Storyist Journey

[rewrite]

Here's a rather long version of how I found Storyist, why I appreciate what Steve Shepard has created, and how I hope to go forward using Storyist.

 

FADE IN:

 

FINAL DRAFT - 2005

 

Although loaded with a comfortable feature set, Final Draft contains a large number of bugs that interfere with its functionality. I am (repeatedly bangs head on desk) frustrated and perplexed that Final Draft continues to feel "as if it is running in an invisible Macintosh Plus emulator ported to Linux and running in OS X's X11 environment." I start to regularly visit VersionTracker, MacUpdate, and various online forums to rant and rave about the lack of a native Cocoa screenplay application. Yes I've become spoiled by OS X... and "care a lot about the user experience of an app I'm going to stare at for hours on end while trying to do my best creative work."

 

MELLEL - 2005

 

An odd looking application to be sure. But it's developed in Cocoa, has an outline pane, paragraph styles that can be configured with style follows style, and keyboard shortcuts. I become a beta tester and create a screenplay template that enables a series of Scene Headings to be grouped within a Sequence. It is my rather clunky attempt at wrestling with the same concept that Stu Maschwitz will later describe in his blog post The State of Screenwriting Software. Unfortunately there is no screenplay element meta-data that exports with the text. After importing into Final Draft, I must step through the paragraphs and assign each one it's screenplay element. This is not the solution I'm looking for.

 

The search begins... to find software that successfully handles the non-linear aspect of structuring a story, without being locked in by Scene Headings.

 

CELTX - 2005

 

I start exploring Celtx. I want very much to like it, but am not keen on the idea of leveraging the Mozilla platform as a writing tool. It gets a lot of things right, conceptually, but it's notecards have the same failing as Final Draft's -- the mistake of thinking that Scene Headings are a useful level of detail in an overview. As it develops I periodically download the latest version, but it never grabs my interest.

 

GREENLIGHT - 2005

 

After writing a comment at VersionTracker I am contacted by a professional screenwriter who also visits Cafe Rant to throw exclamation points against the Final Draft wall. He's so frustrated that he decides to write the application of his dreams for Mac OS X. I offer to help with beta testing Greenlight. The alpha screenshots look promising and his descriptions include some innovative ideas. He too wants to work "in terms of sequences and scenes", rather than being locked in by Final Draft's structure of Scene Heading = Notecard = Outline Element. But eventually the workload of his writing career prevents any further development and Greenlight is abandoned.

 

ULYSSES - 2005

 

A frustrated Final Draft beta tester writes a detailed post at the Ulysses forums, and strongly urges the developers to introduce a dedicated screenplay application that takes into account all the lessons they've learned creating Ulysses. I jump into the discussion hoping to add momentum, build a mockup of "Ulysses: Screenplay Edition", and submit screenshots. Unfortunately nothing is developed.

 

MONTAGE - 2006

 

A dedicated Cocoa screenplay application arrives! I am enthusiastic, hopeful, and become a beta tester... but eventually lose interest in it's design. It has a nice implementation of Smart Views for putting together script versions, revisions, and breakdowns -- based on draft status or keyword search criteria. But Scene Headings still dictate the level of detail in the Scene Navigation and Outline overviews.

 

SCRIVENER - 2007

 

With standard screenplay formatting, Tab and Return key shortcuts, export to Final Draft -- and the ability to have multiple Scene Headings contained within a document -- Scrivener becomes the solution I'm looking for. I now work in Scrivener for as long as possible before exporting the project to Final Draft.

 

FINAL DRAFT - 2009

 

In the spirit of Monty Python... "And Now for Something Completely Ironic!"

 

Eight years after the introduction of Mac OS X, Final Draft finally updates it's text rendering to -- how shall I say this politely? -- The 21st Century. It actually feels like a good native Mac application. However, Scene Headings still have a stranglehold on the writer. Which brings us to...

 

THE STATE OF SCREENWRITING SOFTWARE - 2010

 

Stu Maschwitz grabs Final Draft "by the notecards" in his ProLost blog The State of Screenwriting Software. The entire article and two pages of comments are a recommended read, but here's what I'd like to focus on...

 

 

...the thing that absolutely flabbergasts me about Final Draft is that, after all these years, it still reflects not one ounce of understanding of how screenwriters think about organizing their work. Almost every screenwriting application has a "notecards" feature, where scenes are displayed as virtual 3x5" notecards that can be color coded, annotated, and rearranged. This is meant to emulate the age old screenwriter practice of avoiding actual work by dicking around with 3x5" notecards. The problem is that Final Draft, like most screenwriting apps, assigns one notecard to each slugline, rendering the entire idea completely worthless. When writers use cards, they might break things down as far as one scene per card -- but a scene usually contains multiple sluglines.

 

[The Bourne Supremacy example]

 

The point is, sluglines and index cards have nothing to do with one another. In order for index cards to be of any use, they must be able to contain an arbitrary amount of screenplay. What this buys you is the ability to organize by cards at a high level and at a macro level -- where cards become scenes. Real scenes, not sluglines. Scenes the way a writer thinks about scenes.

 

[end quote]

 

The author goes on to explain how Scrivener has provided a solution, and then closes with... "So I write this in the hope that Final Draft takes a stab at a folder or notecard system that makes one lick of sense. If you don't, someone else will."

 

ADOBE STORY - 2010

 

For collaborative projects I am keeping one eye on Adobe Story -- currently under development and available for preview.

 

FADE IN - 2010

 

A web site appears announcing Fade In as "a better screenwriting mousetrap", but thus far nothing more than an announcement.

 

STORYIST - 2010

 

Due to an unusual twist in the Space Time Continuum, I am not aware of Storyist until seeing a reader's comment to the ProLost article... "Has everything you need and nothin you don't. I'm always surprised to find how few people know about it. Storyist is just an undiscovered jewel."

 

Released the same year as Scrivener, somehow it never crossed my path. I download the application and spend a weekend going through the User Guide, video tutorials, and User Forums. My initial impression is that I prefer Storyist to Scrivener, mostly because of the interface design and collection of features. As the days go by, spending additional time with the application confirms those impressions more and more. My only hesitation is that Storyist is currently using the structure of Scene Heading = Notecard = Outline Element. And so I begin to explore possibilities...

 

SCENE GROUPS

 

Julia Grace's template Screenplay with Scene Groups is a partial solution. By grouping Scene Headings under a Scene Group, one can work with Scene Groups in Outline or Storyboard view and not have to wade through the multiplicity of Scene Headings. I say partial solution because this template introduces a Scene Group element that is outside industry standard formatting, and must eventually be deleted from the script. In addition, the Scene Groups template provides a two level structure within the Script. But to work with methods of screenplay organization that include Sections -- such as Act 1, Setup, Act 2, Midpoint, Act 3 -- requires a minimum of three levels.

 

SCRIPTS AS SUB-SCRIPTS

 

Using the existing structure of Storyist, a better solution would be to use multiple Scripts within the Project -- each Script could be used as a Scene, each Scene contains it's series of Scene Headings. This avoids having a non-standard screenplay element such as the above Scene Groups in the exported document. After selecting the Scripts Collection, each Scene is a notecard in Storyboard view or an element in Outline view. I understand that a future version of Storyist will enable moving documents from Script to Script. With that in place you could drag and drop Scene Headings from one Scene (Script) to another.

 

Of course, working in this way introduces the issue of Export. As it is now, Storyist exports multiple Scripts as separate Final Draft files. Obviously these can be combined in Final Draft using Copy and Paste, but my feature request would be to merge selected Scripts in the Export process similar to the Compile Screenplay feature in Scrivener.

 

However, organizing with film Sections requires more than two levels. So perhaps the best solution altogether is to have folders within the Script -- used for nesting Scene Headings within Scenes, and nesting Scenes within Sections.

 

I realize I'm re-inventing the wheel here. Because I currently use Scrivener for this process, I understand I'm simply describing how that works there. And many people reading this will likely recognize that. I'm just mentally working my way from the current Storyist design, to something I'd really enjoy working with!

 

STORYIST STRUCTURE

 

I've read a small amount of criticism from people who state their objections to being forced to work with a so-called "rigid structure" of Scene Sheets, Plot Points, Character Sheets, etc. These folks obviously didn't spend much time exploring Storyist. What I found was that the user can decide which if any of these features they would like to use. You can even remove entire Collections if you have no need for them in a particular project. Or add those Collections back in, if later you decide you'd like to work with them.

 

CUSTOMIZATION

 

The Scene, Plot, Character and Setting sheets are customizable in terms of fields. I understand that an upcoming version will support customization of fonts and headers etc. I look forward to having that enhanced design. I'd also like to customize the fonts for Notecard and Outline text (my aging eyes). And to have a user preference for turning off the Notecard lines. Hopefully these additions can be included in an update.

 

CORK BOARD

 

Aesthetically I've always preferred a minimal look in order to maximize the workspace (especially on my MacBook) and diminish distractions for the eyes. For example, the first thing I usually configure is to hide the Tool Bar. Although I appreciate the cork board analogy, one of the first things I changed in Scrivener was to turn off the cork board image and replace it with a solid color -- coincidentally almost identical to the background color in Text and Collage view. I would like to see this be a user preference.

 

IN CLOSING

 

Having the ability to think in terms of film Scenes and Sequences -- to move them around during a non-linear writing process, or to drag and drop alternate versions of a script together -- is a feature I find extremely valuable. It's why I use Scrivener as much as possible before taking a project into Final Draft. But I'd like Storyist to be the application I work with prior to Final Draft.

 

Alright then... that is enough... I've written far more than I anticipated going into this. And it's all been done in the spirit of hopefully nudging Storyist in the direction I'd like to see it go. I'm tempted to give it a try on a project using Julia's template, but I think I need more than two levels within the Script -- and so I hesitate. But who knows, I may jump in just to get my fingers wet!

 

Cheers, and thanks for your time...

 

FADE OUT:

[Steve E]

Here's a rather long version of how I found Storyist, why I appreciate what Steve Shepard has created, and how I hope to go forward using Storyist.

And quite a journey it was, Rewrite. Thanks for taking the time.

 

So, if I understand you correctly, your Feature Requests are:

1. Scene Groups in the Project view that are not reflected structurally in the manuscript.

2. Multiple Scripts within a Project (which, I believe, is already possible).

3. You've seconded further customization of sheets.

4. You would like to be able to customize Index cards and Outline text (my eyes are aging too).

5. You'd like a user preference for turning off the Index card lines. (I personally find that they get in the way of the text.)

6. You'd like to be able to change your cork board background to make it less obtrusive.

7. You'd find extremely valuable "the ability to think in terms of film Scenes and Sequences -- to move them around during a non-linear writing process, or to drag and drop alternate versions of a script together". (I think I need a little more explanation for this one.)

 

All good things come to he who waits...or searches.

- Thoth

[marguerite]

Quoting Rewrite:

I'm tempted to give it a try on a project using Julia's template, but I think I need more than two levels within the Script -- and so I hesitate. But who knows, I may jump in just to get my fingers wet!

 

You can get more than two levels with the script if you want them. You'd use the same process that Julia used to create that template, working with the outline levels (up to 9). I don't have time to go over the process again right now, but if you search the forums for "outline level," the instructions should pop up.

 

Glad you found Storyist! Thoth, I think Rewrite wants to add another vote to the existing feature request for dragging/dropping from one script or manuscript to another, to make more effective use of the multiple scripts.

Best,

Marguerite

[rewrite]

Well that must have been my First Draft...

 

My Scene Group and Sub-Script commentary may have been a confusing read. Perhaps I can better describe it another way.

 

I was attempting to discuss two subjects:

 

1) What a document can contain

2) How to organize those documents

 

This is the core element of Stu Maschwitz's article and my multi-year search. Using the definition of "Scene = one or more Scene Headings", the goal is to be able to write a Scene on a single document (notecard). Within Storyist (and Final Draft, Montage, and Celtx) this can not be done. Within Scrivener it can.

 

I was attempting to find a way around this limitation by working with Scene Groups or by using multiple Scripts as Sub-Scripts. But I didn't find either of those to be a solution.

 

The idea of folders within the Script, is an attempt at organizing those documents in a typical film structure, such as Act 1, Setup, Act 2, Midpoint, etc.

 

Hope that helps.

[rewrite]

7. You'd find extremely valuable "the ability to think in terms of film Scenes and Sequences -- to move them around during a non-linear writing process, or to drag and drop alternate versions of a script together". (I think I need a little more explanation for this one.)

Thanks for the feedback Thoth.

 

Using Scrivener as an example -- just because that's what I currently work with -- a Scene document can contain one Scene Heading, or as many Scene Headings as I wish to include. I can have a series of Scenes (documents) nested within a film Section (folder). I can relocate a Scene with a drag/drop of the document, and relocate a Section with a drag/drop of the folder. I can create an alternate version of the script by replacing a Scene or an entire Section. For example, bring in an alternate Ending (Section) to the film, an alternate Opening (Section), etc. And although I have multiple versions of these Scenes/Sections sitting in the Project pane, when I export to Final Draft using Compile Screenplay, I can pick and choose which Scenes/Sections are assembled into a single Final Draft document. Hope that is a clear description. Cheers!

[Steve E]

Using Scrivener as an example -- just because that's what I currently work with -- a Scene document can contain one Scene Heading, or as many Scene Headings as I wish to include. I can have a series of Scenes (documents) nested within a film Section (folder). I can relocate a Scene with a drag/drop of the document, and relocate a Section with a drag/drop of the folder. I can create an alternate version of the script by replacing a Scene or an entire Section. For example, bring in an alternate Ending (Section) to the film, an alternate Opening (Section), etc. And although I have multiple versions of these Scenes/Sections sitting in the Project pane, when I export to Final Draft using Compile Screenplay, I can pick and choose which Scenes/Sections are assembled into a single FD document. Hope that is a clear description. Cheers!

Yes, I see. Some of these elements have already been proposed as Feature Requests. But it's nice to have them all in one place, with a theme.

Thanks.

-Thoth

[rewrite]

You can get more than two levels with the script if you want them. You'd use the same process that Julia used to create that template, working with the outline levels (up to 9). I don't have time to go over the process again right now, but if you search the forums for "outline level," the instructions should pop up.

 

Thank you. I did the search and read several posts related to the use of outline levels. I now understand the underlying structure better and see how a template with additional levels can be done. It is a nice workaround for this situation. But for me the drawback is that each time an export to Final Draft is performed, a person would need to step through the Final Draft script to remove the un-wanted non-standard elements occupying those levels.

 

[channel change]

 

Last night I gave this some more thought while experimenting with Storyist, and observed that using folders (groups) within the Scripts Collection probably weakens the current design. It does for me at least. Aesthetically I think the current icon for Script is better looking and unique compared to the standard folder icon we've been staring at all these years. So on a whim, I created Collections for the film Sections of Act I, Act II, Act III. Obviously if you wanted to have Sub-Sections such as Setup, Midpoint, etc., you would need another solution. But it's nice to see how it might look if multiple Sub-Scripts (or some other name) were used for each Sequence or Scene Group as a container of Scene Headings. Although Steve Shepard has done such a wonderful job with the interface design, he may already have a better solution if this is something he has in mind for Storyist.

 

I've attached a screenshot just for the fun of it...

 

Cheers!

 

screenshot.tiff

[marguerite]

 

Thank you. I did the search and read several posts related to the use of outline levels. I now understand the underlying structure better and see how a template with additional levels can be done. It is a nice workaround for this situation. But for me the drawback is that each time an export to Final Draft is performed, a person would need to step through the Final Draft script to remove the un-wanted non-standard elements occupying those levels.

 

What I did was to create a style to set the outline level (say, Act Name). Then once I wrote the first text and applied that style (Act I), I set the color of the text to white via the Fonts menu and chose Format > Style > Redefine Style (don't have Storyist running at present, so the wording may not be exact). That way, Act I (or whatever) showed up in the Project View, and I could click on it there to navigate to it, but in the manuscript it just looked like an extra blank line. When I exported the file, all that was left was the extra "spacing."

 

If the extra line containing only white on white text will drive you bats, of course, that's not a solution for you. But for me it worked well for drafts, and I'd only bother to hunt it down and remove it for final submission.

 

I'm a novelist, not a screenwriter, so the rest of your feature requests are rather flying over my head. I suspect that you can do some of what you'd like to do already, and other things (like dragging and dropping between scripts) have been on the list for long enough that we can hope a future release will contain them before long. But it never hurts to ask! If nothing else, you'll find out if it's already possible, and that can only be a plus.

Best,

Marguerite

[marguerite]

Thanks for the feedback Thoth.

 

Using Scrivener as an example -- just because that's what I currently work with -- a Scene document can contain one Scene Heading, or as many Scene Headings as I wish to include. I can have a series of Scenes (documents) nested within a film Section (folder). I can relocate a Scene with a drag/drop of the document, and relocate a Section with a drag/drop of the folder. I can create an alternate version of the script by replacing a Scene or an entire Section. For example, bring in an alternate Ending (Section) to the film, an alternate Opening (Section), etc. And although I have multiple versions of these Scenes/Sections sitting in the Project pane, when I export to Final Draft using Compile Screenplay, I can pick and choose which Scenes/Sections are assembled into a single Final Draft document. Hope that is a clear description. Cheers!

The crucial missing piece here, if I read you correctly, is selective export. That is, indeed, an as yet unfulfilled feature request (some of us would like to be able to export just the two chapters with which we are planning to torture our fellow critique group members this month, e.g.). Ditto selective printing.

 

The rest of it I think you can already do. Unless I'm just not "getting" what you are looking for, which may be the case.

Best,

Marguerite

[rewrite]

What I did was to create a style to set the outline level (say, Act Name)...

That's definitely a creative variation with the white text. Congrats on coming up with the idea!

 

For a screenplay document, my preference for Outline Level 1 would be to keep the text black, based on the Scene Heading style, but with Text Alignment set to the right margin. Because I would typically have many of them to remove in the exported Final Draft file, that unique location would make them easy for me to locate.

 

Using an Outline Level to create hierarchical elements like Sequence or Act is exactly what I did when I created a screenplay template for Mellel back in 2005. Part of my search since then has been to find a different solution. Scrivener provided one, and I'm hopeful that Storyist will too, because I would prefer working within it's design.

[rewrite]

The crucial missing piece here, if I read you correctly, is selective export [...] The rest of it I think you can already do.

Yes... I presume that if something similar to multiple Scripts could be used as Sequences or Scene Groups etc., then a selective export process to merge those documents would be a solution. And a drag/drop between "Scripts" would need to be possible in order to move documents between those Sequences. But I have no programming experience, so I genuflect in the direction of Mr. Shepard...

 

 

Cheers!

[rewrite]

A fun observation... After a few hours banging away on my current project in Scrivener, I return to Storyist for further exploration and my reaction is one of... Yes, nice to be back... I like hanging out here.

 

To celebrate my enthusiasm (and Steve Shepard's hard work) I assembled a group of Elite Number Monkeys! Their assignment? To deliver an estimate of future Storyist updates, based on data assembled in the Announcements forum. Here are their findings:

 

Since version 1.2 there have been 19 incremental updates, with a minimum of 7 days, a maximum of 105 days, and an average of 35 days. With those results the Number Monkeys suggest the following are most likely for a version 2.2.2

 

07.31.2010

08.10.2010

10.19.2010

 

Since version 1.2 there have been 6 major updates, with a minimum of 69 days, a maximum of 309 days , and an average of 176 days. With those results the Elite Number Monkeys suggest the following are most likely for a version 2.3

 

06.30.2010

10.15.2010

02.25.2011

 

E.N.M. suggested an alternate pair of dates for version 2.3 -- related to the potentially anomalous gap of time between 1.5 and 2.0 -- the logic being too complex to discuss in this brief synopsis (I was informed with a gaze of indifference).

 

08.27.2010

10.22.2010

 

And for the ever popular Going Out On A Limb category (pun fully intended I was also informed) -- The ENM's suggest the following is most likely for a full version 3.0

 

07.08.2011

 

They've also suggested a marking of the calendar as an appropriate acknowledgment of their fine work (I was informed with a...) well, you get the idea.

[Steve E]

To honor and celebrate that feeling (and Steve Shepard's hard work) I assembled a group of Elite Number Monkeys! Their assignment? To deliver an estimate of future Storyist updates, based on data assembled in the Announcements forum. Here are their findings:...

I salute your number crunchiness, Sir. I had once assembled my own squadron (Troop? Mission? Tribe?) of Elite Number Monkeys for this very purpose. After they patiently explained to me (in a combination of gestures, grunts and chattering noises) that Steve has a life outside of Storyist and so does not produce rollouts in predictable increments of time, they threw their feces at me and stole all my bananas. So much for my management skills (I'm more of a big picture guy anyway).

 

Yours truly,

-Thoth

[rewrite]

...they patiently explained to me (in a combination of gestures, grunts and chattering noises) that Steve has a life outside of Storyist and so does not produce rollouts in predictable increments of time...

CUT TO:

 

A parade of Elite Number Monkeys opening umbrellas as a hard rain begins to fall.

 

FADE TO BLACK:

 

[Steve E]

Ah. Fascinating how narrative styles in different media compare.

The End.

[Steve]

A fun observation... After a few hours banging away on my current project in Scrivener, I return to Storyist for further exploration and my reaction is one of... Yes, nice to be back... I like hanging out here.

 

To celebrate my enthusiasm (and Steve Shepard's hard work) I assembled a group of Elite Number Monkeys! Their assignment? To deliver an estimate of future Storyist updates, based on data assembled in the Announcements forum. Here are their findings:

 

Since version 1.2 there have been 19 incremental updates, with a minimum of 7 days, a maximum of 105 days, and an average of 35 days. With those results the Number Monkeys suggest the following are most likely for a version 2.2.2

 

07.31.2010

08.10.2010

10.19.2010

 

Thanks Rewrite.

 

So ... 2.2.2 is out today - 8/25.

 

Thanks for the analysis, by the way. I hadn't stopped to do the math.

 

And I've read the feature request in this thread with interest. Thanks for taking the time to post them.

 

-Steve

[rewrite]

I just looked at the latest version of Montage, and noticed that it now has an option for multiple Scene Headings per Scene. Editor Preferences has a feature called "Create New Scenes for New Scene Headings". By default this is active, but when turned off you can have multiple Scene Headings within a single Scene document. This enables the Outline view to only show Scenes instead of every single Scene Heading. Montage has no Index Cards feature so no change there.

 

I still have no interest in the overall design of Montage, but just thought I would point this out as an update to my original observations that started this topic.

[Gusmcgee]

I have to second this request. Is nesting folders (without creative work-arounds) on the horizon?