Radial blur plugin for Premiere pro and Cycore FX inside Premiere

[jojejo]

I'm surching for a radial blur fx inside of premiere pro that I can put on a adjustment layer as an effect, not as an dissolve. I tried BCC radial Fast blur, but with less success, cause as soon as I start animating any value, the plugin stop working properly.

Actually I thought there will be tonns of this effect from many plugin provider, but I find nothing except BCC.

Another point I is the ability to load the CC FX (Cycore FX) from AE into Premiere. I have seen this video from Eran Stern, showing how to import the AE pluging into Premiere. But it seem that this trick doesn't work for premiere 15.3 any more. https://www.provideocoalition.com/using-cycorefx-inside-premiere-pro-and-after-effects

THX for any help,

Johannes

[Ann Bens · Accepted solution]

For the radial blur you need to fill out a Feature Request/Bug Report Form

[eschelar]

Why do you think that this is a reasonable thing to say Ann?

The missing radial blur effect in Premiere has been a glaring and embarrassing omission from Premiere for over a decade. Do you genuinely think that the dozens of articles that have been written about this obvious missing feature don't represent hundreds of feature requests for this over the past 10-15 years that people have been complaining about it?

I've been using Premiere for a good number of years myself and I've been using Photoshop for almost 20 years. Photoshop has had radial blur for a very long time. Premiere has not. This is no less than abject laziness on the part of Adobe to not implement.

Very little has been genuinely added to any Adobe software since CC came along compared to before, when sales depended on actually developing real features. Now that sales no longer depend on genuine improvements, Adobe no longer has a need to work on real improvements and bug fixes. This is just another proof of how Adobe's focus is not on making good software, but simply focusing on improving revenue.

Making a feature request hasn't been a useful way of end users helping to improve Adobe for over a decade. Look at the most recent "major" update from CC. Almost every single change has been panned by most serious users because they have little effect on day-to-day use. Yet, commonly used features like this are ignored.

When was the last time radial blur was used in Premiere in a significant way? It's called a "smooth zoom transition". It's currently used extensively in travel vlogging. The current method of doing it involves reflect/mirror and transform effects. The radial blur comes from the transform effect. This method is not suitable for taking advantage of high res footage for a standard 1080p output (still the most common video output workflow), but motion fx and radial blur would be. Of course, this is impossible because there is no radial blur in Premiere Pro.

So an omission that is probably 15 years old is still current - indeed, more current than ever because of the increasing availability of high res footage... and still ignored by Adobe.

The problem is not that people aren't submitting bug reports and feature requests. The problem is that Adobe doesn't appear to have anyone actually monitoring them. Or anyone at all involved in actually trying to figure out what end users might actually need or want.

Stop making excuses for Adobe. They are a big company. If they think we can afford to spend 3 times more for CC, then I think we can reasonably expect them to hire a couple of people to work on prioritizing their development in ways that includes feature requests and bug reports more than a decade old (there are *DOZENS* of them on these forums), but it looks like they don't want to do that.

[Ann Bens]

Dont think radial blur is high on their list.

In the mean time you can use AE.

[Warren Heaton]

HI eschelar:

I'm curious, in addition to the feature request form, how else would you like Adobe to take user feedback?

Also, I just took two minutes to request it.   I actually used Radial Blur in a music video last month.  It would have been great to have had it right in PR.  Between you, jojejo and me, maybe we can get this into a future release!

-Warren

[eschelar]

Warren, if you paid attention, you would note that I'm not saying anything about the amount of time it takes to do a feature request. I'm pointing out that this feature has been actively requested for upwards of a decade or possibly more. I was also looking for this feature in PPro and found a few threads on this very forum which dated back to 2013 and alluded to feature requests going back a decade - and that was 4 years ago.

My point is that I am suggesting a no-confidence stance on Adobe's R&D process.

I feel strongly that their R&D team is completely misguided and has almost no direction since interval versions were the primary driving pulse of Adobe's innovation. Outside of the few updates within around 6 months of releasing CC, there has been very, very little int eh way of significant improvements in any "suite" member program. Look at the last "major" update. Look at the video from Adobe talking about it. 95% or more of the comments from working professionals are complaining that none of those will improve their workflow and most of them also described at least one or two bugs that remain ignored. Properties panel... *eyeroll*

Oddly, many of the "improvements" in the last "major version" of CC were simply borrowed from one program and ported to another. Look at artboards from AI to PS (something virtually nobody wanted and fewer people actually use). They even had something they borrowed from Word and brought into PS... Yet here we are discussing radial blur, which exists in PS and AE and has been requested for PPro for over a decade, but still nothing at all.

There are probably hundreds of threads on the forums of major bugs and omissions from CC programs that have been ignored for 3, 4, 5 or even 10+ years now.

Do you genuinely think that Adobe is ignoring those problems because there were not bug reports of feature requests?

Bug reports and feature requests are simply a way of quieting down the masses so they feel like they aren't being ignored. If you have ever worked in conflict resolution in retail or other business, you would understand how these things work.

Adobe simply has no functional plan whatsoever to organize bug reports and feature requests and implement them. If they did, they would be able to communicate that back to the users. They don't. They obviously *think* they do, but it is also very obvious that it doesn't work.

Sadly, it wouldn't even be that difficult for them to implement. There are dozens of strong communities like Creative Cow, DPreview, nofilmschool, etc... which operate forums where they have "staff" and "MVP" type members who could very easily compile user feedback into bite-sized, hierarchical, age-oriented packages for Adobe. Heck, they even have their very own forum, which is almost entirely ignored by Staff, but those few Staff that don't ignore it freely admit that they have absolutely no power beyond the obviously useless "feature request" and "bug report" opiate. And still nothing moves forwards. Indeed, outspoken folk such as myself are often muzzled (you will notice that my posts now require moderator authorization... more work for the moderator staff, at the expense of keeping quiet someone who spent years supporting Adobe both with wallet and with bringing in new users via workshops and community classes).

None of this is rocket science. None of this is difficult. However, it would require a paradigm shift for Adobe to take their focus away from simply trying to milk cash from their users back to trying to make great product. It would indeed likely cost a little money to turn their totally non-functional model of feedback into a working and efficient one, but it is not money that Adobe is likely to spend. Currently their business model revolves around "doing less, improving less, charging more". It is working well for them and profits are up by capitalizing on low-hanging fruit and decorations. What on Earth would pry them away from that? Only a strongly ethical leadership decision could change that. And given the history of CC, it's pretty obvious that Adobe has no strongly ethical leadership willing or capable of making decisions like that.

[Warren Heaton]

Thank you for sharing your opinion.

I agree with you on one point:  It would be great to have Radial Blur in Premiere Pro.

Take care,

Warren

[excited_Genie16B8]

Why do you think that this is a reasonable thing to say Ann?

Because at the moment, it's all we can do.

[excited_Genie16B8]

Making a feature request hasn't been a useful way of end users helping to improve Adobe for over a decade.

A bold statement.  To verify, we'd need to have a tally of every feature request Adobe has received over the past decade along with how many times each was filed, and compare that to every new feature Adobe has implemented over that same time period.

I might be able to work out the second half of that, but I'm lost on the first part.  Mind sharing?

[excited_Genie16B8]

The problem is that Adobe doesn't appear to have anyone actually monitoring [Feature Requests].

I've seen staff say the opposite.  Of course, I have no way to verify that.  But I also have no reason to believe that staff member was lying.

[eschelar]

Do your own research Jim. I found this thread because I was trying to figure out where Adobe had hidden radial blur in Prem. I came across several other threads on the first page of Google results. One of them demonstrated that this feature has been requested for ~a decade.

In what universe does it make sense to you that Adobe does have someone monitoring Feature Requests, yet a sensible and likely fairly easy request (this feature already exists in AE, so they have the code for it already) is ignored for ten years?

As to the idea of having a tally of every feature request Adobe has received over the past XX years etc...

I can't understand what the problem is. I am not suggesting that this information needs to be made public (although it would probably quell my frustration a lot), my point is that such a thing *should already exist*. It is how *every ticket system works*. If you've ever worked with any other form of customer satisfaction or complaints or similar department, the manager *does* have a way of monitoring those exact things:

we'd need to have a tally of every feature request Adobe has received over the past decade along with how many times each was filed, and compare that to every new feature Adobe has implemented over that same time period.

Yes, this exactly. This is specifically the job of the management in those departments, so either those tallies exist or they don't. If they exist, they aren't being used effectively. If they don't exist, their management should be fired wholesale, today. I wouldn't run a 7-11 if there was no checks being used by management to effectively monitor customer complaints.

I find it very hard to believe that this is operating effectively at Adobe. The forums are the only way we, the users can observe this information and if you look at the forums, you will find many, many issues with Adobe software that show problems being blatantly ignored for years. I can't recall all the exact points and I don't make a point of hunting issues like this (because it isn't my job), but the last 3 things I encountered here on the forums were like this. Radial blur was 10 years, a problem with PS actions was running at 6 years, (another problem with the way PS handles default names in Premiere has been there since day 1 and is not on the radar for being fixed...) problems with nested sequences and track matte key was also in the decade range. I don't keep track of all the things I look for help in the Adobe forums and fail to find answers, but there's probably 15-20 per year that I do look for. I haven't come across a bug in Adobe yet that hasn't already been discovered and discussed.

Because of the nature of my job, I only end up spending serious time with Premiere about every 2-3 months or so, but around half of the problems I encounter fall into this category. I'm a much stronger Photoshop user and most of the problems I encounter there, I can work around via scripting. Premiere doesn't have scripting. If you are a serious Adobe user, I find it difficult to believe that you don't also regularly encounter problems. Most of the time, if the bug existed before CC, it's still ignored even now. There are occasional bug fixes that are fixed in CC but not in CS6, but for the most part, they are just swept under the rug.

It is more common for me to find a thread that says "Adobe is aware of the issue and there will be no fix".

It's extremely important to remember exactly what we are talking about here. Adobe is premium, industry grade software that comes with a premium price tag (even more-so after CC), so I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that there is an effective problem solving strategy or at least some level of feedback. When I am told "there will be no fix", I at least want some level of reason. I do a bit of coding myself as well (web coding and C++) and I cannot comprehend a workflow that doesn't involve some level of analysis/evaluation. If Adobe makes a statement as "bold" as "there will be no fix", I do expect to know exactly why. It is unreasonable for there to be an answer of "there will be no fix" *only* if there is no valid reason for it.

"I don't feel like it" is not an acceptable reason for neglecting bugs and omissions in expensive professional grade software packages.

[excited_Genie16B8]

In what universe does it make sense to you that Adobe does have someone monitoring Feature Requests, yet a sensible and likely fairly easy request (this feature already exists in AE, so they have the code for it already) is ignored for ten years?

That's just not sufficient evidence to support your conclusion.  At best, you could say that the Feature Request system has thus far been unsuccessful in getting this feature implemented.

so either those tallies exist or they don't. If they exist, they aren't being used effectively.

That may be.  But to draw that conclusion, one would need to know those tallies.

I don't.  But since you're making the claim, I have to conclude that you do.  So again I ask...mind sharing?

[eschelar]

No Jim, you're misunderstanding.

I'm taking the forums and discussions as evidence alone. I say that the onus on Adobe to prove that they are taking these things seriously, not on me to prove that they aren't. It's plainly evident that they are not since that is the discussion we are having and the thread we are having it in.

In this thread, we are talking about a feature request that has been active for near (probably over) a decade. You only need to google this issue to find many other places where this particular feature request has been discussed and has been absent since discussions started in... on my google search page, the earliest discussion of this feature is 2007. That's just the first page.

I don't feel a need to search any longer.

You are correct that we would need to _know_ those tallies in order to make a judgment as to how Adobe is doing, but we cannot know this. We can only hope that those tallies exist and someone is paying attention to them. If that were the case, then it would make sense that older queries would be addressed with somewhat greater urgency than 10 years... Especially when it's a simple port of a function from AE to Prem.

It is not my job to babysit Adobe to take care of long-standing omissions, bugs and feature requests. But when I come on Adobe's own forums week after week and month after month and see ancient discussions like this one that are still untouched even with the very latest version of CC, I am left with only one logical conclusion.

So are you, but you're not reaching the same conclusion, so I can only assume that there's a problem with your logic.

The evidence is plain. The problem exists and has existed for over a decade. It has been discussed many times. It has been brought to Adobe's attention many times. Yet it has been ignored.

I am also aware that many companies have a policy (this is particularly bad for MS products) where problems are only addressed based on how many people have mentioned them, rather than evaluating the problems themselves. This is a course of foolishness.

Anyone with half a brain can understand that the more complex an issue is, the less likely people are to find this problem and the less likely you will have a large volume of people reporting it. Doesn't make it a less serious problem, it just means it's more complex, and it gets less attention. Still, I do expect that competent management would be able to deal with this disparity effectively.

The only evidence I have is the evidence that I can see. And from that evidence, I see problems like this one all over the forums for issues that have remained unsolved for years and are replied to by Adobe saying "this problem is known and will not be addressed".

I have a hard time believing that you spend serious time on this forum and you haven't come across this. Most of the things I have come to this forum to look for have a similar situation. This is because I come to these forums when I have a problem.

If you have a different experience, then I would suggest that it's very likely that you come to these forums for different reasons, so you are not spending time looking at problems that currently exist in the software. That also means that you are likely using different software for different purposes. No, you're not going to come across problems with Adobe actions if all you ever do is do brightness and contrast adjustments on family photos. No, you're not going to come across problems with Premiere fumbling around with nested sequences and track mattes if all you ever do is put a title on a couple of GoPro clips from the family.

[excited_Genie16B8]

No Jim, you're misunderstanding.

I think you are.

I'm taking the forums and discussions as evidence alone.

I know.  I'm saying that's insufficient evidence to support your claims.  You don't have enough data to make these claims.

Put another way, you don't know what you're talking about.  And people who clearly don't know what they're talking about are best ignored.

I presume that's not your goal.  My goal was to try and change your tack to something more productive.

[eschelar]

Dude, my project is complete and rendered and has already picked up a few thousand views. Don't worry yourself about my productivity. Worry about productivity *you pay for* - which is Adobe's productivity. I've done three other projects since then.

Adobe on the other hand still hasn't responded to ten year old discussions about this missing feature in Premiere.

The irony is that I just found out about Hitfilm's Ignite Express, which is a plugin package which works in Premiere Pro and... contains radial blur. Adobe needs to hang their head in shame. The biggest part of the irony is that all Hitfilm needed to do to embarrass Adobe was to look at the forums for features that Adobe has been ignoring for years... They made a list and built a plugins package. The full package contains 160 functions. The free package contains 90 or so.

As to my not knowing what I'm talking about, that's a point that *you* haven't proven. You also haven't contributed any reasoning to my original argument.

My evidence is that there are forum posts discussing this exact feature going back to 2007. My point is that Adobe has ignored this. My support for that argument is that this feature was requested many times before and has been discussed publicly at length in Adobe's forums and elsewhere. I gave a 3rd party as my evidence because you don't have to rely on my own word, you can google it yourself and have fully independently verified information.

Please feel free to demonstrate why you feel this is insufficient evidence.

Further, I suggest that the correct way to administrate a feedback system is to create a list of features and mark down their age, number of responders and the evaluated response by management. This would be an internal system of course, so would not be available to the public. However, the *EVIDENCE* that such a system was in place and was working properly would be that there would not be *numerous* threads throughout Adobe's forums describing problems that have existed for a decade or more.

Additionally, for those problems that were being left alone, there would be a simple evaluated response that people with access to the internal records could refer to to say "yes, we know about that problem, but we decided to leave it out of Premiere because we're afraid of the letter R, which is a rational and sensible reason..." or something.

This thread is one example, but I gave others too. For example, the use of a literal naming structure for layers rather than a system call type naming structure to insulate actions from language differences is a problem. It has been discussed many times over the past ten years and Adobe's official response to it is that they will not address this problem. There are plenty of others and it's not my job to show you them all while holding your hand. You're taking issue with my statement that this is the case and I have provided two examples, so it's now up to *you* to prove me wrong.

If you think this system *does* exist and you think it *is* working, then demonstrate why you think that and provide supporting evidence. Specifically, you can show how Adobe has responsibly responded to problems like the one we have been discussing which is over a decade old... and in a timely fashion... and responded with quality reasons as to why it has been ignored or omitted for such a long time if that is the case. If you want to say something is false, you can't simply say that it's wrong because you can't be bothered to do any research.

I've done my bit.

[joe.unsworth]

Reading this thread was painful - the bickering is absolutely beyond me. This is a forum where people should be raising issues, and finding solutions. Primarily, the Adobe staff should be taking note and escalating.

Eschelar has an extremely valid point that this is a feature missing from Premiere. I work in user experience for a major corporation and my number one job is monitoring user feedback and understanding how we can do better. It's not rocket science. I too have been wanting radial blur in Premiere for years - and it's still not a feature. Yes, it's in After Effects - but that's beyond the point. I don't want to link to AE. I don't want to have to use CPU rendering. I want to be able to work solely in PrPro, using my GPU to its full advantage, and not having to rely on dynamic link. 

Coming from a UX expert, the problem is simple: give us radial blur in Premiere. The fact that this still does not exist, and has been discussed in forums for almost 20 years, is astonishing. Let's maybe have someone from Adobe escalate this, instead of arguing with me about how I don't know what I'm talking about, as has been done with others further up the thread. 

[Ann Bens]

Asking for a feature here on this user to user forum is pointless.

If you want a feature implemented fill out a feature request.

Premiere Pro: Hot (1864 ideas) – Adobe video & audio apps

This feedback page is monitored by Adobe engineers.

[matthewh45028019]

YES, YES, YES! I'm amazed that PP does not have an option for radial blur! Such a simple thing. Directional blur is great for adding blur to pans and tilts, but radial blur is needed for zooms! The solution should not be, "well, you can do it in AE!" Oh, wonderful, so I gotta pay $20/mo for ONE effect that I want that PP doesn't have? I used to have AE, but the reality is I don't really need it enough to justify another $20/mo. Definitely not just for radial blur. Come on Adobe!