Dynamic Trimming in X

[Richard Herd]

But I need to see the tail and the head.

[Scott Witthaus]

I can see that.

When I need to see both sides I am usually not in the precision trim mode and simply dragging back and forth looking at the dual display. For me, having the head and tail is best there.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Richard Herd] “But I need to see the tail and the head.”

[David Mathis]

Post of the year award!

[Kevin Rag]

LOL!:)

Kannan Raghavan
The Big Toad Films Pte. Ltd.

[Bret Williams]

Yes, but what you’re describing isn’t dynamic trimming. Neither is anything the ripple guys are doing. Let’s forget the many extra steps to get to it, but even the limited nature of what they’re doing is only available on them primary. And I didn’t see a roll edit where both sides are shown nor even the tail or head of the otherside of the single sided edit. All he did was a slightly dyamic extend edit.

[Neil Goodman]

[Bret Williams] “Yes, but what you’re describing isn’t dynamic trimming. Neither is anything the ripple guys are doing. Let’s forget the many extra steps to get to it, but even the limited nature of what they’re doing is only available on them primary. And I didn’t see a roll edit where both sides are shown nor even the tail or head of the otherside of the single sided edit. All he did was a slightly dyamic extend edit.
“

This – i actually thought the video did more to show the shortcomings of Dynamic trimming in FCPX than anything else. Its not all about simply being able to play around an edit point.

[Scott Witthaus]

[Neil Goodman] “did more to show the shortcomings of Dynamic trimming in FCPX than anything else.”

Interesting. I saw quite the opposite for the way I work. Much like when I switched over to FCP from Avid, and everyone was saying ‘well the trimming is FCP sucks, Avid is the only way…” I soon found out I really missed nothing from Avid and I was faster at FCP. And now after learning more and more about trimming in FCPX I realize that I really don’t miss alot from FCP7 and Avid (which is a moot point as it’s dead in my region) and FCPX is much faster in the way I work. I customized the keyboard and went at it. Not missing much at all in the way I work. Your mileage will certainly vary.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter

[Tony West]

I totally understand why someone used to using that technique in MC would not like doing it in X

It really becomes a moot point for me because I no longer have the patience for J K and L

The skimmer is so much faster at getting around the timeline. When I review an edit I need to get to the other side of the edit for play back. The skimmer gets me there in a blink of the eye. In the dynamic trim mode getting to the play through position is slower than I can get there with the skimmer.

In dynamic trimming you are changing the incoming clip and the out going clip at the same time. it’s rare that I don’t like the position of both clips. I am usually set with where the out going clip is and it’s just a matter of where the incoming clip is going to hit.

I would rather trim those clips one at a time and be in position for review faster with the skimmer than set up that DT mode and review J K an L

[Neil Goodman]

[Scott Witthaus] “Interesting. I saw quite the opposite for the way I work. Much like when I switched over to FCP from Avid, and everyone was saying ‘well the trimming is FCP sucks, Avid is the only way…” I soon found out I really missed nothing from Avid and I was faster at FCP. And now after learning more and more about trimming in FCPX I realize that I really don’t miss alot from FCP7 and Avid (which is a moot point as it’s dead in my region) and FCPX is much faster in the way I work. I customized the keyboard and went at it. Not missing much at all in the way I work. Your mileage will certainly vary.”

Cheers mate- glad its working out for you!