I Love Resolume! BUT (Feature Request)

B Simms_ · Post by **B Simms_** » Tue Aug 05, 2003 09:40

I've tried all the popular VJ software out there, and I really must say, I am most impressed with Resolume (Stable, Intuitive Interface, Features... Stable) but there are 2 things (That I find) are missing.

1) Beat Detection - this program's use is all about Visuals & Music, and it seems insane that such a great program doesn't offer a LineIn function to analyze the beat and synch clips to it. Such a core task shouldn't be delegated to the VJ doing a 'speed match' it's something software can handle, and as such it'd be great to see it added on. I'd rather focus on the artistic side of things. (Unless I'm certified stoopid, and that feature is already hidden in there somewhere - I am rather new to this:)

2) Higher Rez! - Admittedly I'm a n00b to the whole VJ thing, but 320x200? From my perspective, that's c r a z y - Don't most people project this via an LCD Projector? Sure a pixelated effect can look cool, but so do sharp clean images

320x200 was ok with my Pentium90 playing Quake1 back in the day, but it's 2003, and daddy likes it 800x600 minimum (hell, I feel like I'm sacrificing at that!)

From what I understand, #2 is a long ways away (for all VJ software) but #1 seems... absent to say the least.

Again, I love your software... I.... Just want more. (Typical Consumer!)

{dances into blackness}

Dan Syzygy_ · Post by **Dan Syzygy_** » Tue Aug 05, 2003 17:11

Err... Resolume will handle much higher resolutions than 320x240 - we usually use it in 640x480.

(You need to undock the preview and right click it to set the size, or send the output to a second display and set the size)

As for beat detection... I would actually prefer the resolume guys to concentrate on features for live human control of visuals rather than putting too much automated stuff in. Beat matched control of effects might be nice, but VJo is always going to be the software to use if you want to stand back and have the computer react to the music. We like resolume because it encourages and supports live control through midi and so on.

Automating the looping of clips to the beat seems a little bit cold to me - we rarely rely on simply looping stuff to the beats anyway - for us, the triggering of clips _is_ the artistic part.

But of course, there are lot's of different ways to do visuals and if there was beat matching in there we would probably use it at some point.

Dan.

Dan.

stark_ · Post by **stark_** » Wed Aug 06, 2003 16:47

i have found that its rather slow to use resolutions larger than 320 x 240, i am now working with that, because i don't want to sacrifize smoothness of the clips....

what can i do to make it look smooth at higher resolutions.... does it have to do with the video memory?? procersor speed? ram memory? hd access?

please advice

ST-V

fitzke_ · Post by **fitzke_** » Thu Aug 07, 2003 02:01

undock your video, set the resolution to 640 x480 (right click) and then after - just activate the fullscreenmode (on 2nd output rigth click again)!

greetings f. fitzke

SuperficiaL_ · Post by **SuperficiaL_** » Thu Aug 07, 2003 08:09

hey Stark,

it depends on what type of machine u are using now.
any specs?
my gues about the importance of hardware is the CPU is most important than RAM than videocard than HD, that is if u have a working machine now and u want to upgrade it...
but always remember that your machine is never faster than the smallest choke in that machine...

GL!
SuperficiaL

kristian_ · Post by **kristian_** » Thu Aug 07, 2003 08:42

im throwing away all my half res stuff...sick of it
and trying to work with full res (720x576) PAl (im in austrailia)

sure i can set resolumes out put to 640x480 or even higher...
but it cant handle running 2/3 bus's of full res shit no matter what codec...and i cant internally record stuff full res.
when is resolume going to improve these qualities.
or
do I have to go back to Jmax

kristian:)

Dan_ · Post by **Dan_** » Thu Aug 07, 2003 10:13

Can you really mix 3 full pal files with JMax?

Consider the amount of data being thrown around and the number of calculations that need to be done when dealing with full PAL.

720x576 means that there are 414720 pixels in every frame.

25 frames per second, therefore, means that 1,0368,000 pixels need to be calculated every second.

So, every calulation for mixing, effects and so on that is done per-pixel needs to be done over a million times per second.

Unless you have a _really_ fast machine then a few layers and effects are going to slow down no matter how efficient the host software is.

Dan.

kristian_ · Post by **kristian_** » Thu Aug 07, 2003 11:40

not 3 but definately 1 with heaps of effects..including an effect that overlays the next or previous files for 10 or 20 or 30 secs.

yes...im aware of the that techncal stuff...

dont u just wish we could just work with full res files...rec our work digitally, and be able to send it out to fetivals/tv and whatever at full res/broadcast quality with out cheating - without using non-linear editing software. when i make music - im able to work with 48k files back and forth no matter what....
same old cry...i realise...it will get their though...

DinkyToys_ · Post by **DinkyToys_** » Mon Aug 11, 2003 00:49

Possibillity to put minimal 2 effects on an image/movie.

And an rotozoomer like in TranZenDent.

DinkyToys_ · Post by **DinkyToys_** » Mon Aug 11, 2003 00:50

Possibillity to put minimal 2 effects on an image/movie.

And an rotozoomer like in TranZenDent.