-
Apple engineers versus an editor’s ability to set persistent in to out points in their footage.
-
Wait a minute here FCPX does keep its in and outs similare to FCP7.
FCP7
Create your In and Out in your master clip add it to the timeline adjust your ins and outs on the same clip and ad that portion into the timeline.
Double click the clip in the timeline it will open up in the viewer with the ins and outs the same with the second clip from the same master clip.FCPX
Mark your In and Out throw that guy in your timeline adjust the Ins and Outs from the same clip add it in your timeline.
Select the clip on your timeline and hit shift F you will get your In and Outs in the Event library.
Not sure what the issue is? -
[Aindreas Gallagher] “my own question would be whether editing practitioners require (or asked) anyone to provide them with such an unannounced sandblasting?”
Even as one who enjoys using X I really enjoy reading your post Aindreas. You are a smart dude and a crafty writer. You also make great points.
This annoyed me like many others at first.
While I like the favorites and the option to add multiple in’s and out’s, like many editors I like to avoid adding keystrokes if I don’t have to. (hitting F all the time)
X will remember the I and O as long as you don’t “click” on another source clip. (or within that source clip)
Since I know it acts this way I avoid doing that and use the skimmer if I want to look at another source clip after I have made a selection. (that’s the beauty of the skimmer. Not as much clicking)
Once I have made an I and O I drop that clip in the timeline and it’s easy for me to change the I and O from there. It’s not going anywhere once it’s in the TL.
When I would try to change the in and out in the source window that’s when the frustration came in.
It’s kind of hard for me to explain it but since I have been working this way the muscle memory has taken over and I don’t even think about it anymore.
This is not to say people should do it this way or right or wrong.
The more I use this program the more comfortable I feel with it.
I just wanted to share my personal story on this issue.
-
Honestly, don’t feed the animals. I see bill as little more than a waste of opposable thumbs if truth be told, and find his signature nothing short of glorious irony.
The only consistent is his delusion that somehow those that dislike FC10 are somehow backwards and unable to move on with life whilst those who embrace the work-arounds are somehow so mentally deft and adept that really now, people should be in awe.
I’ve moved on. I moved on about 30 minutes after engaging with the ugly bugger when auto save did nothing of the sort and lost everything I had done. No manual save, lmao. But if we challenge it or slag it off of suggest that it is shit and not fit for purpose for us, well, we’re incompetent or backwards or incapable of wrapping our little heads around this earth shattering bit of software. Er, yeah, right Bill.
Perhaps you’re just foolish enough to think the emperor’s new threads are hipster fashion. We are all aware the fool is butt naked Bill, and we giggle at your inability to see it.
-
[David Lawrence] “I’m still not following. Sorting has nothing to do with whether it’s a subclip or not.
OK, that’s added functionality because the subclip is tagged with the keyword. They’re both still subclips though.
Hitting the F key is easy, but that’s not the point. Why not simply keep marked In/outs on an object until the editor decides to change them?
The way in/outs are typically used, they’re persistent, but disposable. Saving them in a list is unnecessary. If I have to save every in/out I mark as I build an edit, the list would quickly fill with garbage. It doesn’t make sense for the way they’re used.
“You know, who am I to tell you they aren’t subclips? I guess subclips to me, are compared to fcp7s “make subclip” feature which I never use as it’s limiting for me. I use extended makerers instead, and favorites is just like that, only better, in my opinion, as they are truly persistent. Favorites (as well as extended makers) are permanent reminders that I liked this part, even I’d I didn’t use it right away.
If you don’t like of the range goes away and don’t want to be bothered with favoriting that range, you could simply add that clip to your timeline in which ever manner you want.
I find that favorites are not subclips, maybe they sort of can be, but as compared to fcp7, much better. If you think they are subclips and act like subclips, then so be it. To each their own. Sorting has everything to do with it, in my opinion.
Favorites are not keywords and are not assigned to a keyword if the clip is not assigned to a keyword. Keywords are blue, favorites are green. Keywords ave a defined name, favorites are just “favorites”. You can search a keyword by name, you cannot with favorites, even if you rename them. You can sort favorites either within a collection, or just by event. You can put the clip in list mode and see all of the favorited sections of that clip and still keep the context of the entire clip, or you can sort by favorites to make little favorite bits (sort of like subclips, but without the subclip limits once added to timeline).
I find that hitting f brings a lot more functionality to the table and I’m over the temporary in and out points in the event. I’ll admit, I wasn’t used to them at first. I much prefer the persistent favorite ranges that are in FCPX today, but it’s only my opinion.
-
I know you guys might not feel it, but I found this an interesting conversation to follow.
-
but isn’t the use of favourites really just a patch?
In a sense doesn’t it distort the use of favourites? – say if I have set an in to out so I can loop playback on a shot of a skaters move – I’m just analysing it right?
The final in to out represents the result of that edit test – but that’s just me nodling – I want the in and out points associated with that action to remain – but this does not mean that it is in any way a nominated favourite.
If we are going to start default using favourites as the function of retaining in to out ranges, then it is no longer a favourite function. It is the “retain in to out” by pressing an extra key every single time.
The favourites list is no longer a favourites list, it is a random assemblage of every time I set an in to out point.
What it means is that it is an unsatisfactory hack, that distorts the feature.
Apple, as designer and publisher of the software should be able to resolve this, unless, as Phillip Hodgetts surmises – they are simply not in a position to do it, even if they wanted to.
To quote him; he views it as likely “impossible”, which leads to other interesting questions about what road Apple have taken this editing software down, and whether there actually is an architectural problem with the database itself.The reason I found the comment thread so interesting is that Andy Mees directly poses the question of whether or not Apple have made a fundamental mistake in the database model:
Andy Mees:
Is it your feeling that Apple’s FCPX designers have built the entire FCPX database model in a rigid or inflexible (and unrelational) manner?That’s the really interesting question here – this software is so unusual, it cannot retain in to out points without user intervention. If something as basic as the database model itself is wrong, then Apple will have some real problems rectifying it at this stage.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
GTD = Get Things Done, relates to a class of productivity and notetaking App that generally relies heavily on semantic tagging for organisation.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
You’re going to feel how you’re going to feel about it.
You see it as a hack, I see a feature as I actually “hacked” fcp7 to be used this way (truly persistent saved “ranges”).
No one knows accept Apple if this represents a “broken” database. I tend to feel its not that dire.
You hit f, you have a temp favorite, you can always delete it, just like you can always set a new in/out in fcp7.
It simply works differently. Two means to the same end.
If you really like a range and want to keep it, keyword it. Don’t favorite it.
This is why I think we should dissassociate favorites and keywords. They are very different.
You can also add markers to any of these. Markers are text searchable.
The Event system is always changing. It can be much more dynamic than a bin system. I welcome it, perhaps it just might not be your bag.
I don’t see this is a glitch in the matrix. “You” can’t keep wrenching fcpx to be fcp7. I know that phrase is now cliché.
Really if you don’t want to favorite, just add the range to the timeline. Anywhere. The timeline will adjust for it. You decide you don’t want it? Delete it.
Or you could simply just favorite it. Save it for later. You decide you don’t want that favorite anymore? Hit ‘u’. It unfavorites it. It’s really f*cking easy. You have to think with intent. Excuse my, Irish.
Could Apple add temporary ranges, technically? Maybe. It would just mean it would have to store a range on all the dynamic clips everywhere in some sort of cache. Favorite allows it to add that decision to the database with intent. So what? Think of it as a “save” action.
Jeremy
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “You can’t keep wrenching fcpx to be fcp7. I know that phrase is now cliché.”
this really has nothing to do with FCP7 – the question is whether FCPX should be able to, or is capable of, retaining in to out points without user intervention in the form of keywords or favourites. The fact that it forgets the in to out markers the moment you click off a clip, unless you flood the favourites list with all your in to out points is, to my mind at least, unsatisfactory.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Jeremy Garchow] “You hit f, you have a temp favorite, you can always delete it, just like you can always set a new in/out in fcp7.”
The nature of FCPX and Favorites is that just as one can add one with F, one can just as easily remove the Favorite with a U or, even reject if, after having examined it, you decide to reject it outright with Delete key.
Basically . . .
F saves the In/out (Range)
U removes it (FCP7 Shift X if my fading memory serves me)
Deletes adds the ability to temporarily make something gone (persistent invisibility until one decides otherwise)I think people are bothered by having to hit the F key all the time as it’s too easy to wander off and lose the range. Over time, hitting that extra key or the extra work when one forgets, can cumulatively slow people down during a session. Having to be conscious of such almost seems antithetical to a “the app gets out of the way to let you edit” philosophy. Personally the only answer that might fall within FCPX’s model (or programers model for it) is the “auto favorite.”
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up