-
Blade
-
[Douglas K. Dempsey] ” Later, you find that you can take an item out of “Event A” and drag it in to “Event B.” It is no longer in A. It now reside in B.”
Assuming that both events are in the same library, yes. If not, that isn’t the case, nor is it even an option. But then having multiple “libraries” (i.e. projects) open at the same time isn’t even possible elsewhere to begin with, right? Certainly not with FCP 7 nor PPro. So, no comparison there either.
On the other hand, holding the ⌥ key will not move but rather copy the file to B. Is that possible with the classic “bin” you’re referring to? Nope. So again, different concept, even if there are seeming similarities at first glance.
I’d say that had they been named “bins” it would do nothing but simply shift the (imho rather nonsensical) nomenclature discussion elsewhere.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Robin S. Kurz] “having multiple “libraries” (i.e. projects) open at the same time isn’t even possible elsewhere to begin with, right? Certainly not with FCP 7 nor PPro.”
I’ve read this several times and you appear to be claiming that it’s not possible to have more than one project open at one time in FCP 7.
If this is indeed what you meant, it is incorrect.
It is of course true of Premiere but not FCP 7.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Simon Ubsdell] “It is of course true of Premiere but not FCP 7.”
Ah! I stand corrected, yes. I must have let myself be confused by the visual differences i.e. differences in the handling. What can I say, it’s been at least four if not five years since I last used 7 for anything more than a quick check on something, comparison or simple export. My bad.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
Ah, OK. It’s easy to forget how much you could do with FCP 7!
This feature was especially important for us as it was the foundation of project sharing between groups of editors.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
Haha, yes, Simon I was going to point that out to Robin as well – working with multiple projects in FCP7 was similar to multiple libraries in FCPX.
But more interesting than that, Robin, is how you fell immediately into the language problem that was the point of this thread! “But then having multiple “libraries” (i.e. projects) open at the same time …”
We are forced to refer to the common-sense concept of “project” as a “library” now because Apple has usurped the universal meaning of “project” in order to mis-use it to mean “timeline” or “sequence.”
I fully understand that the FCPX Event is not a bin, not even a super-bin or a smart folder or a collection. It is something else. But it is most assuredly not an Event. That was the (nonsensical) discussion at hand.
The thread began with Shane Ross bemusedly noting the quaint use of “blade” and a razor icon. I tried to one-up him by saying that at least a blade makes a cut. How do Library, Project and Event make any sense at all?
I guess FCPX was such a leap into a different paradigm, that the poets at Apple struggled with what to call things. I think they punted with Library, Project and Event. There is no parallel structure or relationship between the three words/concepts. All you have to do is Google this issue, to see the public-at-large struggling to wrap their mind around these ill-named concepts. By comparison, “blade” is genius!
Doug D
-
[Douglas K. Dempsey] “By comparison, “blade” is genius!”
Just to be super pedantic about this, the reason it’s called “Blade” in FCP X is almost certainly because it was called “Razor Blade” in FCP Legacy.
In other words, Shane was wrong to suggest that this was some form of terminological innovation in FCP X – what was he thinking?
😉
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
I took Shane’s observation as a bemused observation that, in the 21st century, we still have no better way of describing an edit than the original silent film action of physically slicing or scissoring the celluloid!
For sure, Apple was right to stick with Blade as a progression from FCP7. And as I said earlier, it’s better than “add edit” for the consumer, all of whom understand the idea of a “cut” in a movie.
Doug D
-
Indeed, you are quite right.
And “Add Edit” is certainly not helpfully descriptive at all – I remember 20 odd years ago being mystified when I first came across it!
As for “Blade”, we use metaphors from antiquated customs all the time and that’s one of the delights of the way we use language. I’m all for it.
But I completely take your observations about the rest of the FCP X terminology in terms of Library, Event and Project – I’m not sure that the metaphors there are helpful in the same way.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
I’ve come up with a title graphic for the movie, Blade X: Clash of Metaphors.
This will also do for my submission for what the icon for the tool should be. Nothing more iconic than friggin Wesley Snipes in friggin Blade, y’all.
-
The Blade tool should look like a sword, and be animated as it cuts the clip in two. THAT would be a futuristic tool!
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up