THE HITFILM WISHLIST: What Features Do You Want?



  • NormanPCN
    NormanPCN Posts: 4,139 Enthusiast

    @jsbarrett That is a nice tip. 

  • How about a 3d bone rigging system? 

  • Juda1
    Juda1 Posts: 299 Just Starting Out*
    edited February 2018

    Adding an option "unstretch" to quad warp: Stretching the warped image to full screen with that option. Can be very usefull for scene duplication as set extension when that unstretched video sequence is later put as 3D plane into 3D space.

  • Triem23
    Triem23 Posts: 20,603 Ambassador

    To expand on what Juda is asking, he's hoping for an "Unwarp" option like in Ae's CC Power Pin. 

    This thread discusses the topic further.

  • Triem23
    Triem23 Posts: 20,603 Ambassador

    It would be nice if the progress bar for renders could list the current frame being rendered instead of just the percentages. If nothing else this would help users who have crashes during render from allocation errors or other reasons. If a crash is consistent on (say) frame 1142, then it lets the user know exactly which clip/composite shot is generating the overflow, and aids in restructuring the project. It's a useful little bit of data.

  • CleverTagline
    CleverTagline Posts: 3,332 Ambassador

    The Clone tool introduced in the latest version of Pro has a time offset property that's only adjustable in terms of seconds.  I would love for this property (and anything similar in other effects that I might not be aware of) to have the option of switching to frames.  If I want to offset something by 5 frames at 24fps, converting 5/24 into a decimal value for seconds is not only annoying, but potentially inaccurate.  I would love to just switch the "mode" for that property to "frames," set the value to 5 and know that it's going to work.

  • Triem23
    Triem23 Posts: 20,603 Ambassador

    I'll +1 Jsbarret's above comment. 

  • Triem23
    Triem23 Posts: 20,603 Ambassador

    @inScapeDigital left a good set of questions for the oft-requested "Move multiple clips from Editor to Timeline" feature (slightly reformatted). 

    "Think of how many variables there are.

    1)What size should the comp be?

    2)What frame rate should it take?

    3) If the videos are all different frame rates, how long should it be?

    4)Should different video sizes be scaled up/down to fit, or stay the same?

    5)What happens to any transitions between the videos?

    Add it to the Wishlist, with your answers to all these questions so the devs can build a user story."

    Ok, here's my answers.

    1) The new Composite should be the same dimensions as the Editor. This is the "master" size of the project, and anything on the Editor Timeline will be rendered at this size (barring manual editing of the Export settings).

    2) Editor framerate for same reasons as given above.

    3) Media is automatically conformed to Editor framerate when added to the Timeline, therefore, the Composite Shot should be the duration of the selected clips on the Editor. Shifted clips should maintain prior framerate conformation. 

    4) Media clips should maintain whatever scale they currently have on the Editor Timeline. It is reasonable to assume that the clips on the Editor Timeline have already been scaled to the desired size. 

    5) Transitions cannot work in a Composite Shot under the current engine. They have to be stripped out. A warning dialog should indicate such. This is similar to opening a Pro 2017 project in Express 2017 and the relevant warning dialog there. 

    Where I see issues are other questions Javert didn't ask. 

    6) What happens to existing effects on the clips? They HAVE to move into the Composite Shot. The comp reduces to a single clip in the Editor Timeline, so to maintain an effect on clip A that's not on clip B the effects have to move. Period.

    7) What about audio mixing? This is the really tricky one, since the audio mixer is Editor-Only. This is actually the biggest problem I see--if clips from multiple tracks are selected, they'd be collapsed into one track when the Composite becomes the Editor clip. This blows an existing multitrack mix to hell. It also becomes an issue for L and J cuts as audio is a separate track in the Editor, but part of the same Layer in a Composite. The only thing that comes to mind is having to split clips into two layers--one layer has "audio" appended to its name (because each layer automatically takes the clip's name) and has its Opacity set at zero. Drawback is doubling the amount of layers unless it's possible to parse out which audio layers have different durations from its linked video (so clips where audio/video are the same frame count become one layer, not two).

    So, as I see it, Javert's initial list of questions is an easy solve. Audio is the issue. I'll let this tick in my brain more, see if I can conceptualize anything. 

    But, I've put a fair amount of thought in. I was hoping to avoid a "Sequence" timeline since that would be a whole new module, but Sequences--effectively multiple Editor Timelines where a Sequence from Timeline A is treated as a clip on Timeline B--might be the better solution. 

    Although, if Grade Layers could be added to the Editor Timeline demand for moving multiple clips to Composite Shots would be reduced. The #1 reason given for the request is to be able to grade an entire scene with one layer. 

    I tag @NormanPCN as I know he has thoughts on the issue and I think his are a little different from mine. Norman, think about the audio issues, too. You may have a superior solution to my brute-force idea. 

  • JMcAllister
    JMcAllister Posts: 593 Enthusiast

    Another question to be answered WRT making multiple clips in the timeline into a composite shot: 


    -What if there are gaps between the selected clips?

    One way of dealing with this would be to move the gaps to the composite shot and have one extra-long clip on the timeline, but then that leaves the problem of:

    -What if there are unselected clips between the selected clips?

    So the other solution is to have multiple instances of the composite shot, each trimmed to the position of the original clip (this could also solve the problem of "What if the selected clips are on different tracks?")

    ...Except that now you start with multiple clips on the timeline, and you end up with multiple clips on the timeline. You have gained nothing except for unnecessary complexity.


    I know that I have asked for this feature before, but the more I think about it, the more impossible it seems.


    The two main reasons to want to be able to take multiple clips on the timeline and make them into a single composite shot are:

    1) to add effects/grading to multiple clips simultaneously.

    Grade layers in the editor timeline, or track-level effects, are both simpler solutions. Also nested timelines or seqences would solve this.

    2) to have nested timelines.

    Nested timelines would solve this.


    So the obvious answer is: we need nested timelines.

  • Palacono
    Palacono Posts: 3,423 Enthusiast

    Or Grade Layers on the Editor timeline?

    +1 to the others who have previously suggested this.

  • JMcAllister
    JMcAllister Posts: 593 Enthusiast


    Grade layers in the editor timeline would (obviously) allow you to grade multiple clips at the same time, but does nothing for those who want to be able to assemble each scene in a film separately before combining the scenes together into the finished film.

    On the other hand, nested timelines can (obviously) be used for that purpose, and in addition to this, a nested timeline would be treated as a single clip on the main timeline, so you could use this technique to grade multiple clips at the same time.

    Obviously in an ideal world we'd have both features. But if I had to choose one, I would choose nested timelines because it solves both problems.

  • NormanPCN
    NormanPCN Posts: 4,139 Enthusiast
    edited February 2018

    Multiple clips to composite...

    "What if there are gaps between clips."

    Not an issue. Gaps simply translate to the comp.  This is already supported in comps.

    "What if there are unselected clips in the middle"

    Again, one simply polls the selection and if not continuous then warn/error about this condition. Okay to restrict to continuous selections.

    Something new. What if multiple tracks are allowed and the left and right edges are ragged. For example 3 tracks and the left most edge of the selection is on track one and the right most edge of the selection is on track 3. There is no place for the replacement comp to insert on those three tracks. Answer. Simply create new tracks to contain (video and/or audio). Hitfilm already has a nasty habit (IMO) of creating new video+audio tracks on a make composite shot situation with it's current offering. So the function of doing such already exists.

    I am just acknowledging the ragged edge thing with a multiple track conversion scenario since we are talking about what ifs. I think a multi track transfer should be restricted to clean even left/right edges. A comp is a scene/shot timeline. With a conversion from the NLE to comp with ragged edges we are implicitly leaving some parts of the scene/shot on the NLE timeline. That is not a full complete shot. A ragged right edge could be okay, especially with sound is possibly shorter than the video.

    I think supporting a single video and single audio track for transport to a comp would be fine.

    If a prime reason to move multiple clips to a comp is to use a grade layer then that is a non starter to me. It is using a BFH to force fit something. Square peg into a round hole. If FxHome cares about the NLE they do need to step up and offer something that cleanly offers the ability to apply a single set of effects across multiple clips in the NLE that make sense for an NLE. Be it a nested timeline. My vote. Also provides multiple functions beyond grading like stuff as previously proposed by me in this thread. Be it a Premiere adjustment layer (really an adjustment 'clip' that changes composite order). I would also vote for this. Given its just a composite order thing it should be way easier/faster to do than the nested timeline. Or Resolve like compound clips (which are not much different than a separate/nested timeline). 

    Given the above I don't think audio transport from NLE to comp is any issue. The NLE is the proper place for the audio mixer.  Don't try to force the comp timeline to be something it is not inherently good at.

    I need to shut up to try keep it somewhat short but consider the following.

    One has audio in a separate media file. Because it was recorded that way or processed in some audio application. Now in the NLE you link the video to the audio. Single video clip. Single audio clip. Left+right edges inline.

    Okay we want to do something that requires a composite timeline. e.g. Particle sim. Select the video and audio and choose make composite shot. Oops... Does not work does it. Hitfilm actually does not even complain and leaves the audio behind even if linked to the video. So the slick Hitfilm NLE/comp workflow ability is a no go here. The engine started but we cannot get into first gear.

    Now consider doing something where we sync to music (like effects). For brevity I'll not elaborate but this is an obvious workflow scenario.

    There is a workaround to the above situations. You can do it. But would you want to. Tedium.

    IMO the make composite shot feature is not remotely finished. It is a proof of concept. It only works in a single scenario and even then it can be quirky. One won't/can't cover everything from the get go. But some desired workflow situations are as obvious as the Sun.


  • HitFilmer236093
    HitFilmer236093 Posts: 4
    edited February 2018

    A better stabilizing for Hitfilm Express.
    Because I use my smartphone a lot to film.

    It it possible to provide a better (paid) stabilizing pluging.
    From Mercalli or Newbluefx or ...

  • @HitFilmer236093

    You really can’t do better than the Mocha plugin - available for purchase as an add on for HF Express. 

  • @ToddGroves

    Can I do stabilization with the mocha pluging?

    I know it's available in the Mocha pro version. 

  • @HitFilmer236093

    You would need Mocha Pro for stabilization. But, the Mocha plugin for Hitfilm is rich in features as is.

    You can stabilize footage with Hitfilm's own tracking tools.

    Here's a tutorial for stabilizing in Hitfilm:

    While the tutorial was written for an older version of Hitfilm, the technique is still relevant today. I would give the above YouTube video a try and let us know what your results are.

  • Andersen01498
    Andersen01498 Posts: 1,146 Enthusiast

    It great that you can add puppet points in the view by using your mouse but now it would be superb it somehow Hitfilm could record the mouse movements of the pins without having to manually key frame the points

  • HillsideMedia
    HillsideMedia Posts: 50
    edited February 2018

    Hello Amazing HitFilm Representatives:

    I'm a recent convert from FCPX. The one leg up they have on HitFilm is speed of editing. Here are some features that would help with that (I believe some are already requested):

    1. The ability to import an already organized file structure. 

    2. Smaller increments or some kind of drag control when side-scrolling with Shift + wheel. (instead of being launched completely into the next segment, or having to switch to the hand tool)

    3. The "nudge" feature, not just for the whole clip but for the end of a clip like in FCPX. This could also help with all of the "Zoom" adjustment requests y'all get, because you don't have to zoom in as much if you can select and nudge (said from lots of experience doing that)

    4. This is kitschy, but a Ken Burns style feature would be SOO much faster than keyframing when making a slideshow for someone. I still switch back to FCPX for slideshows.

    5. Making the clip and the progress bar in the Trimmer one filmstrip, complete with waveform, like in FCPX. So you can hover your cursor over the actual frame.

    Unrelated, I would greatly appreciate the ability to change a clip between stereo, dual mono, or mono. It is currently possible to get stuck with an L or R only track, and absolutely no way to fix it. 

    Lastly, I love that y'all added the sync option, but I have noticed even with clean audio on both systems and a good slate, it often fails to line up the clips and I have to just go manual. I can put this on a different thread if it doesn't belong here.

    Thank you all, you make a great product and I look forward to being able to edit faster in the future! - Winter!

    P.S. If this looks like a "please become FCPX" pitch, it's not meant that way. I honestly thought all pro editors had these features before switching to HitFilm (except Ken Burns). 

  • @MCMedia

    "1. The ability to import an already organized file structure. "

    You could build a Hitfilm project with a file structure you like. Save it was a template, and add "template" to its name for your own speed of access.

    When you start a new project, you can open that template and simply save it with a new name, befitting your project. It wouldn't be that hard to rename folders if you had to. The structure would already be there, as you designed it.

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    +1 for importing organized file structure. For now you can try the following.

    In HitfilmPro you can create your own folder/subfolder/file structure in the media panel. Change the media thumbnail view "Group By" from media to folder then create and name your folders and sub folders. You can save it as a HitFilmPro project and use it as a your default startup file.

    Here are some screen caps of my startup file.

  • @spydurhank

    Pretty much what I said. Building a file structure from within the media panel is very straight forward. No different than building a file structure in Explorer or Mac’s Finder interface. 

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

     @ToddGroves missed your post but yeah, exactly what you said. :)

  • Triem23
    Triem23 Posts: 20,603 Ambassador

    @spydurhank @ToddGroves I note my startup templates also have a few other things setup--my preferred Media Panel sorting, a couple of pre-built camera rigs, a three point lighting rig, a "Notes" Comp (just a comp with a text layer), etc... 

    @MCMedia setting up a template for yourself is a great way to set up things like file structure and commonly used elements. Another advantage is by opening the software by double clicking the template you bypass the Home and Project setup screens and open directly into an EDL. 

  • @Triem23

    Great idea to include rigging, etc. in template design. Making note of that.

  • my wish list is... and this isn't intended to sarcastic... to have newer versions every 2-3 years, not 6-12 months and not have to buy either a video card upgrade, the newest windows version or new computer. I was given windows 10 on my last computer and now in this new one refuse to have 10 because it's unstable (and unfortunately won't be able to upgrade.) it's starting to look like, that the relatively inexpensive upgrade is costing more in other areas just to use...

  • DannyDev
    DannyDev Staff Posts: 337 Staff
    edited April 2018


    When you purchase a license for HF Pro, you're entitled to 12 months of free updates, none of which you are required to install.

    This is actually is much, much better deal for the end user as you will now have access to updates throughout the year that previously required a paid upgrade.

    The minimum requirements for HF have barely changed in the last five years. The main one was dropping Windows 7 which is a 7+ year old OS.

  • Juda1
    Juda1 Posts: 299 Just Starting Out*

    Option for the layer stack not to expand when using control panel. Drives me mad sometimes: When lots of layers are present I spend a lot of time collapsing the layer stack because it expands all times by itself.

  • Triem23
    Triem23 Posts: 20,603 Ambassador

    @Simiancro oddly enough your request is directly opposite the current FXHOME Philosophy. Hitfilm had been on a two-year cycle, switched to single year, now are on the 12-month-update plan. 

    In the current business climate I don't think a longer update cycle is desired, or smart. A truth is competing products are now on faster development cycles, and FXHOME needs to stay competitive. Additionally, I'm glad we just got those lovely widgets in Hitfilm Pro. I would guess the majority of users prefer having this now than November. :) 

  • DannyDev
    DannyDev Staff Posts: 337 Staff
    edited April 2018


    Slight correction, the only iterations of HF that were ever produced over a two year cycle were HF2 and HF3, both of which were major updates: this included the Mac version and a major rewrite of the UI.

    Every version since then has been released annually (and in fact, only received about six months of developer time when you subtract the resources dedicated to previous version updates and express releases).

  • CleverTagline
    CleverTagline Posts: 3,332 Ambassador

    While replying elsewhere re: the idea of merging clips, an alternate approach came to mind that I'd like to toss in the request bin.

    HitFilm can already link/unlink clips, but the feature is limited to linking a single audio item to a single video item on the Editor timeline.  I wonder if it would be feasible (i.e. not much of a huge programming headache) to extend the link feature to allow linking of multiple audio and video clips across multiple tracks.  That way a larger chunk of clips could be linked together and moved as a single unit, including clips that are already linked.

    This latter item -- essentially nested links -- would probably be the most potentially tricky thing to manage.  Say you've got an audio and video clip already linked, and then you add another linked audio/video pair into a new "parent" link.  If that parent link is later unlinked, the separate links of the original audio/video pairs would be maintained.

    In a way, I guess this kind of nested linking could also be called "grouping," but rather than adding a new grouping feature, I guess I'm thinking of just expanding what linking can do and keeping the existing name.

This discussion has been closed.