Cutting a major Hollywood Feature on FCPX

[Bill Davis]

[Steve Connor] “It’s true after you shouted at him a bit then he realised that he could do what he wanted and that’s exactly what this forum is good at.”

OK that’s fair.

After all these years, you’d think i would have learned that the overall internet convention is that CAPS indicate shouting rather than just emphasis. I don’t know why I keep spacing on that and feeling it’s OK to use CAPS for emphasis. Must be a part of my brain that just doesn’t function properly.

Sorry.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.

[Charlie Austin]

[Bill Davis] “And then note that what I’m pushing back against in this thread is public discussions with an editor who doesn’t use X indicating that the very REASON he doesn’t use it is because it “fails” in a necessary operation – that I then pointed out that it actually handles that specific operation rather brilliantly.”

And that’s fine Bill, even pushing hard. I think what people react to in your posts are statements like:

“…and therefore make editing much, MUCH easier for those who understand the new system.”

“And the nomenclature had to change because the CONCEPTS behind the program had to change. Starting with a clean slate lets you start from scratch and use names that have meaning in the new system. Timelines were FIXED with a zero point and an unbreakable progression in time.”

“the whine of “But I already KNOW words for this kind of stuff – don’t make me learn any new terms.” which is simply kinda LAZY IMO. “

Here’s my opinion, feel free to reject it, 🙂 …

There’s no reason to insult people, (even if they deserve it lol). Facts help change minds, and you often present great facts. But when they’re wrapped in indirect insults it hurts your argument.

And you sometimes offer your opinions, – such as the part above about names changing because concepts change – as facts. They’re not. The names more likely changed because Apple’s other apps use terms like Library and Project and Event. iPhoto, Logic, Motion. And sometimes you’re even wrong… For example, timelines still are fixed with a zero point, and are still called timelines in X.. 😉

I don’t say this to pile on, but to maybe shed light on why people react to some of your posts the way they do. The high horse approach isn’t necessary, and doesn’t work. IMO of course. There are plenty of people who will never like X. Whether for a legitimate reason like it doesn’t suit their workflow, or a dumb reason like they’re mad at Apple for killing off older products. BFD.

Presenting info, as you have in this thread, about how X can work for someone is great. Pontificating about the inner workings of software you didn’t write, and denigrating anyone who “doesn’t get it” is counterproductive. Again… my opinion…

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Andrew Kimery]

[Jeremy Garchow] “You see, this is really hard to get across, but with trackless or Roles, or whatever you want to call it, you don’t have to rearrange the timeline to get different output results. You simply reshuffle the information to way that suits the output. It’s pretty nice like that.”

Although I haven’t used X I understand what you are saying. My point is that even if FCP X takes less effort it still takes some effort and for many people some effort is still too much effort. 😉 Like the AE example of getting Pre-comp 1, Pre-comp 2, Pre-comp 3, etc.,. If someone is too lazy to uniquely name a file they are too lazy to create Roles and assign them.

With regards to rearranging the timeline, I might be misunderstanding you, but in FCP 7 (and I believe Avid and PPro as well) you don’t have to rearrange what’s in the timeline to get different output results. For example, in FCP 7 you can map the timeline track to be whatever audio output track you want it to be (i.e. Track 1 in the timeline can be mapped to be Track 4 on output).

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Bill Davis] “After all these years, you’d think i would have learned that the overall internet convention is that CAPS indicate shouting rather than just emphasis. I don’t know why I keep spacing on that and feeling it’s OK to use CAPS for emphasis. Must be a part of my brain that just doesn’t function properly.”

You should also quote the right person, as you quoted what I was saying, not what Michael was saying.

For everyone: to quote someone on the cow, select the text in their post and hit ‘q’

Jeremy

[Charlie Austin]

[Andrew Kimery] “With regards to rearranging the timeline, I might be misunderstanding you, but in FCP 7 (and I believe Avid and PPro as well) you don’t have to rearrange what’s in the timeline to get different output results. For example, in FCP 7 you can map the timeline track to be whatever audio output track you want it to be (i.e. Track 1 in the timeline can be mapped to be Track 4 on output).”

You can. In FCP 7 at least, it is a giant PITA of carefully right clicking etc. If you have more than a dozen tracks it’s really annoying, particularly if you have to do a few different iterations. (Stems, mix minus, mono split etc…) I thing Pr and MC act in similarly. Roles make it really really easy…

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Bill Davis]

[Charlie Austin] “Presenting info, as you have in this thread, about how X can work for someone is great. Pontificating about the inner workings of software you didn’t write, and denigrating anyone who “doesn’t get it” is counterproductive. Again… my opinion…”

Fair criticisms.

Points taken.

Thanks for taking the time and effort to share them.

And sorry for the tone. I didn’t realize I was being so harsh. That was never my intent.

My apologies.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Andrew Kimery] “Although I haven’t used X I understand what you are saying. My point is that even if FCP X takes less effort it still takes some effort and for many people some effort is still too much effort. 😉 Like the AE example of getting Pre-comp 1, Pre-comp 2, Pre-comp 3, etc.,. If someone is too lazy to uniquely name a file they are too lazy to create Roles and assign them. “

I get it, completely. It does take a bit of effort, but I would say in X, it takes even less effort. Once the organization is even ROUGHLY setup (ALL CAPS!), that organization follows that clip around until it’s specifically changed. It is quite powerful, and is great for the disorganized because it takes all of one second to do at the very beginning of editing. With tracks, (and Ae) organization is a constant process. You are constantly renaming, retargeting, reshuffling to fit the organization and output. I apologize, it’s very hard to explain over the interwebs, and it’s also hard to explain without diving in to X.

[Andrew Kimery] “With regards to rearranging the timeline, I might be misunderstanding you, but in FCP 7 (and I believe Avid and PPro as well) you don’t have to rearrange what’s in the timeline to get different output results. For example, in FCP 7 you can map the timeline track to be whatever audio output track you want it to be (i.e. Track 1 in the timeline can be mapped to be Track 4 on output).”

Right, but what if you had music AND dialogue on the same track? You’d have to rearrange it.

If you need separate channel outputs, and you didn’t have the tracks properly segmented, you’d have to rearrange.

If you need specific panning (L.R.whatver) you’d have to rearrange the timeline to make sure the panning is set correctly.

In the case of Pr, if you have a multichannel output (but want to monitor stereo) it is a huge PITA that requires a whole new sequence.

In X, all of this can be done in the export from the same timeline.

[Charlie Austin]

[Bill Davis] “My apologies.”

No need for apologies! And i hope I wasn’t being too harsh. I really appreciate your observations and info. It just bums me out when it gets overshadowed by peoples reactions to your tone. Personally, I can understand how you feel. I really think I spend more time filtering my posts here for tone than actually writing them. And sometimes i mess up too. lol

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Jeremy Garchow] “In X, all of this can be done in the export from the same timeline.”

Also, you can be exporting multiple different splits etc at the same time. Start one, set up the next with different output, start it, next, next, next. Very helpful.

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Charlie Austin] “Also, you can be exporting multiple different splits etc at the same time. Start one, set up the next with different output, start it, next, next, next. Very helpful.”

Exactly. One timeline, no rearranging or duplicating.