I think that would just cause confusion. filmic and base curve also use an S-shaped (‘sigmoidal’) curve. The sigmoid module is known by that name; there are blog entries and videos that refer to it by that name, which wouldn’t be updated just because we changed the name. Besides, on what grounds could a new module require that another module change its name?
I’ll simply refer to the curve in agx as the curve, from now on. After all, depending on the parameters, it may not be an S-curve at all.
I went back and look at that one and he covers the basic editing process well. That video doesn’t cover cover importing, tags, ratings, etc, but Bruce does have other videos covering this steps
Again, I’m not suggesting redoing anything, but maybe they could be pinned in a way so they’re easier for new users to find and learn from.
You have lots of people saying what needs to be fixed in general terms, expecting someone else to do the work.
You have 2 burnt out individuals who have been asking for help (as in DO something, not add more to the plate for them to do) for awhile.
Anyone who reads the documentation and sees a problem can download a copy of the documentation and make corrections and submit them.
If I was the maintainer of the documentation and heard “this needs to be clearer” then that would mean:
Was this in this thread or in a github issue? If its an issue, can you please link it?
Also we’re loathe to touch the docs for this module, since I don’t think @elstoc or I have a really clear understanding of how it all works. That makes it very difficult to discern what is correct and what isn’t and also makes it hard to document. The original docs were also written by the module author (which we appreciate because we don’t get a lot of that) but also he is long gone now.
Sorry for that. We, or at least I, have this conversation a lot, and I always have it to see what can be made better. But we need specific actionable things, which you’ve given and I’m thankful for that, but the other hundred times I’ve had this conversation nothing has come of it.
We don’t necessarily know how to fix them either, so we share that frustration.
Yes it is extremely frustrating on the other side as well.
Maybe the next time we open an “improvement” topic we should start it with “What are you willing to do to…”
Add Boris videos to the list. His videos make you see photos in a new light and encourages you to dig deeper in the technical side. Something I am a sorely lacking.
Hal did a pretty good job of walking through the software and working through the options and quoting the manual and its even titled … A-Z…
I’ve only skimmed this thread so someone may have already suggested this…
How about each module has a help icon which takes your browser to the relevant section of the current manual?
And before you ask how you were supposed to know that:
April fool!
No, I’d forgotten all about that. Not sure I’ve ever tried it, have now though.
I think that nothing prevent anyone (including you) from creating such a thread and maintaining it accurate. Also, nothing prevents anyone from creating the video (YouTube or video or…) for new beginners workflow and updating with each release.
Well, I don’t think I would do very well in producing my own content. I’d be willing to take on organizing something like that if the site maintainers think the idea is wotthwhile
It was in this thread, here: Improvement Suggestions - #125 by raublekick
I wouldn’t mind putting in effort to help with the docs, or user guides, or some other useful effort, but I don’t think it’s worth my time and effort, or anyone else’s, for me to rewrite a bunch of stuff to my tastes and expect it to be accepted as if to presume that my way is better than anyone else’s. I’d rather spend time collaboratively discussing things before making changes rather than having to defend changes that nobody but me asked for in the first place.
I’ve provided some ideas and suggestions and would be happy to discuss them further, but I got the sense they either aren’t warranted or aren’t wanted (which is totally fine if that’s the case) so I didn’t feel it necessary to put any more effort into them.
I appreciate the response, and again, no hard feelings.
Just start the thread that has clear content with all the links(videos or webpages). No need for approval. Threads are free.
Someone needs take their suggestions and turn them into actions. My employer performance metrics used to follow the STAR model. Situation/Task, Action and Result. You can be full of ideas and identify improvements but without action there will never be a result.
So rewrite DorS to your taste and then people can look at it and get ideas.
There is only one concrete point of view and that is the manual. If someone rewrites a page with a different point of view, then people can compare them and maybe pick one, or the other, or a combination.
But maybe, someone will look at it and come up with something totally different that’s way better.
DoS is a long and difficult module, it’d probably be better to start elsewhere. Or do a quick restructure.
You’re right, it’s a beast. But I’m trying go get somebody to present a different point of view or thought process, that people can look at, so that it might evoke some creativity.
Before someone embarks on a monumental project that may benefit or please no one, take note that the net result of this thread is that one poster has suggested modifications with a serious tone. Everyone else debating alterations and amendments are veteran users. It is otherwise as I said, some new users and users who recall being new, willing to put in an effort and acknowledging the requisite effort, not complaining about it. If only this thread had not been recently active when I arrived in this forum, and I never would have gotten involved.
I don’t understand the point you’re trying to convey here.
But in order to read that part of the manual, they first have to find said manual…
But then, I’m from a generation which was used to consult text documents, not just video’s.
