"Too many controls" problem

I have just created a filter that performs processing in three channels. In each channel, the processing parameters are controlled by 5 sliders - making a total of 15 controls for the three channels.

The Result component shows the message "Too many controls!" below it and the result preview shows the text "Too many controls - the maximum is 10. Extra controls are not shown in Settings."

This is unsatisfactory for these reasons:

1) The result preview, when zoomed to fit, occupies maybe 20% of the space allocated for it, meaning there is a large amount a wasted space, which could instead be allocated to the Settings display panel.

2) In every other windows program I remember seeing with this kind of layout, the Settings panel would have a vertical scrollbar, thereby making a limit of 10 totally unnecessary.

Tiffle.

Some background info:
When FF controls system was implemented, I insisted on having the scrollbar when user has 10 controls, and just don't allow submissions of filters with more than 10 controls (just like someone suggested in the other thread).

The current decision was made to make interface simpler (also in awful lot of cases if you need more than 10 controls you'd better split your filter in two), but certainly has limitations.

Quote
(BTW: I can't get the Quote function to work when replying nor the smilies. Any ideas?)

Try the quote botton on the reply form (next to "Link").
As far as smilies, I can see them in your post so I don't know what to tell you.

PS: We might have to start a petition if we're going to get them to remove the 10 control limit.

GMM - yes, I need to control each channel independently!

Quote
Tiffle wrote: I can't get the Quote function to work when replying nor the smilies. Any ideas?

Tiffle, the Quote button works when you first select the text you want to quote -- please try and let me know the result.

Or maybe you have Javascript turned off in your browser?

Observation.
I never cease to be amazed at what young people and each new generation of plug-in developers attempt to do, and usually succeed in doing.

Tiffle's outline is understandable if contrasted to the filtermeister base x 5. That really is impressive because it delivers improved manipulation of the subject by roughly 4 to the power 3.

On the other hand, it seems from onxY's and GMM's comments, that FF has been throttled (nominally limited in early versions) to slightly above the old FM base, in order to cater for the main stream end-users (aka. Pleb's).

It is a compliment to FF, that people like Tiffle want to push the envelope and us it to construct filter-plug-ins to match KPX, Extensis and Xero suites.

The argument for broad application simplicity is equal to the product reputation that would come from Tiffle's full-blown efforts.

Perhaps you should compromise and do a "pro-version" beta, then let Tiffle and Uberzev set an entirely new level/standard of image control/manipulation ... that the other 'big-boys' would struggle to match. Would be quite a PR coup for FF.

Cheers,

Rix.

Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote: Tiffle, could you please describe what you're creating in a few words? I'd like to know what kinds of situations might need more than 10 controls.

(Sorry for the delay in replying - I've been away)

I was experimenting with a filter that implements part of my workflow for post-processing images in CS2 using the Lab color space. I know Lab isn't available in FF but I have already mentioned it in the wishlist forum. Anyway, I wanted to see how FF would stand up to being used to apply different gamma functions to the tone curve in each of three channels. For the experiment, I chose HSB channels. The gamma parameters in each channel are controlled by 5 sliders which explains why my filter ended up with 15 controls (5 * 3).

Quote
Tiffle wrote: uberzev: nope, the Quote button doesn't work and neither do the smilies buttons - the ones you can see I typed in myself. I see "error on page" in the status bar of my browser - it's IE6 and maybe that's the problem

Yes, the quote button definitely does not work in IE6 - that's why I switched to Firefox to browse the forum.

Quote
onyXMaster wrote: As a sidenote: Lab (sRGB->XYZ D65->Lab D50 and back) is already implemented and will be available in the next release.

I'm not sure I understand your example onyXMaster: it looks like you're talking about color space conversion or applying ICC profiles to images rather than extracting the L,a and b channels for further individual processing. Can you clarify please?

Quote
Tiffle wrote: That's funny: I've just tried it again and now it works - even the smilies work and I'm still using IE6

Oh yes indeed that's true - it looks like the forum scripts have been repaired in the meantime. Very good.

Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote: Quasimondo wrote: the quote button definitely does not work in IE6

Mario, it does work in IE6 -- you just need to select the text before clicking it.

Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote: Tiffle, could you please describe what you're creating in a few words? I'd like to know what kinds of situations might need more than 10 controls.

the 'stones' component alone can utilize 12 control components. one component...12! i have about 6 filters currently that i'm not releasing because they become way too crippled without MANY more controls. i have one i just made that is using over 60 and that's with cutting some out. the limited controls are the most severe liability to FF right now. it just strikes me as a bit bizarre that something so potentially one of the most creative programs to come down the pike in the last 20 years cripples that creativity with an arbitrary limit like this.

here's an example:

craig

Need More Controls 1a.ffxml

Rest assured that the limit on the amount of controls (and components) has very little to do with your hardware

The control limit to 10 controls is purely artificial, and in my sense -- a wrong one.

Quote
Tiffle wrote: I'm not sure I understand your example onyXMaster: it looks like you're talking about color space conversion or applying ICC profiles to images rather than extracting the L,a and b channels for further individual processing. Can you clarify please?

Yes, I'm talking about color space conversion, since the Lab "extraction" is not possible from RGB, the only thing you can "extract" from RGB is RGB and variations of HSB, which have direct mapping to and from RGB. The Lab is a device-independent space, relying on some specified lighting conditions. RGB is a device-dependent space, also relying on specified lighting conditions. So the implemented Lab "extraction" process is actually converting RGB to device-independent XYZ (assuming the lighting conditions are described by D65 illuminant and input is in sRGB format) and then converting XYZ to Lab (using lighting conditions described by D50 illuminant).

To summarize: "Extracting" is a bad term for Lab, since the process itself indeed performs a color space conversion, very close to color matching process using ICC profiles. Also, not specifying the color space information, I cannot describe the "variant" of Lab you might expect, because using another illuminants, for example C and D50, will produce different results.

Very cool Bongo51.

vladimir,

thank you!

i'm attaching just one possibility for the UI with more controls.

there are more ways possible that might even be better. for instance, if a component chain branches with a switch component, and each branch has different controls within it, it shld be possible to show only those controls within the UI of the branch that is currently selected. or, you could use drop-down menus to do the same thing.

another way would be to show, in the UI, with icons representing the components, the components that have controls connected to them. you would click on that icon and the controls would then be displayed. the icons would be a scrollable list. (dont quite like this way as much as the simple scrolling list, though)

there is always the option of having a 'simple' interface and an 'advanced' with a toggle to go between the two. in the simple, the writer could put just those controls he/she feels are the most important to the end user. in the advanced mode one would see all the controls in a scrollable list. and with another option, the user could tailor which controls go into the simple and which into the advanced.

another possibility is instead of having the main display window taking up most of the space as it is now, one would use ALL the current space on the interface for controls and other options. the display window would then be a popup or additional window over this. this would require changing from a real time updating to a switch mode where the user makes all his controls settings and then hits a button to see what he/she gets. or, you could even tab the display window where you keep the real time updating but just dont see it until you hit the tab for it.

i do understand the problem. i've made filters with over 70 control components in them. displaying all those does add complexity for the user. it also tends to add clutter on the interface. finding one of 70 controls is asking the end user to spend some time looking and thinking and fumbling around. i suppose you could even put this in a formula: power = complexity squared or something of that nature photoshop is the prime example. it's NOT an easy program to learn, at least to learn well, but it is one of the most powerful. so, i'm totally willing to help make FF extremely powerful yet extremely simple. my only objection to the limit was that the 'extremely powerful' part couldnt be tapped because of the 'extremely simple' part. and i still think we can get and have both.

craig

Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote: Bongo, Craig -- I'll look into it after we deal with all the high-priority stuff.

Actually, I'm looking into it right now. I've just discussed this with the programmers, and they were rather optimistic regarding the amount of time required to implement this feature. Here's how it will look: