-
Premiere’s Automagical Timeline
One of the most talked about features of FCP X is that fact that you can throw anything at a timeline without worrying about tracks and patching and the rest of the hassle that comes with “conventional” NLEs.
I wonder how many editors overlook the fact that this option is also there in Premiere. (I know that I keep forgetting about it!)
Grab any clip from the browser and drag it to the upper centre of the Program Monitor, at which point the Overlay option becomes available, which will automatically ensure that the added material, both video and audio, does not overwrite anything in the timeline.
The video and audio will be edited into the lowest/highest tracks available respectively. If there is no room available on existing tracks, then new tracks will be created.
Conceptually there is no difference between this and hitting the Q key in FCP X. The only practical difference thereafter is that the clips are not “connected” to the timeline in the FCP X sense, but otherwise it is the same function.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
27 Replies
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “Grab any clip from the browser and drag it to the upper centre of the Program Monitor, at which point the Overlay option becomes available, which will automatically ensure that the added material, both video and audio, does not overwrite anything in the timeline.
The video and audio will be edited into the lowest/highest tracks available respectively. If there is no room available on existing tracks, then new tracks will be created.
Conceptually there is no difference between this and hitting the Q key in FCP X. The only practical difference thereafter is that the clips are not “connected” to the timeline in the FCP X sense, but otherwise it is the same function.
“Uh…
Reading that kinda does NOT seem like the “conceptual” equivalent of …
“Tap Q.”
“Tap Q” creates (or adds to) a magnetic assembly that’s cohesive, persistent, and (as a unit) often WAY more useful than merely the sum of it’s magnetically connected parts.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Bill Davis] “and (as a unit) often WAY more useful than merely the sum of it’s magnetically connected parts.”
What the heck does that mean?
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
3 clips in your primary.
On the second you connect two cutaway interview segments. Each of those gets embellished with four connected elements like graphic, titles, bugs or logo, etc.
That second primary clip is an assembly of 10 user-fixed content timing relationships – by virtue of the vertical magnetic nature of X.
Drag and drop clip 2 behind clip 3 is basically moving all 10 things with one simple action.
Horizontal Magnetism in the timeline” leverages” the efficiency of the vertical magnetic assemblies by auto connecting them without gaps or issues.
I’d call that a system where the practical efficiency of the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
FWIW.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
You’re talking about something slightly different if I have understood your comment.
All I was pointing out, more for the benefit of Premiere users who also use FCP X but might not be aware of this functional similarity, is that dragging a clip to Overlay in Premiere has the exact same result as hitting Q on the FCP X keyboard.
Incidentally, using Group in Premiere creates a vertical connected relationship that is functionally identical to connected clips in FCP X. It’s arguably a little more flexible since it’s not relying on a single clip to form the basis of the connection, though I suspect I will find it hard to convince you of that! (Of course, just like connected clips in FCP X, a Group relationship is not for life and can be assigned and reassigned at will.)
I do wonder whether perhaps the “uniqueness” of the FCP X timeline doesn’t sometimes get a little oversold. That’s not a criticism of it – I love working with it! – just an attempt to get some perspective on the subject.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Simon Ubsdell] “dragging a clip to Overlay in Premiere has the exact same result as hitting Q on the FCP X keyboard.”
I should perhaps expand on that a bit.
In every respect the two operations are the same, except one.
In FCP X the Q action both adds layers where required and creates a connection between the added clips and the clip in the Primary Storyline. In Premiere the action adds layers where required but does not create a connection to anything. However, as I pointed out above, this can be done manually using the Group command.
So surely FCP X is the superior method because it avoids the need to manually create a connection?
Well, I would contend, and I think it would be very hard for anyone to prove the opposite, that in the overwhelming majority of cases the editor’s intention here is not to create a connection but simply to place a clip at a particular point in time. Of course, the auto-connection is a very useful default if you are placing titles that go with a specific picture or sound effects that sync to a specific frame. But I don’t think anyone can argue that these represent anything like a majority of the edits you are performing when you use the Q function.
Am I arguing that Premiere is superior here? No, not that either, though I would suggest that Premiere’s Group option offers a functionality that goes considerably beyond what you can do in FCP X with connected clips alone. Conversely, as Bill was I think pointing out, shuffling the vertical order of connected clips is much easier in FCP X. And so on.
I think it’s healthy with whatever applications we are using to celebrate the strengths, critique the weaknesses and at the same time acknowledge the similarities – as in this case.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Simon Ubsdell] “I do wonder whether perhaps the “uniqueness” of the FCP X timeline doesn’t sometimes get a little oversold. That’s not a criticism of it – I love working with it! – just an attempt to get some perspective on the subject.”
I actually don’t care much about “uniqueness” per se.
What I care about is efficiency. Particularly when I have work to do.
This forum has spent tens of thousands of words debating how to save repetitive keystrokes and whether it’s possible to reduce three actions to two.
Here’s a shining example of that.
If AVID derserves praise for the efficiency of its trimming approach (and it appears to well deserve that from all accounts) X perhaps to deserve similar praise for inventing a system that reduces so much friction in Clip relationship-building in a set and forget fashion.
Your original post in this thread seemed to be implying that Premiere Pro has a function similar to “command Q” in its functions.
My suggestion is that without the rest of the vertical and horizontal magnetic environment in play – I can’t easily see how it can be more than a pale similarity.
Every NLE “inserts” – only X inserts into a magnetic environment.
But if I’m mis-informed about this and Premiere is, in fact, just as capable – making both horizontal and vertical magnetic behavior “no better” than a tracked system that doesn’t have it, I’d be happy to hear how Premiere removes editing friction in its fashion.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Bill Davis] “Every NLE “inserts” – only X inserts into a magnetic environment. “
This is incorrect. In Premiere, if I have clips on V1 and V2 and I insert something in the middle of the V1 clip, it splits both the V1 and V2 clips and slides them both to the right, as well as everything else that follows.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Bill Davis] “Every NLE “inserts” – only X inserts into a magnetic environment. “
I would actually counter that X doesn’t not do this correctly. For example, if I have a 10 sec clip on the primary storyline. Attached to that is a secondary storyline with 3 clips inside. As a group they are pinned at the head of that secondary storyline. If I insert a new shot in the middle of the Primary storyline clip, it does nothing to the secondary storyline. If these were supposed to stay in sync with something on the primary, they are now out. So I have to take extra steps in X to prevent this. Therefore, efficiency is entirely dependent on the process.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Bill Davis] “I actually don’t care much about “uniqueness” per se.”
Now, Bill, put your hand on your heart and tell me that you really, really mean that.
????
[Bill Davis] “Every NLE “inserts” – only X inserts into a magnetic environment. “
I’m not talking about insert editing. Overlay is quite different – see above.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Simon Ubsdell] “Conceptually there is no difference between this and hitting the Q key in FCP X. The only practical difference thereafter is that the clips are not “connected” to the timeline in the FCP X sense, but otherwise it is the same function.”
le sigh… Here we go again.
Nope. Not the same function at all.
Putting new clips into the timeline and having other clips “move out of the way” (unless overwriting is the specific intent) is a basic attribute of the so-called “magnetic timeline,” and it works whether you are connecting or inserting a clip.**
The Premiere process of putting a clip into the timeline without regard for track patching that you are describing is similar to FCPX in its end result, although rather different in how it accomplishes that result.
The Q, or “connect” command, however, has the specific purpose of connecting the clip to the primary storyline (strictly speaking, to another clip in the primary storyline). The “move out of the way” behavior is incidental to that main connecting function. Just as “W-Insert” specifically inserts the clip into the primary storyline, with the “move out of the way” behavior being incidental to the specific intent. Only “Overwrite” short-circuits the magnetic behavior, by design.
So the Premiere function you’re describing, while superficially similar to FCPX’s “magnetic” timeline behavior, is not at all the same – conceptually or practically – as the “connect clip” function.
**Side note, but relevant to this conversation:
I find that most people get hung up on thinking about the “magnetic timeline” as just another way of describing insert editing with ripple. Magnetic in the sense of clips being attracted to one another. But magnets repel one another when they are near the same poles. And that, to me, is the real point of the magnetic timeline: clips are repelled. They move away from each other and make room, rather than overwrite or simply bump and yell “clip collision!” ala FCP7 or Premiere.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up