Best of both worlds

[Timothy Auld]

Anything’s possible if you are willing to spend the time and the money. The fact that FCP exists at all is due the fact that Apple was out to destroy Avid for having the bad form to want to abandon the Mac platform. Your suggestion is a good one that would make a lot of people happy but sadly I don’t think it’s going to happen. The shortest way to that end would be to simply begin selling and supporting FCS 3 again. But I don’t think that’s going to happen either. I hope I’m wrong on both counts.

bigpine

[Gary Huff]

Who knows? They may implement that very feature by FCP X3 or FCP X4…but who will be around to appreciate it?

[Oliver Peters]

There are some clues in the code – discovered by people poking around – that seem to indicate a track-based GUI was in the original design. My guess is that a decision was made to abandon this in the middle of development. So, I doubt you’ll ever see a switchable interface or a track-based version.

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[David Lawrence]

[Oliver Peters] “There are some clues in the code – discovered by people poking around – that seem to indicate a track-based GUI was in the original design.”

That’s right. Here’s an icon that Alex Gollner found while digging around inside the app. You can see it for yourself by control-clicking the app and selecting “Show Package Contents” and then looking at Final Cut Pro/Contents/Resources/Sequence.icns:

Here’s the link to Alex Gollner’s post about this.

This image gives me both hope and disappointment. Imagine FCPX with this interface and all of the powerful new architectural underpinnings. It would be amazing. Maybe Apple can still bring this back and make the magnetic timeline optional. The model could be similar to DVD Studio Pro’s option of providing simple, intermediate, and advanced workspaces. Let the user choose for themselves how much control they want exposed in the UI. My fear is they’ve gone in a radically different direction that doesn’t give them that option.
I guess we’ll have to wait and see…

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl

[Craig Alan]

“Sometimes it’s necessary to go a long distance out of the way in order to come back a short distance correctly.”

Edward Albee

OSX 10.5.8; MacBookPro4,1 Intel Core 2 Duo 2.5 GHz MacPro4,1 2.66GHz 8 core 12gigs of ram. GPU: Nvidia Geoforce GT120 with Vram 512. OS X 10.6.x; Camcorders: Sony Z7U, Canon HV30/40, Sony vx2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Andy Neil]

I honestly don’t understand the issue people have with the magnetic timeline. Sure, track-based audio is necessary for Pro Tools or other audio finishing programs, but as long as FCP X can be taught to export audio in track form, what’s the big deal with not having tracks in the editing app?

I’ve been editing via tracks since the nineties. Before that, I edited tape to tape. I don’t feel any loyalty to working with tracks simply because that’s the way it’s been done all this time. The magnetic timeline works and works well in my opinion. And anything you used to do in FCP 7’s timeline like create gaps, and stack takes can be done with this new timeline.

I guess I just don’t know what the fuss is about.

Andy

https://www.timesavertutorials.com

[David Lawrence]

[Andy Neil] “Sure, track-based audio is necessary for Pro Tools or other audio finishing programs”

Some of us do audio finishing in FCP.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl

[Oliver Peters]

[Andy Neil] ” Sure, track-based audio is necessary for Pro Tools or other audio finishing programs, but as long as FCP X can be taught to export audio in track form, what’s the big deal with not having tracks in the editing app?”

It’s not just exporting to a DAW. Assume you want to finish the mix in FCP X. Let’s say you have 4 mono audio tracks on each camera source representing a different mic. You want to edit the clips with different levels and edit points for each audio channel. There currently is no way to do that in FCP X without breaking the clips apart and risking sync errors. The workaround is to break each single clip apart, make your adjustments and create new compound clips for each clip. Very cumbersome in FCP X, but a piece of cake in a track-based paradigm.

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Timothy Auld]

Andy,

I just wrote a long post about how the magnetic timeline was not the only problem, etc. and then on re-reading your post realized that you were talking specifically and only about the magnetic timeline. I hope I edited this post in time to not seem like a complete idiot (at least in this particular situation.)

[Andy Neil]

“Let’s say you have 4 mono audio tracks on each camera source representing a different mic. You want to edit the clips with different levels and edit points for each audio channel. There currently is no way to do that in FCP X without breaking the clips apart and risking sync errors.”

What you’re saying makes some sense, but not completely. First of all, why do you need to break the clips apart? You can open the clips in timeline mode (CMD+SHIFT+O) which will show you all your mono tracks. Then make your adjustments and back out. Secondly, as far as sync errors go, don’t you run the same risk in a track based environment?

Andy

https://www.timesavertutorials.com