I'm not trying to slam Marquee or Inscriber. I just have no need for it and think Avid needs to have a basic titler that works so that titles created on multiple systems in a multi-editor production environment show up on all those systems and can be edited.

For those that need something on the level of Marquee or Inscriber, that would be great. But table stakes should be a titler that performs at least as well at Title Tool did for basic stuff we need to do for things like slates. T+ in its current form just doesn't do that. Which was I think the original point of this thread that was started more than a year and a half ago and yet is still relevant.

I agree jc.   Let's move on from the Inscriber/Marquee discussion shall we?  It's not getting us anywhere nearer to a useable title tool

Dave from Avid has already said:  "We are not stopping development of Titler + and starting from scratch."

It would be useful at this point if someone from Avid therefore stood up for the tool and explained the logic behind the current approach.  If you're standing behind the functionality of this tool, what are we all missing?  Take us with you a bit and maybe we can understand some of the constraints you are working under...

Simon_h:

I agree jc.   Let's move on from the Inscriber/Marquee discussion shall we?  It's not getting us anywhere nearer to a useable title tool

Dave from Avid has already said:  "We are not stopping development of Titler + and starting from scratch."

It would be useful at this point if someone from Avid therefore stood up for the tool and explained the logic behind the current approach.  If you're standing behind the functionality of this tool, what are we all missing?  Take us with you a bit and maybe we can understand some of the constraints you are working under...

I dont know, I think the best path path is to take the feedback here and beta program and improve Titler+ so you can get your work done.  We have a lot of info to go on and we're working to get things improved.  I can revisit the approach at a later time. I know if i post things like I did before people will just criticise the approach.  I think its best just to move on with feedback. Sound OK?

Dave

Dave Avid PM:

I think its best just to move on with feedback. Sound OK?

Dave

Yes I think that is the way to go and to also make sure that the feedback is noted in Montreal :) wink .....

Marianna

Marianna:

Dave Avid PM:

I think its best just to move on with feedback. Sound OK?

Dave

Yes I think that is the way to go and to also make sure that the feedback is noted in Montreal :) wink .....

Marianna

Marianna,

With all respect to you and Dave, this is not the way to go! 

Continuing to make small tweaks to a program that no one likes and doesn't work is akin to putting lipstick on a pig.  The comments on the forum have been universal in voicing frustration and exasperation with Titler+.   Avid needs to listen to what the user base is shouting from the hilltops.  I have not seen a single post claiming Titler+ is a satisfactory replacement for the Title Tool, much less an improvement.  The most positive comments confess to "sort of getting it to work" but with much effort and major limitations.

I produce between 80-100 broadcast commercials a year.  MC is not a toy or a hobby for me.  It is a tool.  Avid has taken away a productive tool and replaced it with a broken one.   It's like taking away a perfectly good screwdriver and replacing it with a bent one with no tip.  To add insult to injury, Avid's response is, "It will get better...eventually."   

I'm often asked by young people starting in the business what editing program they should learn.  I tell them if I were starting today, I would go with Premier.   It pains me to say that, because I have been a loyal Avid user for years.   I'll probably stay with MC myself since I have worked with it for years and I'm too busy using it as a production tool to take the time to go down a new learning curve.  But Dave's tone deaf response ("It's best to move on with feedback.") is tempting me to jump ship.  When you start loosing dedicated users like me who have invested years of time and money in MC, then Avid is in trouble.

Ford stopped making the Edsel when car buyers universally hated it.  CocaCola did an about face on the "New Coke" when consumers revolved.   Yet Avid continues to alienate users by refusing to admit that Titler+ is a disaster.  In the classic fable of the Emperor's New Clothes, everyone pretends to see the Emperor dressed in fine new garments when in fact the Emperor is naked.  Only one little boy has the courage to speak up.   Avid's bizarre twist on this fable is that everyone can see the Emperor is naked except for Avid.  I hope Avid changes course before the only ones left are a bunch of Avid engineers congratuating each other on dressing up Titler+ in fine new clothes while scratching their heads wondering where all the users have gone.

I don't know where you are getting your information, if you read back in this entire post, I believe I have said many times I am listening and by extension my team is listening.  We not only listening here, we have beta forums and ACA committees that we soliciate and receive feedback.  I don't know how to say this differently, we hear the concerns, we will address them. It's time to let us do our work.

Dave Avid PM:

I don't know where you are getting your information, if you read back in this entire post, I believe I have said many times I am listening and by extension my team is listening.  We not only listening here, we have beta forums and ACA committees that we soliciate and receive feedback.  I don't know how to say this differently, we hear the concerns, we will address them. It's time to let us do our work.

You can have all the beta forums and committees in the world but it's been a couple of years now and we still don't have a usable 4K titling solution inside MC.  Honestly, this work should have been done a long time ago.

Terry Snyder:

Dave Avid PM:

I don't know where you are getting your information, if you read back in this entire post, I believe I have said many times I am listening and by extension my team is listening.  We not only listening here, we have beta forums and ACA committees that we soliciate and receive feedback.  I don't know how to say this differently, we hear the concerns, we will address them. It's time to let us do our work.

You can have all the beta forums and committees in the world but it's been a couple of years now and we still don't have a usable 4K titling solution inside MC.  Honestly, this work should have been done a long time ago.

Totally agree but not totally fair.  There have been many improvements over the past 2 years, but obviously a ways to go. Thanks again for the commentary, I really appreciate it. 

Dave Avid PM:

I dont know, I think the best path path is to take the feedback here and beta program and improve Titler+ so you can get your work done.

Thanks for posting back Dave, I also feel that this is the best approach (i.e. get it fixed and coherent to user expectation and not explain why it is as it is... there is pretty much consensus of opinion on the present state of the tool).  A few additional comments, concerns and suggestions:

- In my original post (18 months ago), and reiterated in subsequent posts (by other users and also myself recently), the core issue is the very non-standard interaction (eg. text and object selection and feedback, impossible to use escape key to quit current mode...) and mixing of segment properties, defaults and actions in the effect editor, and the presence of properties that are sometimes hidden and expected interaction order from the user.  Whilst there are other effects that have actions in the effect editor, these are reduced to an absolute minimum (eg. Pan and Zoom to select the image file and to clear caches.) - they don't significantly pollute the UI.  This needs to be a priority.

- Please take care from now on to ensure that features are not included until they are ready for prime-time in release (not beta) versions.  A released product should work, even if it is not necessarily feature complete.  This will help ease frustration in users as the UI is not lying to its users and being frank....  I personally would prefer a titler that doesn't do much, but does it well, and have frequent updates to add features.  Even by (temporarily) partially decoupling Titler+ and MC (i.e. allowing patch updates by only installing an updated AvidTitlerPlus.avx, and possibly DekoLibrary.dylib/dll...)

 - The roll effect (now that I have found out how to use it.. but it is like finding the secret door in an escape game...) - It is/seems impossibie to see off-screen text, the only way is to copy paste into the caption property (and copy-pasting into the preview removes line breaks...).  An important use case needs to be considered:  end credits are often not created in one shot, but have subsequent modifications and may include logos.  It is essential to be able to modify and preview roll titles and scroll up and down as was possible with the Title Tool.  The hiding of all properties and locking off object interaction when the Roll effect is activated is very problematic UI design.

- I am a little concerned that rendering is based on the underlying OS renderer/rasteriser, and as such would give different results on a PC and a Mac for the same effect.  This was a big problem for the old Title Tool, but mitigated by the fact that Title Media were generated and these would remain as intended unless recreated.  As several post-houses I know and work with have a mixed PC and Mac stations, this could be a big problem.  Subcap, on the other hand, seems to be based on Freetype which is cross platform and gives consistent results given the same fonts (with the caveat of font shadowing on Windows previously mentioned, if multiple fonts with the same name are installed).  This seems to be a more solid approach.  Could you confirm that this is an issue that you are taking into consideration?

- It does not seem to be possible to create a sequence with just a Tltle+ effect, only cut one in from another sequence.   This should be adressed and made possible.  Equally to be able to add a title to the end of a sequence(very common use case).  Another useful modification, but requiring a change request to MC itself (not only in the AVX2 plugin) would be for the initial title text to be displayed in the sequence rather than Filler and allow this information to carry through to EDLs (as Clip name for example).  This would require a change to the AVX2 host (MC) to request the display name from the plugin when applied to Filler.

- It may be worthwhile ensuring that your beta testers are sufficiently representative (ie. that they actively work in TV/Film/Commercials and are experienced).

- Some form of roadmap and timescale would be appreciated, as Leo Baker previously suggested above.  Patience is wearing thin, as ultimately the slow progress ends up costing significant time (and therefore money...) as workarounds have to be found (eg. making titles as matte keys via. photoshop...., and Photoshop then Pan and Zoom or After Effects for end credits..) This sort of communication would help manage expectations as well.

Janusz

Could someone not be tasked with updating the classic title tool to work in 4k+ projects and Catalina in parallel with the Titler+ development  so that while we wait for these changes to occur there is something basic but usable as a stopgap? Because I really don't want to wait another 2 years for this. That way Titler+ will become what Marquee was to Title tool, something you go to when you need to fancy it up a bit?

Andi  

ripvanmarlowe:

Could someone not be tasked with updating the classic title tool to work in 4k+ projects and Catalina in parallel with the Titler+ development  so that while we wait for these changes to occur there is something basic but usable as a stopgap? Because I really don't want to wait another 2 years for this. That way Titler+ will become what Marquee was to Title tool, something you go to when you need to fancy it up a bit?

Andi  

No, it's 32 bit and it would take 2 years to rewrite.

Janusz

Thank for this well thought out and detailed response.  Im going to let Dave digest it and respond back if he has any comments specifically.  Re Beta - I will speak with keith when back from vacation on this topic to ensure we have the right degree of coverage.... I know we do have some heavy hitters in beta and a lot cover that recommendation but I dont know how much they test.

I'll work with keith on that but know you can also become a tester as well.....  

To apply for the next test cycle please click here [https://goo.gl/cSfr5d] which will walk you through creating an account in our Beta feedback system, named Centercode and then place you within the Media Composer beta project. 

If you have any issues creating an account or need help if interested in beta testing, ping me back.

Marianna

Thank you Marianna. Eggcelent to have a link to participate. One thing that made the old title tool almost useless for us is that soft drop shadows would cut half way off on a random manor.  (on 6.5 PC, 3 seats all w/same problem I can't stand hard drop shadows) I haven't tried the old title tool in 2020.6 but it sounds like the old title tool is not available. I use Boris Red and now BCC Title Studio so I don't have to deal with the short comings of Title+ and NewBlue as T+ seems un-useable and I tried TP5 for a few projects and bailed. But very good points are raised when in a shared environment with many people needing the same title application. I've been at this since 1981 and routinely have bought software that really is in beta and they wait for their customers to test and get the brunt of short comings. Sound familiar gang? :) It seems we have the finest at Avid now looking at this really seriously. I say we all get together for a virtual beer.  

I don't see how any editor could say T+ is a functional titler in its current form. Trying to use it for simple slates and I can't get it to do what would take 5 seconds in Title Tool. All I'm doing is pasting five lines of text, adjusting the size, and trying to make the first line bold. It screws up the text in some way every time! Sure the interface is different but all title programs are different. T+ just seems like it doesn't work. Are there a ton of bugs still? 

jcmcnamee:

I don't see how any editor could say T+ is a functional titler in its current form. Trying to use it for simple slates and I can't get it to do what would take 5 seconds in Title Tool. All I'm doing is pasting five lines of text, adjusting the size, and trying to make the first line bold. It screws up the text in some way every time! Sure the interface is different but all title programs are different. T+ just seems like it doesn't work. Are there a ton of bugs still? 

HI,

I'm assuming you are on the latest version of Media Composer? Which version are you using?