Choosing a letter type should be as simple as it is in Illustrtor, photoshop, word.
Standard way fonts are chosen in other applications. Photoshop cs6 is a good example. Just choose from a list and not have to leave and go in different directories.
I have installed a few font, but they are not showing up in smoke 2013, whilst I can see those extra fonts in my other applications. I believe you are doing some sort of direct read instead of letting the os inform you. Am I correct?
Some fonts aren’t installed as system fonts. I believe some install under the user account. I am not sure, but I once read about the fonts being able to be activated and unactivated, but that the were managed apart from the system fonts.
What it comes down to is keep simple things like this simple.
By the way, all the fonts that I have installed are not showing up in the list.
It isn’t done until it is finished.
All the ‘loadable’ options in each of the editors are directory-based and this does cause some issues for fonts in ways that I would agree with. Whilst the directory scan is obviously good for ‘Action’, etc., for fonts it would be much better to have a viewer that allows you to see fonts in the way that is more unified. At the moment you have to go into different directories. If you are confused as to how to do this in the current paradigm, you navigate up a level and then see the different fonts folders. If you are after system fonts you go into that directory.
Much better however would be if Smoke fed these font directories into a unified browser that gave you the option to look for ‘bold’, italic, etc. as in other software. I’ve used ‘Inscriber’ and although it sucks in many respects it does have a really nice font chooser. Maybe it would be good also to have a favourites section as there are many fonts that I would barely use. Also Inscriber has an area where you can mix together styles (colour, outlines, etc.) much like a paint swatch. It is very intuitive and obvious and Smoke could do with taking a leaf out of their book?
Your installed font will be in one of those directories.
You hit the nail on the head with those directory structures. That would potentially mean that if two different accounts on the same system try to use one project, say two editors working on the same machine under different accounts. You could not be able to load the fonts. I would like smoke to do it like every other app, such as how photoshop offers a live preview, And that comment that Tony said about there being a favorites is true. There are only a few fonts I use for all me graphics. And not having to scroll thru all the rest is a bonus.
I think this is an obvious change, as i anything else which is pointlessly over engineered/ or complicated. The power of smoke is awesome, the unessesary complications are not. It is not more pro just because things are a pain in the arse. Smoke is heading in the right direction- but it’s still got more to go…
Yes, I am glad to see other people understand my point.
You would navigate to these directories through the Smoke File-browser when looking for fonts and add them as bookmarks.
With regards to fonts being installed per user account on Mac… I am not sure what you would need to do to install them in the main fonts directory which is what you have access to by default in the file browser.
Many thanks for your feedback!
It needs to be as easy as it is in Photoshop or you have failed at your redesign of making it easy for new users. Simple as that really.
Or, for now allow the use of the arrow keys where searching through fonts. This would definitely speed font selection up…
Larry Jordan is rather damning of the font system in one of his new tutorials, and I think he was hired by AD to actually make these videos! When the sale man doesn’t big-up the system, you know there’s something to worry about! Think that AD could do with revisiting some of these tools to update and refine them. So hunting, organising and ‘style storing’ needs looking toward at least?
I like how Larry brings it. That is his style with his tutorials. It comes from a user point of view and he help you to avaiods the Gotchas. If the people who do the tutorials only make it pretty, we as the users always come accross the problems. I like tutorials that tell he whats wrong so I can avoid them. I would rather it that way than on a job. I really appreciate his style, I would encourage Autodesk to let him do more. We need to know the gotchas ahead of time, and I think everyone here knows that no software is bug free, but you have to know how to navigate around the bugs the make the application bug free.
So more Larry please, his tutorials are refreshing instead of just one sided.
You can get some good tutorials from FXPHD.com as well. John Montgomery & Mike Seymour have been Autodesk users for decades, no one else better.
[The Area Smoke Forum Assistant]
Indianapolis, IN, USA
SMOKE 2013.2.2 HP9400/FX5800 | HP z800/FX5800 | & now Smoke 2013 SP2 on MBP
[Twitter @bkmeditor] | Check out the Smoke Blog on PremiumBeat.com |
I just recently started using Smoke about three days ago. II’m not the best with learning new software, but the way Smoke handles basic 2d text and fonts is the most cumbersome, laboring, experience I’ve ever had to deal with in using any software! I do not understand the logic behind this and think this is something AD seriously needs to address if they’re going to attract more FCP converts.
Oh I don’t know, the Text modules/nodes in Smoke are not super intuitive, but they piss all over the Text tab in Final Cut. Font handling can be vastly improved for sure, and Illustrator/vector integration is a must for the 2014 release.
Miller, you should check out the Text FX tutorial video on the Smoke Learning Channel.
Agreed that the handling of fonts is a bit of a mess in smoke. I guess I’ve just gotten used to it but it could certainly stand some streamlining. And I would also agree, spend a little more time with the smoke text module because in my humble opinion the text tab in FCP is brutal.
At some point soon (now that Smoke is becoming more OSX and less Linux) choices for fonts and beyond are going to have to be made via more guy-friendly means. I like the choice that directories give you in terms of choosing your storage space but some nice shelves for picking up your savings would be most welcome. The project and user bins within CFX are sort of in the right direction but they’re only half-way towards where they need to be. Th icons in the directories for many choices are good-ish but there needs to be something less directory-like and much more ‘shelvy’. While I would not wish to reduce all the different ways of storing things (for there are many) it would be good for each area and node to have its own pretty obvious ‘go to shelf’ that could be easily recognised as a methodology wherever you are?
By no means do I think FCP is any kind of solution for handling text. But when I’m struggling to even load a font into the program, or rather, the fact I have to “load” a font into the program, I’d almost just not even bother. If I’m working with text animation After Effects is my “go to.” I was hoping I’d be able to replace FCP and After Effects with Smoke, but at this point I don’t think I have the time or the patience to deal with an interface that doesn’t allow simple 2d text management. I have no doubt that Smoke is great for animation and working in a 3d environment, and I’ve watched hours of tutorials that prove its capability, but I don’t really see myself saving that much time in the long run. I think I’m just more turned off by the claims that this is supposed to be an easy transition from FCP. My workflow just isn’t effects driven enough for me to really consider spending $4k to make the switch. Call me ignorant, call me lazy, but I just have too much work and not enough time to fumble through a program that already feels like it’s behind the curve in terms of interface management. That’s just my humble opinion.
While i have issues with the software I feel that this is a rather 2d assessment, to repeat your sub-issue. Whilst the cap doesn’t at all fit you yourself here and now, in many ways Smoke is ahead of the curve if you wish to use a curve as your topographic image. It certainly has issues that I cry about, but it also has many non-issues that I celebrate as being just right and getting also getting better. I would hate to see Smoke just become a carbon copy of what many might see as being the ‘current’ curve. Progress is a cliche. Smoke in many ways works very well and has a methodology that should not so easily be sacrificed. The truth is that you really ‘have’ to make some space to learn it and earn its ways, but if you’re just too busy to make space for its ways then mores the pity. As I said I am far from being a member of the cult of Smoke but I much prefer it to many other editors and comp-editors.