Klaus Hoefs wrote:And btw does it still make sense to have Image Layers (while having such flexibility with Anim Layers) ?
That's a very good question. After the introduction of
Exposures it becomes clear that Image Layers are the same - only with a different kind of handle.
I have a different problem. Often I have image layers which just need to fade in/out over time (nice effect to change the weather!) but don't move otherwise. Or I have some BG element which doesn't animate in itself but just moves in its entirety. The problem is that after I created those really basic movements via FX stack I end up with a bunch of single frames which blow up the file extremely. A 10 sec scene is half a gigabyte easily!
So I hereby propose the introduction of a "Reference Layer" type of layer (suggestions for a better name welcome). This new type of layer should behave like this:
- It can only hold one image frame, like the current image layer.
- It can be painted or created otherwise like any other layer.
- It can be bigger than the project size.
- It can be moved in its entirety or hold any other FX stack operation (but maybe not all). The FX information will be stored within this layer as it is part of it.
- There could be a low-res render available for scrubbing, and a hi-res render for checking details.
The idea behind this is to separate between an image (actual pixel information) and its use. Think of "linking" to a video file instead of importing it, but add the concept of still manipulating some attributes, like size, position, transparency etc.
I know that this is a paradigm change for the program, especially from showing everything in final rendered quality at any given moment (at least in HD this will not be possible all the time). But I'd like to discuss it because IMO it surely holds a lot of advantages. Especially because some in-program referencing models (exposures, Xsheet) already work nicely.
