Difference between revisions of "Apertux"
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== | == Introduction == | ||
'''Apertux''' normally was planned to be another, of many already existing, '''Linux''' distribution with a particular focus on movie making. It becomes finally a tool, in fact a bunch of several tools, embedded in different movie production workflows. Everything being under Linux, open and free of course. | |||
The different discussion I had with different people deeply involved in movie making, and all I could read and understand by my own on the subject, make me change my mind about the first approach, even if the creation of a Linux movie distro is always possible but on certain condition that will be explained later. The choice of dedicated tools under very precise criterias (sound, video, image an their treatment under Linux - what we can call the content), but above all the ways we use these tools and why, become important, and finally more logical than a single distribution (the containing)that always will be, or too general, or too specialized and that should be not able to fit the needs of all possible kind of directors will and movie genres. | |||
The first approach was also figured for the alone scenarist-director-producer-cameraman with a very short "guerrilla" or "indie" team style. The new approach wants to be more pragmatic and integrate as a central pivot the '''Production''' (and the role of the '''Producer''' even if this one can be also the scenarist and/or the director) that, with management and communication tools (always free and open), can master the whole movie creative process where other people with different roles and competencies, come at a moment or another, to work on it. This approach then can apply to an "indie" team as well as to a bigger one. Teams "picking" what they need and want in the workflows where tools and methodologies are. And the production making the linkage and managing the communication, verifying the work done between the different members and "departments". | |||
These workflows and tools being defined and chosen for the project, the members can use the Linux distro of their choice, (Debian, Ubuntu, Suse, Fedora, etc...), it doesn't have any kind of importance. The '''Production''' is gathering the different works in a centralized tool and with a standardized approach (or tools). The producer can follow and react to the progression of the works done in every '''Department''' during the creation/production process. | |||
The formula is enough flexible to cover all possible cases (from little to bigger team), for all movie genres (short, medium, or long movies) or categories (movies with real actors, or 2D, 3D animation movies) and concentrate on the core of the project: the production of a movie with Linux free and open source tools. | |||
Now let's define all that... | |||
[[Category:Project]] | |||
[[Category:Software]] | |||
Revision as of 10:15, 3 May 2013
Introduction
Apertux normally was planned to be another, of many already existing, Linux distribution with a particular focus on movie making. It becomes finally a tool, in fact a bunch of several tools, embedded in different movie production workflows. Everything being under Linux, open and free of course.
The different discussion I had with different people deeply involved in movie making, and all I could read and understand by my own on the subject, make me change my mind about the first approach, even if the creation of a Linux movie distro is always possible but on certain condition that will be explained later. The choice of dedicated tools under very precise criterias (sound, video, image an their treatment under Linux - what we can call the content), but above all the ways we use these tools and why, become important, and finally more logical than a single distribution (the containing)that always will be, or too general, or too specialized and that should be not able to fit the needs of all possible kind of directors will and movie genres.
The first approach was also figured for the alone scenarist-director-producer-cameraman with a very short "guerrilla" or "indie" team style. The new approach wants to be more pragmatic and integrate as a central pivot the Production (and the role of the Producer even if this one can be also the scenarist and/or the director) that, with management and communication tools (always free and open), can master the whole movie creative process where other people with different roles and competencies, come at a moment or another, to work on it. This approach then can apply to an "indie" team as well as to a bigger one. Teams "picking" what they need and want in the workflows where tools and methodologies are. And the production making the linkage and managing the communication, verifying the work done between the different members and "departments".
These workflows and tools being defined and chosen for the project, the members can use the Linux distro of their choice, (Debian, Ubuntu, Suse, Fedora, etc...), it doesn't have any kind of importance. The Production is gathering the different works in a centralized tool and with a standardized approach (or tools). The producer can follow and react to the progression of the works done in every Department during the creation/production process.
The formula is enough flexible to cover all possible cases (from little to bigger team), for all movie genres (short, medium, or long movies) or categories (movies with real actors, or 2D, 3D animation movies) and concentrate on the core of the project: the production of a movie with Linux free and open source tools.
Now let's define all that...