New way to edit... Tamper
- Thread starter ATL Media Group
- Start date
ryan brown
lOwEr CaSe Member
Last edited:
ATL Media Group
Veteran
Ya... pull... pull... drag this to the desk.... pull pull.. hehe
As someone who suffers from carpal tunnel syndrome, I highly support getting rid of the clumsy interfaces we have now. Although I think multipoint touch screens are much more useful. As an editing workstation this actually appears a bit useless, but the same concepts can be applied to other things to create something incredible. It's getting there. And it's time for computers to start conforming to our needs, instead of the other way around.
ZazaCast
Major Contributor
:huh: Last I checked, WE still design the machines & programming...I think?
It would be nice to have the middle finger trigger certain actions through the editor for those difficult clients.
ZazaCast
Major Contributor
You're probably too young to remember, but that's how it used to be done...hands rocking reels...a razor blade and edit tape. Believe me, NLE systems were a godsend!
As far as audio, I still perfer mixing on a console or control surface...there's nothing like a finger on a fader! (with full automation to recreate your moves)
rogar-BigGrin(DBG)
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I interviewed John Underkoffller, the inventor of the Tamper system recently. He gained his experience in entertainment designing the interfaces used in the film "Minority Report". John is a REALLY smart guy who came from MIT, The article appears in the February 2010 issue of HD Video Pro Magazine that will appear soon.
You should know that Tamper is not an editing system, it is a design study for different interfaces for all kinds of technology besides editing systems. They are doing some very interesting work on editing interface design with UCLA Film School. Some amazing things coming down the pike.
Dan
You should know that Tamper is not an editing system, it is a design study for different interfaces for all kinds of technology besides editing systems. They are doing some very interesting work on editing interface design with UCLA Film School. Some amazing things coming down the pike.
Dan
Marc Villafan
Well-known member
I agree 100%.
It seems like a complete gimmick.
I can see adding some physical-ness back into editing, and all of computers. But honestly I think I would rather hit the 'space bar' or the 'J' key to pause playback rather than lifting my hand up.
It looks like a good way to keep yourself from falling asleep, but I doubt that you can edit on this UI faster than an NLE w/ good keyboard commands.
It looks like a good way to keep yourself from falling asleep, but I doubt that you can edit on this UI faster than an NLE w/ good keyboard commands.
Otis Grapsas
Carbonite Member
The best editing system is the one that consumes less time in the mind of the user and requires minimum labour. One that does not become a creative obstacle or a workout. I believe a regular keyboard and mouse are superior to these complex systems, because after a while the keystrokes and mouse gestures become automatical. They just add small variations to motions that are already automated in our system. Different uses for the same motions.
Some people prefer writing by hand when writing scripts, poetry, etc, because the interface is simpler, but the new generations grew with a qwerty keyboard in their hands, it's as natural as writing to them, perhaps even more natural. Some film editing professionals prefer editing film but it's only because they are used to that and editing on a computer requires too much thought and effort for them. No one that grew when computers were widely used would prefer to edit film.
Keyboard and mouse are an old technology but it's been decades since the companies tried introducing control with hand gestures and speech. They always failed and it's not due to cost. It's just that they were totally inefficient and problematic. Starting apps and using menus by voice was only fun for 10 minutes when we got the new sound card that allowed it. Speech and repetitive motions of this type would consume a lot of energy and probably lead to trauma, even in well designed interfaces.
All attempts to innovate the computer keyboard and mouse also failed. You will only find the ultra "ergonomic" text entry and pointing devices in the desks of people that do not really use a computer 12 hours a day.
A regular keyboard and a good match between screen and mouse resolution are extremely ergonomic, as long as the desk and chair are ergonomically positioned and adjusted for the body of the user.
Regarding temporary trauma due to mousing, the users that didn't have any issues after decades of use, do one simple thing. Keep the wrist resting on the table and only move the mouse with fingers, less that an inch of horizontal and vertical motion. It is safer than hand writing and uses the same motions. The only thing required to get this is high mouse resolution, which is easy to get today if you dig into the specs.
The repetitive stress of using an interface requiring all these motions will certainly be more damaging that the good old mouse/keyboard.
Some people prefer writing by hand when writing scripts, poetry, etc, because the interface is simpler, but the new generations grew with a qwerty keyboard in their hands, it's as natural as writing to them, perhaps even more natural. Some film editing professionals prefer editing film but it's only because they are used to that and editing on a computer requires too much thought and effort for them. No one that grew when computers were widely used would prefer to edit film.
Keyboard and mouse are an old technology but it's been decades since the companies tried introducing control with hand gestures and speech. They always failed and it's not due to cost. It's just that they were totally inefficient and problematic. Starting apps and using menus by voice was only fun for 10 minutes when we got the new sound card that allowed it. Speech and repetitive motions of this type would consume a lot of energy and probably lead to trauma, even in well designed interfaces.
All attempts to innovate the computer keyboard and mouse also failed. You will only find the ultra "ergonomic" text entry and pointing devices in the desks of people that do not really use a computer 12 hours a day.
A regular keyboard and a good match between screen and mouse resolution are extremely ergonomic, as long as the desk and chair are ergonomically positioned and adjusted for the body of the user.
Regarding temporary trauma due to mousing, the users that didn't have any issues after decades of use, do one simple thing. Keep the wrist resting on the table and only move the mouse with fingers, less that an inch of horizontal and vertical motion. It is safer than hand writing and uses the same motions. The only thing required to get this is high mouse resolution, which is easy to get today if you dig into the specs.
The repetitive stress of using an interface requiring all these motions will certainly be more damaging that the good old mouse/keyboard.
Are you guys really not seeing any point here? It has nothing to do with editing. This is about interface technology. It's not even about personal computing. This can be used for presentations, anything using a map, all sorts of stuff. Or not. It doesn't even matter if it is completely useless and never applied to a mainstream device, because the underlying technology can be useful for other things. That's how technology moves forward.
And perhaps more important than any of that, it looks cool.
And perhaps more important than any of that, it looks cool.
Last edited:
Otis Grapsas
Carbonite Member
But data gloves have been around for at least 20 years. Combined with monitors, projection, VR helmets, cameras etc. Everybody was very enthusiastic about those for a few weeks. Most companies that entered the field went bankrupt. When looking for a similar device you had to sort out the 90% than was not in business any more. Some companies discovered that there could be applications in the millitary so something did come out of it. It's easier to be impressed into buying something expensive when it's not your money. Most of this field must be funded by the goverments, millitary and general research in universities because the end users were only enthusiastic while being in the trade show floors.
The market knows what works and only accepts a solution if it a) solves an existing problem b) has advantages over the previous solutions. In commercial applications, these system achieve none of the two. I don't think we cannot use a computer with what we have today. I also don't think that this is more useful or ergonomic. The "cool" factor never sold anything by itself. The pure gadget market is quite small and limited to low/medium cost items. We will probably keep seeing these systems in hollywood films, millitary and other training, the occasional "interactive" video art and the hip museums for children.
What percentage of Google Earth users will buy a dataglove? There are probably many companies working on one as we speak. Is it really something one needs? It might impress one's friends for a few minutes but does that establish and sell user interfaces? If I liked to play God on a map, I would probably prefer a mouse over a dataglove and huge gestures. God wouldn't need to move an entire hand, it would just take a finger or a roll of the mouse wheel, right? Or just a thought. Which we might see in commercial applications 40 years from now.
The market knows what works and only accepts a solution if it a) solves an existing problem b) has advantages over the previous solutions. In commercial applications, these system achieve none of the two. I don't think we cannot use a computer with what we have today. I also don't think that this is more useful or ergonomic. The "cool" factor never sold anything by itself. The pure gadget market is quite small and limited to low/medium cost items. We will probably keep seeing these systems in hollywood films, millitary and other training, the occasional "interactive" video art and the hip museums for children.
What percentage of Google Earth users will buy a dataglove? There are probably many companies working on one as we speak. Is it really something one needs? It might impress one's friends for a few minutes but does that establish and sell user interfaces? If I liked to play God on a map, I would probably prefer a mouse over a dataglove and huge gestures. God wouldn't need to move an entire hand, it would just take a finger or a roll of the mouse wheel, right? Or just a thought. Which we might see in commercial applications 40 years from now.
adkimery
Veteran
Of course the tech has potential beyond editing, but when he's demoing the "editing system of the future" and talks about putting the physicality back in the editing process how does the demonstration in the video not have to do w/editing?
-A
It's not about editing because that's just one application that he found interesting and wanted to move forward on; the underlying principles are the real demonstration. For the above that, it's true that these have been around a while, but I think the software is much more advanced at least. But you're right, I was thinking more useless looking things in general. Personally I think, as I said earlier, that touchscreens are the way to go. Really anything to get rid of the mouse would be fine, and a multipoint touch pad is superior in every way. Especially if it can be set to be absolute instead of relative with screen position.