garageCube

First of all: I know you guys dont have answers to this, but I want to hear the thoughts of somebody who has more experience than me.

Ive been using Modul8 since 2009, being the only interface that made sense to me. I tried Resolume back then, but it didnt really give me a hard-on. But lately Resolume seems to catch up, and go beyond. When I was playing with Resolume, the quality of my compositions went up a notch. It was easier to make good transitions, and the effects seemed a little more mature than Modul8´s. The DXV codec is a selling point in itself.

As it havent been a major update for quite some time, what do you guys think we will see from Garagecube in the future? Are Resolume a more stable company, with more resources for development, or do you think Garagecube will surprise us "apple-style" with something big in the near future?

Funny how there is not much response to this. That is kind of answer for you from garagecube crowd.
The same topic in VJF http://vjforums.com/showthread.php?t=37735

I get the sense that Modul8 was EOL'd when the team switched gears to work on MapMapMap, a seperate garagecube product. That's fine, I use Modul8 and it still works good, but now I feel as if I paid far too much. I assumed the high price meant the software wouldn't EOL so easily, but that's what happened to Shake and Color buyers as well, so nothing new here in the world of software. My erratic experience with Modul8 has made me wary of independent developers in general, which is sad.

(also forgot me forum info. Hey, it's the new me!)

@JaylikeBird MapMapMap is a module for Modul8 that was created by Anomes. It is essentially a greatly enhanced version of the perspective transform module. You are likely referring to MadMapper.

What you all need to do is to step back and look at the bigger picture:

- Resolume Ave 3 took 6 years to develop
- VDMX5 is still in beta
- Grand VJ was not a major leap in evolution from Arkaos and that too took years to develop and release

Despite these conditions these companies have continued to exist.

If you are not happy with what exists, there are plenty of other tools to choose from. If you want amazing flexibility and an effective open wide choice of building what you want you can jump into processing or Open Frameworks. This is where most people go when they want to take their visuals 'to the next level.'

From a personal perspective if you are just doing visuals, then I would try to spend more time exploring innovative approaches to building installations that you can project on, as the effectiveness of simple screen projection is quickly becoming the spectacle of the past. Hence the introduction of MadMapper.

At the current time Modul8 is making a lot of people very happy. People who are new to VJ'ing or just using it for artistic purposes or event production purposes who don't even know what VJ'ing. These people are making future development possible for us as well as maintaining very responsive technical support.

To answer this thread firmly and conclusively, we are definitely working Modul8.

If you are not happy with what exists, there are plenty of other tools to choose from.

This is what good customer support never tells you. Why would you want to alienate your loyal customers?! I have been with you since 2006 and I want to stay with you because M8 is an excellent tool. But even if this slap on the face was not directed to me I get tired of the same reaction from many users as well. This is not just the right answer.

To answer this thread firmly and conclusively, we are definitely working Modul8.

OK! Since this tread is about the future of M8 - what is the Future of Modul8?

ilan wrote:I would try to spend more time exploring innovative approaches to building installations that you can project on, as the effectiveness of simple screen projection is quickly becoming the spectacle of the past. Hence the introduction of MadMapper.

Thanks for the art tips.

First and foremost, I want to say that I don't necessarily agree with either the content or manner in which many things have been said in this thread, however I do (at least in part) agree with some of the sentiment. Personally, while I think Modul8 is a great program with which I continue to find new and creative uses, I have been using it in a new installation lately which has caused me to run up against a couple of areas where I do think that Modul8 is starting to show its age. While I certainly understand that no company wants to inform their competitors of their future plans, I am also concerned that MadMapper is kind of receiving all of the attention right now.

That said, I just wanted to offer a couple of (hopefully) constructive criticisms that have crossed my mind lately:

Soft Edge Blending - I know this one is a biggie for a lot of people and I recently found myself in this camp. I can imagine that it's tough, but I do hope it's something we'll see sooner rather than later.

More interaction with external programs (e.g. Quartz Composer, Syphon Input, etc.) - I've been wanting to do a live twitter feed in Modul8 for some time. I have a QTZ file that does what I want, but without a lot of hacks (which I'm afraid could stop working, if I can get them working) it's not at all easy to do. I had thought about doing this directly in a module only to find out that the module system is stuck on Python 2.3. I can't do it directly with the QTZ file because it accesses the internet. That leaves the hacked syphon input as the only way.

I mention the foregoing primarily to illustrate the point that I think parts of Modul8 are starting to get just a bit outdated, thus making it more difficult than it should be to achieve certain things. While I don't consider these to be major flaws, it's just one of those things where the tools seem to be getting in the way of executing ideas, and that's not very fun.

Modules Don't get me wrong, the module system is great. Unfortunately, I've been having some problems lately that prevent me from using modules reliable in an installation setting. While the flexibility is nice, I am beginning to think that maybe some of the more basic functionality (e.g. the layerset sequencer, etc.) might be better off being built directly into the program so that they're a bit more reliable. Also, like I said before, it would also be nice if the module system could be updated to reference a more recent version of python.

Performance I could be way off base here, but for some reason, it seems to me that Modul8 just doesn't perform the way it used to. Maybe I'm just doing more with it than I was before, but I used to feel like Modul8 was just blazingly fast. Now, even with faster, more capable hardware, it just doesn't seem to have the same kick that it used to. Again, that's my totally subjective opinion, but I have to wonder if there couldn't be some "under the hood" changes that could get everything up to date with the latest OS X technologies and really make Modul8 scream again.

So, those are a few of the things that have been on my mind lately. I hope at least some of this will be helpful as Modul8 progresses...

@gmint, thank you for your constructive message. Each of the items you have outlined are major concern for the team and all of them will be addressed. Some of in the near future, as in within this year, and some may take a bit longer then that.

If I could give exact or even rough dates for these things I would. You have to trust me in that I know for sure they are working on these things.

Ilan - for most of us thats all we really wanted to know - it's good to know you're still working on things and that sooner or later there will be a new version with improvements and bug fixes. I look forward to seeing things continue to improve.

@lotech being primarily an 'end user' myself, that is pretty much what I look forward to as well.

@ilan

Yes, thank you very much for the response. None of the things I've mentioned are of immediately necessary for me, however I will definitely be looking forward to any update...

i stopped using modul8 4 years ago.
the technical design is so old fashioned.

if you have to earn your money with video shows it is impossible to do it with modul8.
the output quality is to bad.
its a shame, that the software has got no main update since 2005.

at its time, modul8 was the best software.

respectfully,
janine

janine wrote:the output quality is to bad.

Perhaps you're using it wrong--just like the word "to"...

hi janine,

could you pls post a sample that is not produceable with MD8?

i´m really curious , too

and the quality has to do with the input , not ?

pele2010

I think what janine means to say is, is her cracked copy stopped working 4 years ago