Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Creative Community Conversations An editors two cents

  • Chris Kenny

    June 25, 2011 at 4:04 pm

    [Jamie Franklin] “If people don’t like the way it does things, why is the response always “they just don’t get it”…? “

    He was explicitly using terminology that demonstrated he was thinking of FCP X as a traditional multitrack editor, which it’s simply not. It wasn’t “You must not understand this if you don’t like it”, it was “You must not understand this because you’re talking about it in terms that seem to demonstrate you don’t understand it”.


    Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

    You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

  • Chris Kenny

    June 25, 2011 at 4:06 pm

    [Aindreas Gallagher] “The hubris and pomposity of the “solutions” proposed by Randy in this ludicrous piece of software just about take my breath away.”

    You haven’t actually advanced a substantive argument here. All you’ve done is point out that it’s different, and claim that it’s worse without explaining why.


    Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

    You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

  • Aindreas Gallagher

    June 25, 2011 at 4:15 pm

    Oh give me a break. Chris, in reference to V1 and V2 I am never Chris, never do you hear me, never going to refer to them as primary and secondary storyline. If I did, I would have to walk up to a mirror and punch myself in the face. What’s V4 anyway? Postscript? What’s A4? Whispers off stage?

    The software is full to brim with the most stupid, stupid shite.

    And so again, having V2, that’s right, I’m going to marker it directly onto the LCD, having clips laid onto V2 glue themselves to clips on V1, that’s right – V1, having the software gluing stuff together for me, the guy holding the mouse trying to have a think, is stupid, grandly pompous of randy, horribly misguided, deeply annoying and yes, it is truly, truly dumb.

    I’ll say it again Chris and I want you to think about it: FCP7 wasn’t a multitrack editor, editing is a multitrack operation.

    http://www.ogallchoir.net
    promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

  • Chris Kenny

    June 25, 2011 at 4:25 pm

    [Aindreas Gallagher] “Oh give me a break. Chris, in reference to V1 and V2 I am never Chris, never do you hear me, never going to refer to them as primary and secondary storyline. If I did, I would have to walk up to a mirror and punch myself in the face. What’s V4 anyway? Postscript? What’s A4? Whispers off stage?”

    Now you’re simply writing as if “storyline” is the new word Apple is using for “track”, tracks and storylines are equivalent, and I’m giving you a hard time merely just for using the wrong synonym. But this is not true. The area above the primary storyline (what you’re calling V2) is not the secondary storyline; it’s an area for things that are linked to clips on the primary storyline. Those things can be secondary storylines (which are basically nested sequences that can be edited inline), compound clips (nested sequences that aren’t edited inline), normal clips, text generators, etc.


    Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

    You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

  • Aindreas Gallagher

    June 25, 2011 at 4:31 pm

    I gave you a very specific argument Chris, you failed to notice it, I’m going to repeat it.

    FCP7 wasn’t a multitrack editor, editing is a multitrack operation, editing systems are an expression of that truth, or they were until that intergalactic moron Randy wrote the words ‘primary storyline – rad!’ drunk on a napkin and had the insight of his life, in how he might go about making another infinite loop revolution to sweep up the world, or to look at it another way, he dissapeared up his own fundament and destroyed a piece of software we all rely heavily on.

    http://www.ogallchoir.net
    promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

  • Aindreas Gallagher

    June 25, 2011 at 4:36 pm

    Yeah and you know what, that is all dumb as crazy town dumb. How in the hell am I supposed to work with a single track of video sliding around itself and a secondary track that attaches to the clip below it the minute I lay it down?

    So I’ll say it for the third time Chris: FCP7 wasn’t a multitrack editor, editing is a multitrack operation, all editing systems are an expression of that essential truth. Or they were until the grinning idiot of all time Randy walked in the room.

    http://www.ogallchoir.net
    promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

  • Chris Kenny

    June 25, 2011 at 4:42 pm

    [Aindreas Gallagher] “FCP7 wasn’t a multitrack editor, editing is a multitrack operation”

    I disagree with this statement. Editing is the process of arranging a series of shots to tell a story. Sometimes for organizational reasons it’s useful to be able to have two shots that overlap on the timeline (so that, for instance, you can keep cutting away to one of them, with the main shot showing through gaps between the cutaways), and it’s also necessary to be able to layer shots in order to create certain effects.

    Tracks are merely one way of doing this. They are, perhaps, the most obvious way, but the most obvious way to do something is frequently not the best way.

    [Aindreas Gallagher]
    Yeah and you know what, that is all dumb as crazy town dumb. How in the hell am I supposed to work with a single track of video sliding around itself and a secondary track that attaches to the clip below it the minute I lay it down?

    This is what I mean when I say you’re not really making an argument here. All you’re doing is asking a question. You think the answer is self-evidently “You can’t be expected to work like that; the FCP team was full of idiots who designed a timeline that’s impossible to edit with”. But this is not actually self-evident.


    Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

    You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

  • Aindreas Gallagher

    June 25, 2011 at 4:47 pm

    Oh absolutely – what were we all thinking? Multitrack, it’s so obvious, we must be mad. You’re kind of funny dude, you really are.

    And yes, you’re bang on Chris:

    “You can’t be expected to work like that; the FCP team was full of idiots who designed a timeline that’s impossible to edit with”

    You’re spot on there man, that statement is right on the money, fair play to you.

    http://www.ogallchoir.net
    promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

  • Chris Kenny

    June 25, 2011 at 4:48 pm

    You’re not even trying to have an actual discussion at this point.


    Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

    You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

  • Aindreas Gallagher

    June 25, 2011 at 4:52 pm

    ‘Multitrack’ man, just keep saying multitrack to yourself, roll it around on your tongue and keep looking at FCPX – at some point you’re going to stop and shout – hang on! I’ve had an insight! This software is total bollocks! What the hell is going on!??!

    It’ll come – I swear it to you.

    http://www.ogallchoir.net
    promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

Page 2 of 3

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy