Call to Arms: AVTECH4

[Zarxrax]

Yea, and avisynth+ is looking pretty sweet now. Vaporsynth is conceptually a nice thing, but I don't see it getting to the point avisynth is for a LONG time.

[l33tmeatwad]

Yea, and avisynth+ is looking pretty sweet now. Vaporsynth is conceptually a nice thing, but I don't see it getting to the point avisynth is for a LONG time.

Yeah, I agree and I personally think most users here would not use VapourSynth anyways...the steep learning curve, difficult structure, and the very unforgiving nature of the scripting would be a nightmare for the average user (especially since they struggle so much with AviSynth which is WORLDS easier).

[BasharOfTheAges]

You really think most people are actually trying to understand avisynth and not just copy-pasting lines from the guides or forum posts verbatim?

[l33tmeatwad]

You really think most people are actually trying to understand avisynth and not just copy-pasting lines from the guides or forum posts verbatim?

I wouldn't disagree with that, the problem with VapourSynth is that the script structure REQUIRES you to learn how it works, while AviSynth users can just simply copy paste one function and put it in their script.

What that basically means is, the help forum would get a LOT busier and users would constantly be asking for entire scripts to be written for them...

[Qyot27]

VapourSynth's main strength is the integration with Python, even if it's not technically part of the core. The Cython bindings are just that; as others have mentioned before, bindings for other languages - even AviSynth - could be written and then you'd have to deal with their internal syntactical issues while using the VapourSynth core...although somehow I have a feeling that even if VS bindings for AviSynth appeared, it wouldn't lessen the syntax burden that much - you may not need to populate variables all the time, but you'd probably still need the verbose namespacing stuff or some mechanism to translate to and from.

And that's why its greatest strength is also its greatest weakness. Most people are just too lazy to want to deal with learning Python, even rudimentary Python (or dislike the syntax for philosophical or technical reasons, even if they do understand it), although if you're writing a media application using Python, the Cython bindings would make VapourSynth a natural choice.


Also, oh-shit-HuffYUV-just-got-updated-to-support-high-bit-depths-and-colorspaces. Or ffvhuff, more accurately, but still. The extended colorspaces @8bit were added about a week and a half ago, but I checked my RSS feeds a few minutes ago and saw these:
http://git.videolan.org/?p=ffmpeg.git;a ... 9bb42db793
http://git.videolan.org/?p=ffmpeg.git;a ... 857bb6b31b

[l33tmeatwad]

While I think VapourSynth has the potential to become one of the most powerful tools available for advanced users, I think it will be too much for your average org user because they are not willing to learn, especially since what they already know (AviSynth) still works, is still being developed, and is easier. That said, I'm not opposed to it being added to an existing guide, I just feel like if the holdup is for a universal multi-OS software to use exclusively then we are waiting for the wrong thing. Personally I think BOTH should be included for an advanced guide here on the org once VapourSynth is more developed than it currently is, however for now I think we need to concentrate on getting something out there that all users can read and digest that isn't out of date and doesn't make them feel overwhelmed.

[mirkosp]

I'm okay with lmw's proposal, but can anybody handle the html side of the guide?

Also, I think the first step in making a simple and straightforward guide should be to write down a good flowchart, so we'll be able to make the pages for the "choose your own adventure"-style easy guide.

[l33tmeatwad]

I'm okay with lmw's proposal, but can anybody handle the html side of the guide?

Also, I think the first step in making a simple and straightforward guide should be to write down a good flowchart, so we'll be able to make the pages for the "choose your own adventure"-style easy guide.

If it's just basic HTML I could handle that. We should get everyone interested in contributing in a chat on IRC or Skype to discuss things sometime.

[Zarxrax]

It should just be a wiki or something.
Makes it a lot easier to keep updated too.

[l33tmeatwad]

It should just be a wiki or something.
Makes it a lot easier to keep updated too.

I agree with this, I don't know how we would go about this though.