Just making sure its not me as have a whole stream of UHD multicam shots to tweak but the keyframe paramaters cut and paste still doesnt stick after pasting?

Frameflex is an embarrassment.  Sorry. And I am being polite.

Jef

Just another half-implemented feature that was never paid any attention after it's initial release. This is a real bad habit of Avid's. Respond to user complaints/requests just enough so that they can say they have a working solution for it (frameflex, CC shapes, sub-frame audio slipping etc) and then abandon it in its first iteration. I've got news for you, your first attempt is never your best one. Guaranteed they would have left the title tool as it was if it wasn't for the massive uproar in the community. 

Andi

The fact that Frameflex was introduced as a stand alone, very limited tool rather than integrated into 3D Warp astounded me.  And not in a good way.  It had the hallmark of dumbing down the product.  And making it a separate tool was a dead end street.

Compare it's features (and lack of features) to what is found in the free Resolve transform tool. Actually, don't.  You will be even more depressed.

Jef

I can apply a global Frameflex 'look' in source settings per clip but STILL not being able to cut and paste keyframes for reframes I do in the timeline is very regressive as its a BASIC. I too remember getting excited at talk of AE like resolution independence - but we never got it.  Well its still in Marquee but its only a few rare beasts like me who use Marquee - it gives continuity to unintuitive after all!

I don't disagree with any of the complaints about Frameflex in this thread.

That said, it has been a godsend for me.  A lot of my work involves doing moves on stills and artwork and Frameflex lets me do it quickly with the ability to easily make changes.  I've never quantified it but I'm sure I do upwards of 90% of that kind of work with Frameflex.  (After Effects for more complex needs.)

Yes, I have to change my raster size back and forth when I import to accomodate high resolution files.  Yes, I wish the default setting were letterbox/pillarbox rather than stretch -- especially when switching to vertical versions.

But please don't let's trash it as useless.

I would not say it is useless. There is one feature that I in fact like very much. But it is so much less that what editors in post production need these days.

According to a former Avid employee in a public interview after their retirement (I can not find the link again), the big rule for Media Composer development was don't do anything that jeopardizes hardware sales.  And that means the news world. I feel Frameflex was a tool developed with news editors in mind to keep the lucrative portion of Avid's business happy.  Not the rest of the editorial market which has widely varying needs.

Now that it exists, they have to keep supporting it.  Avid rarely ever deletes a tool.  So we are stuck.  We have a new UI but we cannot copy and paste effects parameters from a timeline effect.  A timeline effect that has been around for several years.

Sorry to keep beating this, but it is a major pain in the *** for a finishing editor trying to do quality work.  It is very confusing to most of the offline editors I work with as they don't understand why they can't just use 3D Warp or Resize.  The number of "workarounds" I see and have to clean up because an offline editor tried their best to do something that should have been easy but was not is crazy.

Jef

Hi Jef,

jef:

he big rule for Media Composer development was don't do anything that jeopardizes hardware sales.

I guess that was some time ago. The days of Nitris DX and Mojo DX are long gone and I/O for media composer is for years now developed by AJA and Blackmagic. But if you leave the word 'hardware' out of it it is still valid in 2022 I guess.

jef:

And that means the news world. I feel Frameflex was a tool developed with news editors in mind to keep the lucrative portion of Avid's business happy. 

I won't go into Avid policies as it is offically not allowed here, but it is no secret that the combination of market pressure resulting and cost reduction and shorter new update release times have resulted in a lack of resources to deliver well designed and tested 'finished' new features and updates and that the customers have become increasingly part of the development cycle (I call it an involuntary beta testing program). And we all understand Avid is prioritizing fixes on commercial need. 

But I don't see this devide (anymore) between the editorial editors (using local storage or Nexis) or the news editors (using mediacentral products). Even if feature A or B, like frameflex, titler+, relinking, Avid media engine, etc... would have a different priority for either user base, the problems described in this and many other threads in these forums affect both the editorial and news editors. Based on the fact that many of the mediacentral using news editors are still on 2018.12.15 you could even argue the problems in all version using the new UI have affected them more.

While a debate on who Media composer is designed for always was and also is very relevant in 2022, I don't think the policies at Avid that make some believe some features are left in an unfinished state are related to a devide in the user base (anymore). The problems affect both!

From my perspective I see a company that has started announcing End of Development dates on existing products without prior knowledge that, by that time, a fully functional successor will have been released and/or all other Avid products, typically all software part of the mediacentral bundles, will be ready as well, while the new LTM policy includes the absence of backwards compatibility with previous versions.

A practical example of something observed in 2022: Mediacentral production 2022 was released without backwards compatibility for any 2020 and 2021 product while the Avid Graphics products (Maestro) weren't ready yet. One of the issues preventing us from upgrading one of our customers to implement the fixes they still need in mediacentral Cloud UX but can't have because of this situation.

So many, in these forums, ACSR email lists, Avid Customer Associations, social media, personal meetings, etc... have been providing feedback for years, no decades... but it seems some things never change. The only thing Avid seems 100% dedicated to is to be 'backwards compatible' with the economic laws (Sarbanes Oxley act) that prevents them from providing roadmaps on product development including if features like Frameflex will ever do what DIESELE asks for.