I want to give you a little hint: the movement of my cross is implemented without the SPR filter and similar ones 
There are two other great filters for these purposes 
1 Like
Rumbled!! 
Will reveal in detail soon (it’s not GIMP)…
Brilliant!
Ooooh, intriguing - looking forward to your method.
Yes, I think that’s probably all the replies, so I’ll try to explain my methods later today (it’s Sunday 10.00am here right now) if I get a few spare moments.
Thank you @PoisonedSlice, @dimadjdocent, @namna and @MusicalBox (in order of posting) for taking part. It’s been fun, and I think it will be educational when the different methods are shared.
2 Likes
If no one minds, I will reveal my method. The project consists of two tracks, the lower one is the background, the upper one is the cross.
The background track can be any, I used a color layer with the “gradient” filter, I like to make such soft gradient backgrounds. Well, and the most interesting thing is the track with the cross.
There is a white “color” object on it. There are three filters on this object. The first one is “Mask: Simple Shape”, in order to cut the color layer and leave two thin lines of 2 pixels on both sides.
The second filter is “No Sync”, it is needed to move the cross vertically and so that the vertical line continues.
The third filter is “360 Transform”, the “yaw” parameter is needed for the same thing as “No Sync”, only for horizontal animation. You can also animate other parameters of “transforms” and get fancy animations
Everyone can open my project and see how I did it. It is necessary to enable GPU effects, because I used the “glow” effect on the path with the cross, I love this effect, I love when the letters and other animations glow.
Cross-Hair2.mlt (6.9 KB)
3 Likes
Well, that is amazing, @dimadjdocent. In contrast to yours, I used a dinosaur method… one track for each of the horizontal / vertical lines, each having two SPR filters - one to give a 3-pixel line, the other to move each line horizontally or vertically.
I suspect all the others did something similar, but maybe using Text:Rich and/or mask or crop to create the thin lines?
Great work - very educational!! 
1 Like
That’s pretty good, @namna. Extra marks for the typewriter text - but how did you do it? I also noticed some drop-shadow on the co-ordinates text. You gain another 300 points for that … 
C’est plutôt bien, @namna. Des points supplémentaires pour le texte à la machine à écrire - mais comment as-tu fait ? J’ai également remarqué une ombre portée sur le texte des coordonnées. Tu gagnes 300 points supplémentaires pour ça…
Before performing any test, I try to pass it minimalistically. I am not comfortable when there are many tracks on the timeline, I will search until the last minute for a way to create some effect using a minimum of tracks and a maximum of filters on one track. At the moment, shotcut has become such an advanced editor that for complete happiness the only thing missing is a motion blur filter and the ability to reverse a track without recoding.
1 Like
Here’s a description of my Crosshair effect attempt:
The crosshair lines
I considered 5 ways of creating them:
-
Using an image editor (Photoshop in my case) to create two 1920x1080 PNG files. One with 1080px vertical line and one with a 1920px horizontal line. Both lines 2 pixels thick, white, and on transparent backgrounds.
I rejected this method, because, for a few reasons (one was pointed out above by @PoisonedSlice), I didn’t like the idea of using the SP&R filter to animate the PNG clips. The Rotate and Scale filter would also work, but since it is disabled by default and not everyone knows how to activate it, it was not a shareable option. Also, even if it uses less resources (so they say), it is not as straightforward to use as the SP&R filter. -
Create the lines with Glaxnimate. But the 2-pixel lines of the resulting RAWR clips didn’t display as sharp and bright as the ones created with the other methods. Also, to animate those lines I would also have to use the SP&R filter OR do the animations in Glaxnimate. But I felt that the latter would unnecessarily complicate the process.
-
Create the lines in Shotcut with the Crop: Rectangle filter, export them as PNGs (with transparent backgrounds) and import them back in Shotcut. But again, I would need the SP&R filter to animate them… Plus, obviously, exporting as PNGs is an unnecessary step (see method #5).
-
Use the Text: Rich filters (one for each line) to create the lines. Steps: Don’t include text, set Background color to white, edit the Background size values to set the dimensions of the background to 1920px by 2px in one filter and 2px by 1080px in the other, and animate with keyframes on the Position parameters. This has the advantage of having the 2 lines on the same clip (so only one track in needed). Since I always like to uses as few tracks as possible, I was very tempted to choose this option. However, I must mention that, for me, it was not a flawless method at the start. On my first attempt, I couldn’t get the two lines to keep the same thickness. I was able to set both to a thickness of 2 pixels, but when switching between the two filters, one of the lines thickness value would always change to 3 pixels. Shutting down Shotcut and restarting the project from scratch fixed the issue though. But it is not the first time I’ve noticed that sometimes the Text: Rich Size parameter will only accept even values and sometimes only odd values. Most of the time, this is not a significant issue. But in this particular case, it was quite noticeable that the two lines had different thicknesses. So I finally decided to use method #5.
-
Use one white clip per line and set the line sizes with the Crop: Rectangle filter: 2px by 1080px for the vertical line, and 1920px by 2px for the horizontal line. Place each clip on its own track and animate with keyframes on the Position parameters.
Here are the parameters of the Crop filter used for the vertical line:
At this point, I’d like to congratulate anyone who took the time to read all of the above
The Text
This was simple to do since, as mentioned in my previous post, I decided I would not use the typewriter effect.
By the way @jonray, I could be wrong, but I’m almost 100% sure I know what typewriting method you used. On my computer I have a script created by one of our mutual friends that does that pretty well.
So, obviously, one transparent clip + a Text filter for each block of text. And I used Mask: Simple Shape filters to hide/unhide them.
Here’s a capture of my timeline:
Track V1: The background image.
Tracks V2 and V3: The 2 line clips.
The text clips are overlapping on tracks V4 and V5.
2 Likes
Hi @dimadjdocent The No Sync filter is intriguing. I’m still not sure what it does exactly… 
I searched Google and nothing came up. Also there is nothing here:
(This is NOT a criticism - I am well aware that this documentation requires user input, and I’m as guilty as anyone of not contributing to the documentation…)
Anyway, if you do have some time @dimadjdocent , or anyone, any chance of a brief description of what it does? No worries if you don’t have time…
PS I’m putting something together to describe the Typewriter effect method I used… soon…
Thank you - I read it all!
Close!! It was indeed a HTML file, but actually I found one that uses something called “splitting.JS” and I adapted it. I’ll post it soon.
I may need help from our illustrious friend @elusien at some point because there are a few things about the HTML script I can’t get to work…
It works fine as a typewriter effect though. Watch this space…
1 Like
2 Likes
The “no sync” filter creates a copy of the image and places it under the main one (I see it that way). The only parameter “offset” raises the main image up and pulls its copy along with it, creating the effect of a poorly configured old tube TV. But I use this effect for creative purposes, for example in transitions. By the way, I would be glad if the developer could add a second controller that would move the image horizontally, so as not to use 360 transformation.
2 Likes
That was a very clever idea to use of those 2 filters.
Respect!!
2 Likes
I second that suggestion!
That would indeed be very useful.
2 Likes
@dimadjdocent J’avais deviné pour “360 Transform” mais pas pour “No Sync”, merci pour cette information.
Pour ma part, comme d’habitude, j’ai triché. 
Tout est réalisable directement dans SC, mais avec V20.09 (WebVfx)
Pour les lignes verticales et horizontales, un seul filtre sur l’image de fond placée sur V1. Ce filtre est disponible sur le site d’@Elusien
https://www.elusien.co.uk/shotcut/filters/index.html
C’est le filtre “Shapes”
Choisir option “Ligne Simple” variante “1 ligne horizontale + 1 ligne verticale”. L’UI vous permet de régler tous les paramètres nécessaires.
Pour le texte TypeWriter, j’ai tout bêtement utilisé les filtres “Flip and Spin” de @jonray
https://forum.shotcut.org/t/flip-and-spin-text-effect-version-2-more-user-friendly/24970
qui permettent d’animer du texte. Il suffit de remplacer le fade-in d’entrée par une apparition directe. (Opacity 0 à 1 sur l’image-clé de départ).
J’avais publié l’UI de ce filtre dans le fil cité ci-dessus, mais je l’ai modifié depuis. Si cela peut vous intéresser, MP
@dimadjdocent I guessed for “360 Transform” but not for “No Sync”, thanks for the info.
For my part, as usual, I cheated.
Everything is possible directly in SC, but with V20.09 (WebVfx)
For vertical and horizontal lines, only one filter on the background image placed on V1. This filter is available on the @Elusien website
https://www.elusien.co.uk/shotcut/filters/index.html
It’s the “Shapes” filter
Choose option “Single Line” variant “1 horizontal line + 1 vertical line”. The UI allows you to set all the necessary parameters.
For the TypeWriter text, I simply used @jonray’s “Flip and Spin” filters
https://forum.shotcut.org/t/flip-and-spin-text-effect-version-2-more-user-friendly/24970
which allow you to animate text. You just have to replace the entry fade-in with a direct appearance. (Opacity 0 to 1 on the starting keyframe).
I had published the UI of this filter in the thread mentioned above, but I have modified it since. If you are interested, PM
3 Likes
Thanks for your explanations, @namna, and also @musicalbox. interesting stuff!
@dimadjdocent - I just posted my “new” typewriter HTML method. Feel free to grab it and give it a try!
2 Likes
So I considered almost all possibilites as per @MusicalBox’s post and eluded to graphics being a cheat method!
My first method involved text rich (as indicated earlier by the initials TR) and a SPR for movement. I am now thinking it is possible to animate the text rich lines themselves individually, on the one track just to see if this helps with flicker. It will be slightly more complex than an SPR for lots of movement, but it also reduces the performance hit of the SPR.
My second method used 2 masks (set to subtract) to create the lines and a SPR for animation; but it also requires an underlying white track to paint the lines, although there are no keyframes or filters so this doesn’t add complexity and actually makes the line color easy to change. This definitely gives a better result than the text rich option from a flicker perspective and I will also animate the masks instead of the SPR for movement to see if that helps even more. Doing that now.
@Namna I just knew WebVfx would be involved with you!
Crosshairs.mlt (13.7 KB)
–
J’ai donc envisagé presque toutes les possibilités selon le post de @MusicalBox et j’ai éludé le fait que les graphiques étaient une méthode de triche !
Ma première méthode impliquait un texte riche (comme indiqué précédemment par les initiales TR) et un SPR pour le mouvement. Je pense maintenant qu’il est possible d’animer les lignes riches en texte elles-mêmes individuellement, sur une seule piste, juste pour voir si cela aide avec le scintillement. Il sera légèrement plus complexe qu’un SPR pour beaucoup de mouvements, mais il réduira également l’impact sur les performances du SPR.
Ma deuxième méthode utilisait 2 masques (réglés sur soustraire) pour créer les lignes et un SPR pour l’animation ; Mais il nécessite également une piste blanche sous-jacente pour peindre les lignes, bien qu’il n’y ait pas d’images clés ou de filtres, ce qui n’ajoute pas de complexité et rend la couleur de la ligne facile à changer. Cela donne certainement un meilleur résultat que l’option riche en texte du point de vue du scintillement et je vais également animer les masques au lieu du SPR pour le mouvement pour voir si cela aide encore plus. C’est ce qu’il faut faire maintenant.
@Namna je savais que WebVfx serait impliqué avec vous !
2 Likes
Update
Keyframing the masks/text rich lines and removing the SPR makes no difference to flicker.
I would say @dimadjdocent has the best resulting output due to his animation technique. Brilliant!
I had a quick look and wonder just how easy is it to get pixel perfect location using yaw etc for movement?
1 Like
Maybe I’m doing something wrong, or my shotcut version doesn’t match, but no matter how hard I try, I can’t add these filters to myself after downloading them from the site and installing everything according to the instructions. It is for this reason that I had to “reinvent the wheel” 
1 Like
Hi @dimadjdocent - are you using v. 20.09 (or maybe 20.07)?
1 Like
Hi, I always use the latest version available.