|
||||
|
|
@ -164,8 +168,19 @@ data. Would there be a way to check the validity of this statement? And how shou
|
|||
|
||||
Chapter 1: working with source material
|
||||
---------------------------------------
|
||||
[red]#To be written.#
|
||||
This chapter will not cover every detail of the process of ingesting, project organisation and
|
||||
logging. It will focus on the main strategies of how a user goes through all of their material within a
|
||||
specific project in order to select the parts needed for the final edit. I will compare the ways in
|
||||
which different NLE's handle this and will propose possible directions for Lumiera to support
|
||||
certain workflows.
|
||||
|
||||
[red]#To be written:#
|
||||
Asset organisation: bins vs metadata-based structures (+ search bins/filters)
|
||||
Viewing footage: single clips vs source reels; continuous playback from browser
|
||||
Source monitor + program monitor vs a single monitor
|
||||
Creating selects: selects reels, subclips and keyword collections
|
||||
On markers and notes
|
||||
From selects to editing in the timeline: Timelines in the source viewer: reel to reel editing
|
||||
|
||||
Chapter 2: the timeline
|
||||
-----------------------
|
||||
|
|
@ -177,11 +192,40 @@ working in the timeline which I will explore in the different subsections of thi
|
|||
|
||||
Tracks vs trackless
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
Traditionally, NLE's have been track-based. The reason for this is that they have been modelled
|
||||
after analog hardware. For example, Adobe Premiere's predecessor ReelTime was created to work
|
||||
like 3/4" tape decks.
|
||||
In general, we can observe two extremes when it comes to editing:
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
I'd like to quote Randy Ubillos, original creator of ReelTime and Final Cut Pro:
|
||||
On the one hand, there are NLE's modeled to resemble working with analog gear (i.e.
|
||||
classic editing stations from KEM, Steenbeck, Moviola). A lot of terminology in editing
|
||||
software (‘bins', ‘reels', ‘cut', ‘mark in/out', among many others) stems from the analog
|
||||
origins of editing. Lightworks is an example of this. When trimming you ‘unjoin' a cut,
|
||||
make changes, and then ‘join' the cut again, as if working with analog film that needs to be
|
||||
taped together. It works best in conjunction with the Lightworks Console, a hardware device
|
||||
that was designed specifically to make software editing feel as if editing analog film. Very
|
||||
hands-on, very tactile, according to editors who have worked with these consoles
|
||||
(unfortunately I haven't had a chance to try this myself).
|
||||
Not just Lightworks, but also Avid is said to have been greatly influenced by analog
|
||||
equipment, and Adobe Premiere's predecessor ReelTime was created to work like 3/4" tape
|
||||
decks. Blackmagic's Speed Editor (and corresponding Cut Page in Resolve) has also been
|
||||
designed according to this principle: to make editing feel like you're operating a machine.
|
||||
Pressing buttons, rotating dials. This has a great feel to it, but it's less flexible than the other
|
||||
extreme:
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Editing and trimming designed to be performed by mouse. Most NLE's added this earlier or
|
||||
later during their development. Final Cut Pro was from its core designed to be used this way.
|
||||
It's fast, and in combination with the clip connections and magnetic timeline, it's the least
|
||||
destructive way to edit. Trimming and editing by mouse is less precise though, which is why
|
||||
even FCP offers many keyboard shortcuts for precise trimming by keyboard. Using a mouse
|
||||
feel slightly less tactile than using physical buttons and dials.
|
||||
In this same category we can also mention touch screens (as they offer similar interactions
|
||||
as a mouse, with the addition of finger gestures). Editing on a smartphone or tablet, when
|
||||
not using a pen, feels even further removed from giving you a physical connection between
|
||||
your hands and the buttons on the screen.
|
||||
|
||||
Because of its analog roots, traditionally, NLE's have been track-based. I'd like to quote Randy
|
||||
Ubillos, original creator of ReelTime and Final Cut Pro:
|
||||
____
|
||||
"In a track based system the layers at the beginning, middle and end all share the exact same tracks
|
||||
and you're always potentially disrupting things in other parts of the project when you make changes
|
||||
|
|
@ -211,7 +255,7 @@ tracks.
|
|||
|
||||
* They support editing by keyboard, as you can toggle tracks on and off and bind this to keys.
|
||||
|
||||
Disadvantages of tracks:
|
||||
Tracks have disadvantages as well:
|
||||
|
||||
* They're quite inflexible: you can't easily change their order.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -227,8 +271,9 @@ mitigate sync issues.
|
|||
* Clips that naturally belong together are separated, for example b-roll and associated sound
|
||||
effects. Instead, clips that only share a shallow relation are grouped together.
|
||||
|
||||
* To me, personally, track management takes me out of my storytelling flow. It's a necessity
|
||||
that doesn't directly aid in the creative process.
|
||||
* To me, personally, track management (i.e. the enabling and disabling of tracks and/or sync
|
||||
locks in order to get a certain result when performing editing operations) takes me out of
|
||||
my storytelling flow. It's a necessity that doesn't directly aid in the creative process.
|
||||
|
||||
Editors often proudly share screenshots of their timelines on social media, and they do look
|
||||
impressive, but these are in fact pretty fragile structures.
|
||||
|
|
@ -242,21 +287,27 @@ disastrous marketing campaign caused many editors to leave the application, alth
|
|||
more people are starting to realise that many of its ideas were way ahead of its time. It's still the
|
||||
only big NLE out there that was designed with computers in mind, and not analog hardware.
|
||||
|
||||
It's not entirely trackless, but it manages to hide the concept of tracks from the user. In a nutshell, it
|
||||
works by having a primary storyline (in a track-based NLE this would be V1+A1) where you build
|
||||
the foundation of your edit. Then the video clips you put on top and the audio clips you put below
|
||||
get connected to one or more clips from the primary storyline. Move a clip on the primary storyline,
|
||||
and all connected clips automatically move with it. With a modifier key you can ignore clip
|
||||
connections, so that you can also easily move a primary clip elsewhere without its connected
|
||||
siblings coming along.
|
||||
It's not entirely trackless, but it manages to hide the concept of tracks from the user. There are no
|
||||
buttons to enable or disable tracks or other track controls, and instead, the tracks are called ‘layers'.
|
||||
In a nutshell, it works by having a primary storyline (in a track-based NLE this would be V1+A1)
|
||||
where you build the foundation of your edit. Then the video clips you put on top and the audio clips
|
||||
you put below get connected to one or more clips from the primary storyline. Move a clip on the
|
||||
primary storyline, and all connected clips automatically move with it. With a modifier key you can
|
||||
ignore clip connections, so that you can also easily move a primary clip elsewhere without its
|
||||
connected siblings coming along.
|
||||
|
||||
Sounds good! Why not just copy this? One reason is that FCP assumes that all clips clips that are
|
||||
not on the primary storyline should be connected to this primary storyline. This might work well for
|
||||
fiction films, but not necessarily for other types of video. Earlier I mentioned an example of sound
|
||||
effects that share a connection to b-roll on a higher layer. FCP won't allow you to connect them.
|
||||
Extending one clip will automatically move all connected clips in order to keep sync
|
||||
Sounds good. Why not just copy this? One reason is that FCP assumes that all clips that are not on
|
||||
the primary storyline should be connected to this primary storyline. This might work well for fiction
|
||||
films, but not necessarily for other types of video. Earlier I mentioned an example of sound effects
|
||||
that share a connection to b-roll on a higher layer. FCP won't allow you to connect them. Another
|
||||
limitation of FCP is that it's primarily designed to be operated by mouse. It's not possible to use
|
||||
keyboard commands to, for example, swap the position of clips (other than by cut and paste), or to
|
||||
perform slip edits (the trim keys will work, but the clip needs to be selected by mouse using the
|
||||
Trim tool).
|
||||
|
||||
How else could we group clips together that ought to be connected? We could potentially group
|
||||
them in compound clips that are directly editable, like so:
|
||||
How else could we group clips together that ought to be connected? We could create groups that are
|
||||
directly editable, like so:
|
||||
|
||||
.Compound clips
|
||||
image::{imgg}/wouter/02-1-grouped.png[Timeline with compound clips]
|
||||
|
|
@ -270,72 +321,144 @@ Can we restructure this? Perhaps like this:
|
|||
.Overlapping compound clips
|
||||
image::{imgg}/wouter/02-2-grouped.png[Timeline with stacked overlapping compound clips]
|
||||
|
||||
But how exactly would a user interact with a timeline like this? You'd need a toggle somewhere
|
||||
(and corresponding keyboard shortcut) to toggle the compounds on and off. When the compounds
|
||||
are enabled, you can move entire compound clips at once. When turned off, you could edit any
|
||||
individual clip. When using the keyboard, one could cycle through all visible compound clips with
|
||||
a key like Tab and then perform actions on the compound clip, or choose to step ``into'' and ``out of''
|
||||
these compound clips to work on the material inside.
|
||||
But how exactly would a user interact with a timeline like this? I will leave the answer to that
|
||||
question for an actual design document, as for now I just wanted to show the concept of grouping so
|
||||
that it becomes clear that alternative ways to organise the timeline might be of great value.
|
||||
|
||||
This rises another question: would enabling/disabling of compounds actually be an improvement
|
||||
over track management? This idea clearly needs a lot more thought and development to see if it
|
||||
could actually work in a real-world editing scenario, but it might be an interesting direction to
|
||||
explore.
|
||||
Tools + modes + views
|
||||
If we observe existing NLE's, we can distinguish several ways to change timeline interactions.
|
||||
Some use a tool-based approach (Adobe Premiere, Final Cut Pro), others a mode-based approach
|
||||
(Avid Media Composer, Lightworks and DaVinci Resolve), and we can also see a view-based
|
||||
approach (FCP's use of the precision editor, explained in more detail later). Which of these
|
||||
interaction methods would be preferred for Lumiera?
|
||||
Using modes is somewhat controversial, as it increases cognitive load (the user needs to remember
|
||||
which mode they're in) and can lead to user errors (an action in one mode might do something
|
||||
different than intended in another mode). Another thing about modes is that they require a user
|
||||
action for entering and exiting.
|
||||
|
||||
A tool-based approach however, is very mouse-centered. It changes the behaviour of the mouse, not
|
||||
of keyboard actions, and this change is visible in the cursor. Tools are of little use to the keyboard
|
||||
editor.
|
||||
A view-based approach is not too different from using modes, with the difference that it drastically
|
||||
alters the contents of a view or panel in the user interface. It's less common and can be seen in
|
||||
FCP's precision editor. It doesn't change the working of keyboard shortcuts or the mouse and it
|
||||
alters the timeline via animations in a very fluid way.
|
||||
|
||||
Inserting material onto the timeline
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
[red]#To be written.#
|
||||
Final Cut Pro's precision editor
|
||||
|
||||
Another example is the Trim View in DaVinci Resolve: whenever you perform a trimming
|
||||
operation, the program monitor displays a trim view (showing the frames left and right of the cut
|
||||
next to each other). As soon as you start doing something else, it exits this trim view. It needs no
|
||||
dedicated user action.
|
||||
This might seem like a great approach (and can be combined with tools and/or modes), but it does
|
||||
mean a user needs to reorient a bit when they exit the altered view and return to its default state.
|
||||
Perhaps that's a small price to pay, when not overdone.
|
||||
When we more closely examine the behaviour of NLE's, we see that things are not as black and
|
||||
white as they seem. No NLE exclusively uses one method over others. Resolve's modes do in fact
|
||||
also change the mouse cursor's look and behaviour and can therefore be considered a hybrid
|
||||
mode/tool system. FCP's Select and Position tools also change the behaviour of trimming keys and
|
||||
can therefore indeed also be considered modes, which gives us a hybrid design as well. Specialised
|
||||
views can be combined with tools or modes.
|
||||
To conclude: all methods have pros and cons. Tools, modes and views aren't mutually exclusive, so
|
||||
I think we should use whichever method or combination of methods is appropriate for different
|
||||
actions in Lumiera. Whenever we can, we should try to avoid all three and design the app to be as
|
||||
consistent as possible. Whenever we use a mode, we should see if we can design it in a way in
|
||||
which a user fluidly enters and exits this mode, without requiring extra actions: contextual modes.
|
||||
Most mode-based NLE's already implement this for their trim mode in a way where selecting a trim
|
||||
side automatically enters trim mode. However, a user does still need to explicitly exit trim mode.
|
||||
Regardless of the method, immediate visual differentiation of tools/modes/views is important and
|
||||
I'd like this to extend to any timeline option that can be toggled on/off. Therefore I'd like to propose
|
||||
the use of a contextual bar that appears over the bottom part of the timeline whenever a contextual
|
||||
mode is active.
|
||||
|
||||
Grouping material: sections
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
I would like to propose the ability to divide a timeline into multiple sections. Each of these sections
|
||||
will have a header in the ruler that can be edited, to give each section a name (similar to how
|
||||
duration markers in Premiere are displayed).
|
||||
Currently I'm thinking of using this bar on two or three occasions:
|
||||
1. When selecting clips. It can feature:
|
||||
a Group Clips button
|
||||
a Cut button
|
||||
a Duplicate button
|
||||
a Nudge Left ‘<' button
|
||||
a Nudge Right ‘>' button
|
||||
a Ripple toggle
|
||||
a Snap toggle
|
||||
2. When trimming. It can feature:
|
||||
a Trim radio button
|
||||
a Slip radio button
|
||||
a Slide radio button
|
||||
a Trim Left ‘<' button
|
||||
a Trim Right ‘>' button
|
||||
a Ripple Trim toggle
|
||||
3. When adding clips to the timeline. It can feature options like Insert, Overwrite, Replace, etc.
|
||||
See the next subchapter: ‘Adding clips to the timeline'.
|
||||
A limitation of such a bar is that it might overlap with content that a user wishes to interact with. If
|
||||
this is the case, then clicking on the grid with dots will let a user drag this bar out of the way. As an
|
||||
extra option I would like to suggest to use a modifier key (Ctrl?) which temporarily hides the
|
||||
contextual bar. Another consideration could be to attach this bar to the bottom of the timeline and
|
||||
combine it with the zoom and navigation sliders, although I feel a more central default position will
|
||||
get things done quicker.
|
||||
|
||||
.Timeline with sections
|
||||
image::{imgg}/wouter/03-sections.png[Timeline organised into a sequence of sections]
|
||||
Adding clips to the timeline
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
|
||||
All NLE's offer multiple ways to get your material in the timeline, and those methods fall into the
|
||||
following categories:
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
The benefits of sections:
|
||||
Drag and drop from either the project contents panel or directly from a file browser
|
||||
|
||||
* Creating a broad sense and clear overview of how a timeline is constructed. Background
|
||||
colors in the timeline will make it easy to differentiate between different sections.
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
* Easy navigation between sections by keyboard shortcuts.
|
||||
By creating a timeline out of selected clips in a bin
|
||||
|
||||
* Keeping sync. All clips in a section are encapsulated. If you work in one section, you will
|
||||
not be able to throw clips in other sections out of sync. Users could also time-lock a section,
|
||||
so it will stay in place regardless of other edit operations. This is especially useful when
|
||||
editing on music, but will also prevent losing sync between other elements that have been
|
||||
carefully lined up. Sections will not prevent anyone throwing anything out of sync within a
|
||||
section, but at least not the entire timeline will be affected.
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
* The order of sections can easily be changed by clicking and dragging. This way sections can
|
||||
be used to, for example, easily change the order of scenes. The free-flowing editor for
|
||||
example, can construct different parts of their edit on different parts of the timeline in
|
||||
different sections, and then arrange them later.
|
||||
N point editing, of which the most commonly used is three point editing: you load a source
|
||||
clip (or timeline) into a (source) viewer/monitor, mark an in point, out point and use one of
|
||||
multiple options (by clicking their buttons, by pressing the corresponding keyboard shortcut,
|
||||
or by dragging your clip from the source viewer into the program monitor onto a list of
|
||||
zones), of which the most common ones are:
|
||||
◦ Insert (based on playhead position)
|
||||
◦ Overwrite (based on playhead position)
|
||||
|
||||
* Sections could have a versioning system: this would allow the user to try different cuts
|
||||
within a section and to quickly change between these different versions.
|
||||
◦ Place on top (based on playhead position)
|
||||
◦ Append (added to the end of the timeline)
|
||||
Three point editing also works by only providing an in-point on the source clip, and marking
|
||||
in and out points on the timeline. In order to choose on which tracks your clips end up,
|
||||
track-based NLE's usually provide a way to route source tracks to timeline tracks via the
|
||||
track header.
|
||||
Some NLE's support four point editing, where speed adjustments are applied to make the
|
||||
selected duration in the source clip match the selected duration in the timeline.
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Several other characteristics of sections:
|
||||
Avid features a Replace Edit option: a selected clip on the timeline can be replaced by the
|
||||
contents in the source browser with a single click or keystroke.
|
||||
|
||||
* Clips can be excluded from being part of a section. For example: music tracks could span
|
||||
the entire length of a video by not being included in any section.
|
||||
All of these options make sense, but in general I find it easier to remember two options (insert and
|
||||
overwrite) and easily forget any surplus options that NLE's offer. We should also try to limit the
|
||||
amount of keyboard shortcuts that a user needs to memorize, so two options seems like a proper
|
||||
number. In that case, I would suggest one key/function for an Insert operation.
|
||||
The second key/function will be a more generic ‘Add Clip' action, which might display a pop-up in
|
||||
which we can select which method to use. TAB will cycle between Overwrite, Place on Top,
|
||||
Append and Replace, followed by Enter to confirm. It will remember the last used option. Double
|
||||
tapping the keyboard shortcut for this action will skip the pop-up.
|
||||
Having to repeatedly view a pop-up menu (or double tapping a key) might feel cumbersome, so an
|
||||
alternative could be to let the ‘Add Clip' action insert a clip by default and show all different
|
||||
options via the contextual bar. You can then change the behaviour after the fact, until you commit
|
||||
by doing something else. In this case, adding a clip will enter and exit another contextual mode.
|
||||
One last thing I would like to address is the destruction that an insert operation can cause. Usually
|
||||
this can be prevented by proper track management, but you can wonder why you would ever want
|
||||
an insert action to cause the following:
|
||||
|
||||
* When working within a section, its size will adapt to your edit operations (so its edges will
|
||||
shrink or expand automatically while trimming or moving clips).
|
||||
|
||||
* A new timeline will have one large section spanning its entire length. A ``split section''
|
||||
button and keyboard shortcut will create new sections.
|
||||
|
||||
Things to consider:
|
||||
|
||||
* How to move clips from one section to another?
|
||||
* If sections can be time-locked then they will probably need to be able to overlap.
|
||||
Inserting a clip with sync locks enabled for V2 might split a clip in Avid Media Composer.
|
||||
|
||||
In this case, if you'd like the clips on V2 to stay in sync, the overlapping clip will be split in two. If
|
||||
you don't want this to happen you would have to move the overlapping clip to another track
|
||||
temporarily, or move everything on V2 by hand with the same amount of frames as the duration of
|
||||
the clips that's inserted. My point is, however, that while the behaviour above makes sense when
|
||||
you strictly follow the logic of how such a timeline works, in real-life you would rarely want a clip
|
||||
to be split only to keep sync. Therefore, I would like to propose insert operations to be nondestructive by nature. Overlapping clips on other tracks or layers will simply move in its entirety.
|
||||
Another thing to consider, as I put much emphasis on grouping (or linking) clips, is that we might
|
||||
want to differentiate between inserting a clip into the currently active group, or inserting it in a
|
||||
newly created group. This way a clip will always end up in a group without much manual work.
|
||||
|
||||
Navigating the timeline
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
|
|
@ -431,8 +554,7 @@ Zooming in and out, by keyboard:
|
|||
* Every NLE has keys to zoom in and out horizontally. Some (Premiere, Resolve, Avid)
|
||||
support keys to expand and shrink all track heights at once (vertical zooming).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
About keyboard shortcuts
|
||||
Navigating with keyboard shortcuts
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
I can imagine that all of the keyboard shortcuts for navigation were invented simply to provide
|
||||
many options for each editor to choose what they need. This way, every editor can pick the
|
||||
|
|
@ -446,8 +568,9 @@ basically Vim's way of doing it (m+0-9a-zA-Z to bind, backtick+0-9a-zA-Z to jump
|
|||
want to keep it as simple as having the regular ``add marker'', ``add and edit marker'' and ``go to
|
||||
next/previous marker'' keyboard shortcuts.
|
||||
|
||||
Sections will get navigation markers automatically, so a user doesn't have to create each marker
|
||||
manually. Or we might want to include keyboard shortcuts for ``go to previous/next section''.
|
||||
Sections (explained later in this chapter) will get navigation markers automatically, so a user doesn't
|
||||
have to create each marker manually. Or we might want to include keyboard shortcuts for ``go to
|
||||
previous/next section''.
|
||||
|
||||
*Fast forward and fast rewind keys* as found in Reaper might be a helpful addition to the
|
||||
aforementioned keys. This would give as a quick way to skim a timeline by keyboard. While fast
|
||||
|
|
@ -524,21 +647,447 @@ to be similar to the autoscroll widget.
|
|||
* When using the keyboard shortcut versions: a downside is having even more keyboard
|
||||
shortcuts that need quick access from the one hand that stays on the keyboard.
|
||||
|
||||
Selecting clips
|
||||
Selecting a single clip happens in all NLE's by left mouse clicking. Selecting multiple clips happens
|
||||
through box-select, by using left mouse and drag. Premiere and Resolve both offer ‘Selection
|
||||
follows playhead', where the position of the playhead determines which clip gets selected. Then
|
||||
there are keyboard shortcuts, to select the next or previous clip on a track. Final Cut Pro lets you
|
||||
move the clip selection up and down by Cmd+up/down.
|
||||
Selecting multiple clips by keyboard has no support that I know of in any big NLE. I would suggest
|
||||
to add this though, because the alternative for keyboard selection is the famous mark in/out range.
|
||||
That's a pretty arbitrary way to indicate what you'd like to extract, lift or remove, and, in all
|
||||
fairness, this works great as long as your timeline has few tracks. However, once you have multiple
|
||||
overlapping clips on different tracks, combinations of mark/lift/extract/insert/overwrite require
|
||||
careful track selection and there are serious risks of throwing tracks out of sync. It's not very
|
||||
convenient either, the moment you start creating J- or L-cuts. It's a butcher's knife that pays no
|
||||
respect to any kind of clip connections.
|
||||
While we should support marking in and out points (and I'd advice to copy Lightworks' mark and
|
||||
park, where you only need to set a single mark and the playhead becomes the second mark) simply
|
||||
because most professional editors are so used to them, we should aim to include less destructive
|
||||
ways of arranging clips on the timeline. The natural element in the timeline is the clip, so I would
|
||||
suggest to focus on providing proper ways to select clips and edit the positions and durations of
|
||||
these clips, instead of relying on in and out marks to do the job.
|
||||
I would propose to use the arrow keys for navigating clips and groups. There can be a cursor (for
|
||||
example, a white dot) which we can move left, right, up, and down by using the arrow keys.
|
||||
Changing the cursor from clip to clip will also move the playhead to the start of the highlighted clip
|
||||
- but this is secondary. A clip-based focus instead of playhead/cut-based focus will be different from
|
||||
what any other NLE does at the moment, but enabling multi-clip selection by keyboard will be a
|
||||
good reason to go in this direction.
|
||||
|
||||
Selection mockup: selected clips are highlighted in yellow, the cursor is a white dot.
|
||||
|
||||
For selecting, we can introduce an ‘add to selection' key which adds the highlighted clip to the
|
||||
current selection (apart from the convention of using Ctrl+mouse click). Selected clips can have a
|
||||
differently colored box, yellow, for example.
|
||||
One thing to note is that we do still need extra keyboard shortcuts to move the playhead frame by
|
||||
frame, indepently from the clip selection. See the navigation subchapter for more details.
|
||||
Selection will be one of the previously mentioned contextual modes. The user can always return to
|
||||
their previous selection until they make a new one, by pressing the corresponding keyboard shortcut
|
||||
(S).
|
||||
|
||||
Arranging clips
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
[red]#To be written.#
|
||||
|
||||
Selecting and moving clips
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
[red]#To be written.#
|
||||
|
||||
Timeline tools vs modes
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
[red]#To be written.#
|
||||
Most NLE's handle the arranging of clips in a destructive way. Drop one clip over another, and the
|
||||
clips underneath disappear. Move one of two clips that are connected by a transition, and the
|
||||
transition disappears. While it's certainly true that experienced editors will understand the risks
|
||||
involved in moving clips and will therefore avoid such destructive behaviour unless they intend for
|
||||
something to be destroyed, accidents still occur and most probably someone won't notice until much
|
||||
later, when undo cannot help to recover the lost work anymore.
|
||||
At the same time, something as fundamental as swapping the position of two neighbouring clips is
|
||||
harder than it should. Premiere has Ctrl+Alt+drag, but the results can be destructive. Resolve has a
|
||||
similar modifier combination, and keyboard shortcuts for swapping left and right, but these also
|
||||
easily mess up parts of your edit if you're not careful with your track selection. Avid's smart tool
|
||||
has a Segment Mode that can be set to extract/splice-in, which will do a similar thing. It only has an
|
||||
effect on the tracks that hold the clip selection and results can get messy when there are J- or L-cuts.
|
||||
An alternative is to select a clip by mouse, use ‘ripple cut', move the playhead to the next cut, and
|
||||
use ‘paste insert', but this can also be destructive when not being careful with track management.
|
||||
We've talked about using in and out marks already in the previous subchapter, so I will skip that for
|
||||
now.
|
||||
FCP is the only widely used NLE as of now that allows non-destructively changing the order of
|
||||
clips, by having other clips move out of the way: the so-called magnetic timeline. How come the
|
||||
other professional NLE's make it so difficult to simply change the order of clips? The reason for
|
||||
that, I can only assume, is that the software doesn't know how clips on different tracks relate to
|
||||
each other. And as a result, it will be very hard to guess how to exactly change the order. FCP solves
|
||||
this problem by having clips always connect to a primary storyline. Lumiera could do a similar
|
||||
thing by utilising its grouping features, in combination with a Ripple-toggle in the contextual bar of
|
||||
the selection mode. As long as clip relations are clear, changing the order of clips should be simple
|
||||
to achieve.
|
||||
|
||||
Trimming clips
|
||||
Trimming
|
||||
~~~~~~~~
|
||||
[red]#To be written.#
|
||||
Trimming means extending or shortening the duration of one or more clips (simultaneously), either
|
||||
from its start or end. In most applications, there are two distinct ways to trim: ripple trimming and
|
||||
non-ripple trimming. Ripple trimming means that when you extend or shorten a clip, all other clips
|
||||
on the same track and possibly on other tracks move along. When non-ripple trimming, all clips
|
||||
stay in place, and when a clip is shortened, a gap appears. To choose a trim type, NLE's use either
|
||||
tools or modes.
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
FCP's Select tool defaults to ripple trimming, and it's Position tool does non-ripple
|
||||
trimming.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
In Premiere it's the other way around: the default selection tool does non-ripple trims, and
|
||||
the ripple edit tool... well, it's in the name. A user doesn't have to switch tools per se:
|
||||
pressing the Ctrl modifier will inverse a tool's mode of operation.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Resolve talks in terms of modes, not tools, and it has two modes related to trimming: the
|
||||
default Selection Mode and Trim Edit Mode. The latter lets you ripple trim (by dragging the
|
||||
edges of clips), slip (dragging inside a clip, upper half) and slide (dragging inside a clip,
|
||||
lower half) - more on slip and slide edits later.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Avid has a trim mode that can be in overwrite trim or ripple trim mode, indicated by the
|
||||
color of the trim sides (red or yellow). The timeline will be in either of these modes when
|
||||
entering trim mode.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Lightworks has a trim mode that defaults to ripple trimming, unless you specifically use the
|
||||
“drag to black” feature by Control-clicking trim edges when entering trim mode. When
|
||||
|
||||
using the keyboard, one needs to mark a section and use the Remove command (similar to
|
||||
Avid's ‘lift') to create a gap.
|
||||
Next to ripple/non-ripple trimming there are three other edit operations closely related to trimming
|
||||
that need to be mentioned:
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Roll edits. This is where you move a cut left or right, so that as a result, one clips gets
|
||||
extended, while the other gets shortened.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Slip edits. Nothing gets extended or shortened. Instead, you shift the contents of one or more
|
||||
clips on the timeline.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Slide edits. This moves a selected clip (or clip selection) left or right, thereby keeping its
|
||||
own duration, while the duration of its surrounding clips gets altered.
|
||||
|
||||
Some apps use their trimming system for slip and slide edits (Avid, Lightworks). Others use a
|
||||
special tool or mode and/or separate keyboard shortcuts for this (FCP, Premiere, Resolve).
|
||||
|
||||
Selecting trim sides
|
||||
Every trim starts by selecting which sides of which clips need to be included in the trimming. How
|
||||
many sides to select greatly depends on how many tracks are involved and if the NLE has a sync
|
||||
lock system or not. Sync locks makes sure that when you ripple trim selected clips, clips on other
|
||||
tracks automatically stay in sync. This means (manually) enabling or disabling the sync lock per
|
||||
track. Once set, trimming a single clip can be enough to have all tracks move along, although you
|
||||
might still need to manually select trim sides for overlapping clips to get the desired result.
|
||||
|
||||
Avid's sync locks will split longer clips by default, in order to keep sync. Such destructive behaviour should be avoided
|
||||
in Lumiera.
|
||||
|
||||
Without sync locks you will have to select trim sides on every track that needs to stay in sync,
|
||||
although, as we'll see, even that can be accomplished by a single keystroke. FCP is the exception
|
||||
here: it does not use sync locks (as it has a trackless design), but keeps sync not based on tracks, but
|
||||
on clip connections (this is discussed in the subchapter ‘Tracks vs Trackless').
|
||||
Let's first examine trim side selection by mouse. This is generally as simple as clicking near the
|
||||
edge of a clip, or on the edge between two clips to select both sides for a roll edit.
|
||||
Adding additional trim sides often works by using modifier like Ctrl + left click (Premiere, Resolve,
|
||||
Lightworks, Avid). FCP does not allow the selection of multiple trim sides and therefore does not
|
||||
support asymmetric trimming. Such trims are still possible, but need to be performed in two steps
|
||||
rather than one.
|
||||
Keyboard selection of trim sides happens in general by providing shortcuts for selecting the left (A)
|
||||
side, the right (B) side, or both, of a cut (Avid, Premiere, Resolve and FCP, although the latter does
|
||||
not have a shortcut for selecting both sides as it uses a dedicated Trim tool for roll edits). This
|
||||
|
||||
applies to the cut nearest to the playhead. Lightworks is the only NLE with a slightly different, but
|
||||
very powerful method: instead of A/B/both, it has four shortcuts:
|
||||
• Trim last out
|
||||
• Trim in
|
||||
These two apply to all cuts on enabled tracks to the left of the playhead.
|
||||
• Trim out
|
||||
• Trim next in
|
||||
These two apply to all cuts on enabled tracks to the right of the playhead.
|
||||
These commands can be combined: when pressing multiple keys, new trim sides are added to the
|
||||
selection. This allows for quickly selecting many trim sides on many tracks.
|
||||
|
||||
One keystroke led to the selection of these four trim sides in Lightworks
|
||||
|
||||
Another feature that was already mentioned in a previous chapter, is FCP's precision editor, which
|
||||
can be triggered by double clicking a cut or by keyboard shortcut. This shows how much footage
|
||||
from each clip is available for trimming and allows ripple trimming as well as roll edits to be
|
||||
performed by mouse or keyboard.
|
||||
|
||||
Performing the trim
|
||||
Usually we see three ways to perform a trim:
|
||||
1. Frame by frame. This can be done by mouse by clicking and dragging the edges of a clip, or
|
||||
by keyboard by using shortcuts for left one frame, right one frame, left 10/many frames,
|
||||
right 10/many frames. Instead of using keyboard shortcuts, dedicated hardware can be used
|
||||
to joggle left or right to perform trimming.
|
||||
2. By specifying an exact amount of frames. Pretty much every NLE supports using the plus
|
||||
and minus keys on the keypad to enter exact frame numbers. Lightworks does an excellent
|
||||
job at this: when not entering any amount (so just plus/minus + enter) it will repeat the last
|
||||
entered amount of frames.
|
||||
3. Dynamic trimming. This means starting playback of the timeline around the position of the
|
||||
cut, and pressing a key to mark a point in realtime where the cut should be placed. Avid and
|
||||
Lightworks have dynamic trimming support within their trim modes. Resolve has a separate
|
||||
switch for this that needs to be toggled, and Premiere has a separate mode for dynamic
|
||||
trimming, simply called ‘Trim Mode'. FCP does not seem to support dynamic trimming at
|
||||
the time of writing.
|
||||
|
||||
Previewing the cut
|
||||
Most NLE's feature a Preview keyboard shortcut with user-adjustable pre-roll and post-roll
|
||||
duration. Avid always does a looped preview around the cut in trim mode when triggering playback.
|
||||
|
||||
Entering and exiting trim mode
|
||||
Avid and Lightworks have keyboard commands to both enter and exit their trim modes. When used
|
||||
for entering, Lightworks will re-enable the previous trim side selection. FCP's precision editor can
|
||||
be closed with the Escape key, as can Avid's trim mode.
|
||||
|
||||
Analysis and proposal
|
||||
My proposal is to leverage the same system as the clip selection system to highlight a clip, and then
|
||||
have three commands:
|
||||
•
|
||||
•
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Select the clip's in point as trim side
|
||||
Select the clip's out point as trim side
|
||||
Select the clip's in point for a roll edit
|
||||
|
||||
If the latter is pressed a second time, it will take the clip's out point for a roll edit. When the first
|
||||
two shortcuts are pressed once, they select the trim side for ripple trims. When pressed again, they
|
||||
will switch to non-ripple trims (and back again with another press). There should be a clear visual
|
||||
difference between these two (perhaps through the color of the brackets, as in Avid).
|
||||
Note that this approach closely resembles Lightworks, and is different from Avid, FCP, Premiere
|
||||
and Resolve. Those apps take the cut closest to the playhead as the basis for choosing a trim side.
|
||||
Lightworks takes the underlying clip as its basis. Since we already have a mechanism for navigating
|
||||
clips, we should probably not add another mechanism just for navigating cuts.
|
||||
I propose to not make use of sync locks. They apply to entire tracks and we previously established
|
||||
that clips that have no relation to each other might share a track, so it makes little sense to provide
|
||||
track based operations. We should instead take the actual clip connections that the user establishes
|
||||
into account. This way we also don't need to be able to select multiple trim sides at once (for
|
||||
complex asymmetric trimming operations), as this can create sync problems elsewhere on a track.
|
||||
Trimming itself doesn't need to be reinvented. Trimming frame by frame, by a specific amount of
|
||||
frames or dynamically through playback make perfect sense and offer a full range of options, from
|
||||
extremely precise to trimming on gut feeling.
|
||||
Ideally trimming sides should stay active and we won't need to enter or exit a trim mode. However,
|
||||
if we consider that we need the following keyboard shortcuts:
|
||||
•
|
||||
•
|
||||
•
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Trim left many frames
|
||||
Trim left 1 frame
|
||||
Trim right 1 frame
|
||||
Trim right many frames
|
||||
|
||||
These same keys can't double for nudging clips, the way it does in many apps, without using modes.
|
||||
Therefore my proposal is indeed to introduce a Trim mode. As said, it should be designed as a
|
||||
contextual mode that we fluidly enter and exit and that is visually easy to distinguish from the
|
||||
regular mode, which we can call the Position mode. Trim mode can be accentuated by marking the
|
||||
part of the timeline we'll be previewing. As in Avid, in trim mode playback could always preview
|
||||
the selected cut, so we won't need a special Preview (sometimes called 'Play around') shortcut. Trim
|
||||
mode will be exited automatically whenever the user clicks in an empty spot of the timeline or
|
||||
presses the trim mode key (T). This key can also be used to return to the last-used trim
|
||||
configuration.
|
||||
|
||||
Mockup of the trim mode. The striped area marks the pre- and post-roll that will be previewed.
|
||||
|
||||
Splitting and merging clips
|
||||
Tool-based NLE's offer a Blade or Cut tool that will cut clips wherever a user clicks. All NLE's
|
||||
offer a dedicated keyboard shortcut for creating a cut at the playhead as well.
|
||||
Merging two timeline clips with so-called ‘through edits' is often possible by selecting the cut for a
|
||||
roll edit and pressing the delete key. A through edit is a cut made within a clip, where the start of the
|
||||
second clip in the timeline matches the next frame from the source clip that corresponds to the first
|
||||
timeline clip.
|
||||
A Blade tool, a shortcut for Add Cut and the ability to remove through edits with backspace seem
|
||||
all worth implementing.
|
||||
|
||||
Removing clips
|
||||
In general, we find the following options:
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Select a clip, then: backspace or delete key, or (ripple) cut command.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
In and out points, then lift or extract.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Lightworks lets you remove a clip by dragging it outside of the timeline window.
|
||||
|
||||
These operations are so common that I would not change them.
|
||||
|
||||
Organising the timeline: sections
|
||||
I would like to propose the ability to divide a timeline into multiple sections. Each of these sections
|
||||
will have a header in the ruler that can be edited, to give each section a name (similar to how
|
||||
duration markers in Premiere are displayed).
|
||||
|
||||
The benefits of sections:
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Creating a broad sense and clear overview of how a timeline is constructed. Background
|
||||
colors in the timeline will make it easy to differentiate between different sections.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Easy navigation between sections by keyboard shortcuts.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Keeping sync. All clips in a section are encapsulated. If you work in one section, you will
|
||||
not be able to throw clips in other sections out of sync. Users could also time-lock a section,
|
||||
so it will stay in place regardless of other edit operations. This is especially useful when
|
||||
editing on music, but will also prevent losing sync between other elements that have been
|
||||
carefully lined up. Sections will not prevent anyone throwing anything out of sync within a
|
||||
section, but at least not the entire timeline will be affected.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
The order of sections can easily be changed by clicking and dragging. This way sections can
|
||||
be used to, for example, easily change the order of scenes. The free-flowing editor for
|
||||
example, can construct different parts of their edit on different parts of the timeline in
|
||||
different sections, and then arrange them later.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Sections could have a versioning system: this would allow the user to try different cuts
|
||||
within a section and to quickly change between these different versions.
|
||||
|
||||
Several other characteristics of sections:
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Clips can be excluded from being part of a section. For example: music tracks could span
|
||||
the entire length of a video by not being included in any section.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
When working within a section, its size will adapt to your edit operations (so its edges will
|
||||
shrink or expand automatically while trimming or moving clips).
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
A new timeline will have one large section spanning its entire length. A “split section”
|
||||
button and keyboard shortcut will create new sections.
|
||||
|
||||
Things to consider:
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
How to move clips from one section to another?
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
If sections can be time-locked then they will probably need to be able to overlap.
|
||||
|
||||
Adding and editing transitions
|
||||
There's usually a variety of ways to add transitions:
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Right clicking on a cut and choosing a transition from a context menu
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Double clicking or dragging a transition from an effects or transitions panel
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
With keyboard shortcuts. Premiere has separate shortcuts for audio and video transitions,
|
||||
others (Lightworks, Resolve) have a single transition shortcut that detects whether a video or
|
||||
audio transition needs to be added. The default length can often be adjusted in the app's
|
||||
settings, as well as the default transition type. Some apps have shortcuts to create a
|
||||
transition from a clip's start or end to the position of the playhead.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Avid has a configuration panel for adding transitions:
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Some apps allow adding transitions to every cut in the in-out range (Avid, Lightworks). Avid
|
||||
gives you the option to skip cuts that already have a transition. Very useful for adding short
|
||||
(2-4 frame) audio transitions to each audio clip that doesn't have a specific transition applied
|
||||
already.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Most apps allow adding transitions to a selection of clips.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Blackmagic's Speed Editor lets you select different transitions through a button press and the
|
||||
big dial, and lets you adjust its length through the dial as well.
|
||||
|
||||
Editing transitions:
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Changing a transition's duration always works by dragging the transition handles in between
|
||||
clips (in Avid you will need to have Transition Manipulation enabled for this to work).
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Changing a transition's position sometimes works by dragging it left or right (Premiere,
|
||||
Avid).
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Avid lets you type in the duration underneath the viewers.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Often you can double click a transition to enter a duration.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Final Cut Pro has a right click context menu option called ‘Change Duration' (Ctrl+D)
|
||||
which lets you enter the desired duration by keyboard and press enter, for video transitions.
|
||||
Audio transitions are actually performed by creating fades and having these fades between
|
||||
clips overlap. They can be adjusted with the fade handles and require the ‘Show Audio
|
||||
Lanes' or ‘Expand Audio' options to be enabled.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
Lightworks lets you trim transitions via its trim mode like any other cut.
|
||||
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
DaVinci Resolve and Final Cut Pro have a Transition tab on their Inspector panels where
|
||||
length and position of transitions can be adjusted, among other settings.
|
||||
|
||||
Most of these established ways of working with transitions can be applied to Lumiera. I would like
|
||||
to suggest to also add Avid's option to add transitions to a large number of cuts while skipping
|
||||
existing transitions (and this should even be the default).
|
||||
|
||||
One thing we do need to address is how transitions magically disappear in pretty much any NLE
|
||||
except Avid and Final Cut Pro, the moment you move one of the two adjacent clips elsewhere, or
|
||||
whenever you replace a clip by another. Transitions take time to setup in the right way, and they
|
||||
shouldn't disappear by themselves. I would suggest to follow Avid and FCP's behaviour and leave
|
||||
transitions in place by default.
|
||||
|
||||
Changing timeline clip properties
|
||||
Each NLE has an effect properties panel en most have a generic properties panel for changing all
|
||||
basic properties of clips in the timeline, such as:
|
||||
•
|
||||
•
|
||||
•
|
||||
•
|
||||
•
|
||||
•
|
||||
|
||||
X & Y position
|
||||
scaling
|
||||
orientation
|
||||
rotation
|
||||
opacity and blend mode
|
||||
stabilization
|
||||
|
||||
Avid is the only NLE out there that still requires adding an effect to change these basic clip
|
||||
properties (‘3D DVE'). Quick access to such properties saves a lot of time, so enabling this is
|
||||
essential. Depending on the actual effects workflow we might want basic properties to be part of an
|
||||
effect that is automatically applied to each clip when it's added to the timeline. A separate Properties
|
||||
panel (as in Premiere) is less ideal: the fewer panels, the better. FCP and Resolve use a tabbed
|
||||
approach for their panels (which is named ‘Inspector') to keep different categories of properties
|
||||
separated.
|
||||
|
||||
Chapter 3: finishing
|
||||
--------------------
|
||||
|
|
@ -548,3 +1097,4 @@ Chapter 4: a broader GUI concept
|
|||
--------------------------------
|
||||
[red]#To be written.#
|
||||
|
||||
Panels vs fixed layouts. Workspaces.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue