-
And the lightbulb goes on…
-
“[Walter Soyka] “The software does exactly what you tell it. Primary, secondary, connection — to whatever extent you consider the role of the clip when you cut it in, and choose how you cut it in accordingly, some intent is captured in a way that cannot be true with traditional timelines.””
Thinking about this some more – and this is going to start to sound like one of those conversations we used to have two years ago with David L. – I can encode intentions in a conventional NLE that FCP X is unable to encode.
My example of syncing up a sound effect with music at a particular point in time is an example of an intentional “connection” that can only be encoded in FCP X in the context of connecting to the primary storyline.
It absolutely refuses to encode my actual intention if the two clips are both connected.
Conversely in a traditional timeline those kinds of “connections” are being encoded for the simple reason that the “connection point” is time – and not another clip.
It’s a shame to have lost that ability in return for a much more limited tracking of my intentions.
Not that I’m complaining – it’s just a trade-off that you either embrace or you don’t.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Simon Ubsdell] “Thinking about this some more – and this is going to start to sound like one of those conversations we used to have two years ago with David L. – I can encode intentions in a conventional NLE that FCP X is unable to encode… It absolutely refuses to encode my actual intention if the two clips are both connected. Conversely in a traditional timeline those kinds of “connections” are being encoded for the simple reason that the “connection point” is time – and not another clip.”
It’s a nuance, but the traditional timeline doesn’t relate the two clips to each other. I think this captures less intent because that original intent would have to be reiterated (not redefined) in some timeline maneuvers to preserve the original implicit relationship between the two clips.
You could do this in FCPX with the Giberti method.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “It’s a nuance, but the traditional timeline doesn’t relate the two clips to each other.”
I would argue that it does – in a sense. It relates them to each other by virtue of them coinciding in time and the timeline being non-magnetic they will stay where they are all things being equal.
The FCP X timeline removes that “connection” by insisting on a singular point of connection with the primary – which over-rides all other implicit “connections” such as the one I am describing.
Time is a very powerful “connection device” in the context of a traditional NLE that isn’t there in X.
I would also suggest that the fact that X’s connections are always singular (only to the primary) imposes significant limits on its ability to encode my intentions. That was the point I was trying to make.
(As always just arguing cos it’s interesting, not to be critical of X. It’s all snakes and ladders – I don’t think X or any other NLE offers you only ladders with no snakes.)
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Simon Ubsdell] “Time is a very powerful “connection device” in the context of a traditional NLE that isn’t there in X.”
Yes it is, if you want things to stay where they are put and use time as a “connection device” then simply use a slug in the primary and connect everything to that. I often use this method to edit.
Steve Connor
There’s nothing we can’t argue about on the FCPX COW Forum
-
[Steve Connor] “simply use a slug in the primary and connect everything to that. I often use this method to edit.”
Indeed. but it doesn’t really answer my observation.
Which was that you can’t connect two connected clips to each other and not to the primary.
And often it would be handier if you could – or even connect multiple connected clips to each other and not the primary.
As always just an observation not a criticism.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Simon Ubsdell] “And often it would be handier if you could – or even connect multiple connected clips to each other and not the primary.
“I use compound clips if I need to do that.
[Simon Ubsdell] “As always just an observation not a criticism.”
and your observations add considerably to the quality of this forum 🙂
Steve Connor
There’s nothing we can’t argue about on the FCPX COW Forum
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “And often it would be handier if you could – or even connect multiple connected clips to each other and not the primary.”
Multiple primaries and arbitrary clip connections would both be powerful features. Magnetism, more magnetism, and tracks, all together.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Steve Connor] “I use compound clips if I need to do that.
Indeed – and I’m really overstating how much of an obstacle it is. It’s not really an obstacle at all.
I was really just responding to Walter’s point about how X “encodes the editor’s intentions” in its implementation of connected clips. I just wanted to observe that it’s only some of your intentions some of the time.
At other times it “encodes” things that are not your intention at all.
And then again it doesn’t have a way of encoding explicit intentions such as lining up connected clips with each other but not with the primary storyline.
But mostly it’s pretty darn handy.
[Simon Ubsdell] “As always just an observation not a criticism.”
and your observations add considerably to the quality of this forum :)”
Not at all sure they do, but thank you 😉
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Walter Soyka] “Multiple primaries and arbitrary clip connections would both be powerful features. Magnetism, more magnetism, and tracks, all together.”
Indeed they would and we’ve been talking about such things for two years!
Whether it’s actually feasible is another matter.
And whether Apple have any intention of giving us that kind of box of delights I’m not at all sure.
I’d love to see that though – that would be fun.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
With the tilde control, do you need multiple connected clips anymore? Or arbitrary connections?
I don’t look at connected clips as connecting to the primary only, you can also connect it to time, since the primary storyline controls time for the most part.
Since we can now lock the secondary clips in time with tilde, having multiple connected clips doesn’t seem as necessary, does it?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up