-
How Apple Has Changed the Paradigm of Editing
I baited you all, my post is really a question. A lot of people and of course Apple itself is saying it has changed the paradigm of editing. I am not sure I understand what they have done that is so revolutionary.
The software still follows the same basic drop clips in a timeline format of editing. Many features have been taken away but nothing completely new and unheard of has been added. Nothing as revolutionary as when non-linear moved from the Steenbeck to a computer, or the creation of DVDs.
The only game changing thing I see that they did is create a product without input from the end user, and dictated to the end user how they should create. This is more of a change in the software sales paradigm as opposed to the editing paradigm.
So I plead with all the Apple apologists to enlighten me to what I have missed. Magnetic timeline, background rendering, audition, 64-bit support and similar minor feature tweezes are not acceptable answers.
-
16 Replies
-
christ but I’ll say this much – if i never hear the words ‘magnetic timeline’ for the rest of my life it will not be too soon.
wanky consumer branding balls of a phrase.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[MIke Guidotti] “I baited you all, my post is really a question. A lot of people and of course Apple itself is saying it has changed the paradigm of editing. I am not sure I understand what they have done that is so revolutionary.
The software still follows the same basic drop clips in a timeline format of editing. Many features have been taken away but nothing completely new and unheard of has been added.
See this post. While it sort of looks like it does at first glance, FCP X doesn’t have conventional tracks (stacked linear containers for clips that run the full length of the sequence) besides the primary storyline. This is a pretty significant difference.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
Ah but they’ve changed the names of everything – which after all is the really important part.
I mean, doesn’t it make you feel all warm inside and just like a real editor to know you’re cutting in a “primary storyline” and all the rest of it? I just can’t get enough of that stuff – finally I feel validated!
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Not to nit-pick, but Steenbeck is a linear editing environment. You cannot go to any frame instantly. You must run linearly through the roll to get to an edit point.
-
Talking of paradigm shifts, here’s what I keep expecting to see in an FCP update: some spectacular update to storyboard editing in the browser.
As it stands: Icon view, arrange clips (left to right, top to bottom), drag into the timeline. It’s been in FCP for ever but hasn’t been developed at all.
I’m not the only kid with a 27″ monitor. How about an infinitely zoomable space with filmstrips on it filling the whole screen as a way to start a rough cut? Think of the possibilities with gestures/trackpad/ipad control – draw a circle around clips to group them, pinch to zoom, command-circle to make a timeline.
I find keywords utterly useless as a meaningful organisational tool – I’m a visual person, that’s why I work in video. Give me a y-axis and 2 whole dimensions, with a 1-dimensional timeline for finishing.
While we’re at it, how about a spatial view for output as well? A nodal compressor with access to all FCP effects and motion templates.
Out.
-
Not sure if you’ve played with the software yet, but the metadata features are totally revolutionary. The tagging and keyword system to organize, search, and access footage quickly and efficiently is very cool. You can even keyword tag a selection of footage, replacing the wonky sub-clip feature. It changes the entire way you import and access your data.
Also high on my list of wow factors is the overall integration. The “Send To” feature in FCP was always really awful. Motion and FCPX feel like companion programs for the first time ever, both in GUI and how quickly you send things between them. Not just opening projects as sequences, Motion can create custom FCP text, transitions, and effects. Save in Motion and it instantly appears in your Effects browser in FCPX ready to use. You can edit parameters directly in FCP or right click to bounce back to Motion.
Color correction matcher is really slick — plugins that did the same thing used to be insanely expensive. Logic Audio plugins a big plus.
I’m still trying to figure out the intricacies of the Magnetic timeline, but it’s very bizarre to throw out the “track” system that has been the paradigm since… well… forever with software NLEs. A lot of people are complaining that it’s too simple, but the more I poke around I’m not sure I agree… a track based system is a lot easier to understand. Clip connections, Compound sequences, the new Gap system, Duplicating Storylines… it’s all very different. If throwing “tracks” out the window isn’t a paradigm shift I’m not sure what possibly could be. Also love the visual re-timing indicators.
The well documented missing pro features are a legitimately huge concern, but short of going all Minority Report on the interface, this is about as different of a NLE as I’ve seen.
JONATHAN DORTCH
BLACK WOLF CREATIVE -
[Jonathan Dortch] “Also high on my list of wow factors is the overall integration.”
Let’s not get carried away here. You can’t yet actually send anything to Motion 5 other than the built in templates so for the time being at least the “send to” feature in FCP7 trumps anything FCPX can do on this front. Obviously (?) this will change pretty soon, but you know, just for the record.
Plus I think it’s pushing it a bit to suggest the Color board gives you anything as good as say Colorista – certainly way below the capabilities of the free app we used to have called Color!
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
I had a long conversation with some editing colleagues last night (all of us use Final Cut and Premiere Pro, one of uses Avid MC, so there’s no bias here). The conclusion I came away with was this:
Apple clearly sees online as the future of video broadcasting, and doesn’t see room for trained professionals to provide content. And for that purpose, X probably works just fine. Apple’s core customer base (consumers who love iOS) are generally accepting of the iCNN/YouTube level of production, and don’t care about the why and the how of colour balancing, audio mixing, and (most importantly) good editing.
From what I’ve read about X (I haven’t used it yet), it appears to be fast and efficient at basic editing tasks. This mindset makes sense, when consumers just want to get a video they just shot on their iPhone “on air” as quickly as possible. And X will make the consumer feel like they’re using professional tools (Apple is, much like Coca-Cola, great at selling a lifestyle).
Because the X workflow lacks the ability to collaborate with multiple users and software applications, it appears counter-productive to me (and the work I produce). I’m glad I’m familiar with many editing tools, so I can pick and choose what works best for the task at hand. X might end up in the toolbag someday, but right now, it’s just a consumer “app.”
-
You should use the program first before jumping to any conclusion. It feels stripped down, especially compared to how robust FCP5-7 became, but I think it’s silly to try and interpret Apple’s entire market strategy based on FCPX 1.0. There are some insanely powerful elements to the software. I like that Apple is thinking outside the paradigm of how we expect an NLE to be organized, and pushing native a Prores timeline is a good thing IMO.
You can actually share projects pretty easily in my limited testing so far. “Events” keep all of your media organized on your source drive. “Projects” save to a different folder. Transfer the “Event” and the “Project” folder and all of your stuff is there. I’ll be testing transferring a “Project” folder to a different user while referencing an “Event” on network storage later, but I see no reason why that won’t work. There is an entire subchapter in the manual about duplicating and sharing Events.
It’s impossible to wrap your head around a lot of the new stuff in FCPX without taking it for a test drive. Just consider it a beta and keep FCP7 rolling.
JONATHAN DORTCH
BLACK WOLF CREATIVE -
Sending clips from a sequence to Motion was always a huge pain in the ass. I never even really saw the point except for keying, which Motion was never very good at anyway. I’ve done it a few times for using the stabilizer, but FCPX has that feature now.
Much more of a fan of using Motion to create elements for use in FCP. Text, titles, transitions, effects, filters. I think they nailed it this time around. The transition is seamless, and saving from Motion doesn’t send a stupid .motn file to be rendered in my FCP sequence, it sends a native effect into the effect browser that can be adjusted in FCPX. Very cool.
JONATHAN DORTCH
BLACK WOLF CREATIVE
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up