-
Editing scenario
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I think it breaks X’s strengths, and breaks them good. No offense, Jim. Keep fighting the good fight.
“No offense to take Jeremy.
I just finished a dozen projects the last month and used FCPX exactly as you do.
But I get the sense that you don’t understand the concept because it doesn’t do anything to X’s strengths.
It doesn’t change magnetism or defeat anything you like about it.
It just gives the horizontal organization that X denies many editors if they want it.
It breaks absolutely nothing.
It works exactly within the paradigm as it was designed. It’s just an organizational tool that gives more flexibility than Apple delivered initially.Win win, if you want or need it.
-
[David Lawrence] “Maybe we need a new term term for tradition in/outs – semi-persistent?”
I’ve been asking you guys to define persistent ever since this came up.
[David Lawrence] “You could use an extended marker in FCP7 to create “persistent” in/outs but do you ever really use them for that? “
All the time as they are always there. I use them in interviews to mark good sections on one clip, I use them in action when the actor is doing multiple takes in one clip, I mark ins and out on all the takes to so I have them all marked. Every time I go back to theft clip/interview/whatever they are always marked in to out. They even show up in list view on my clips in the browser. X takes this even further. So, as I mentioned in that other thread, 7 doesn’t have persistent in and out markers that are persistent enough for me.
I know what you and Andy are saying, in X, you mark in, out, the you go to another clip, and whey you go back to the original, that range is now gone. If only, you would have just hit f, all of this fussing would be over.
Let’s put it this way. Let’s say you have multiple clips in your event and you are sorted in chiclet view, not list view. You mark a range on a clip, you skim to the next clip, you expect the range to stay on the first clip, and then stay on the second clip too? So when you hit an overwrite, which clip does X put in the timeline, both? So if I had ranges marked on all clips in my event and I hit overwrite, that means all ranged clips go in to the timeline?
Come on guys, you have to think this whole thing through. Hit f, it does exactly what you want, and more.
-
[Walter Soyka] “However, it’s clear that although this is possible, it wasn’t the design intent of FCPX. If it were, the data model and toolset might be very, very different.”
But Walter, I was responding to your assertion that changing the timeline to be more traditional in organization would be very, very difficult because of the underlying foundation of the program.
My example simply shows that it’s incredibly simple.
Whether it was part of Apple’s original intent is irrelevant to whether:
A.) it would be easy to implement now as an option – clearly not.
B.) Does it in any way impede or compromise the program as it’s envisioned – clearly not.
-
[Jim Giberti] “It just gives the horizontal organization that X denies many editors if they want it.”
I have to find the picture again, but I remember an audio track that looked like it might be connected to clip above it, but it was stuck in a secondary. If anything moved, you’d have to drag that clip all by itself with the position tool and reline it all up. If it was simply connected to the clip above it, it would be connected.
I think separators help like this, now if we could just have control of them and not use a secondary storyline to do it. Zones, we need zones, by role:
https://images.creativecow.net/42171
At any rate, I hear what you’re saying.
Jeremy
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I guess I have a hard time seeing how this would be a problem in X.”
As I said, the timeline structure isn’t the concern. It’s the nature of client changes and how they affect the timeline. In other words, how best to position clips in the X timeline in order to make changes easily.
[Jeremy Garchow] “This is a wild guess, but it seems that the a1/a2 tracks drive a lot of that piece, and they would be in the primary.”
Actually those are the least important elements. The edit – and length – is driven more by a combination of the music cues (beat pace for the edits) – and visual length of shots. What works, what doesn’t. So, tracks 3-8 are more important in the overall timing than 1-2, but it’s really all interactive. They are all important. For example – from today – the client requested that several sections be extended by :10 each. This required re-editing several cues of the music to end correctly and then also re-adjusting each clip because the pace had changed due to the new music phrasing.
[Jeremy Garchow] “and you might have to rearrange the “stacking order” to accommodate.”
Yes, another X nuisance.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Changing every edit takes work, I don’t think there’s any difference in magnets or not in that scenario.”
Never said it wasn’t. It’s just that sometimes magnetism gets in the way.
BTW – attached is an updated screen grab of the timeline from the end of today. If you compare the structure to the earlier one, you’ll see quite a lot of changes. More graphics (v2), longer total length, some soundbites removed and others added. In the morning it will change again 😉
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Jeremy Garchow] “ave to find the picture again, but I remember an audio track that looked like it might be connected to clip above it, but it was stuck in a secondary. If anything moved, you’d have to drag that clip all by itself with the position tool and reline it all up. If it was simply connected to the clip above it, it would be connected.”
But that’s the whole point. You would use that audio track exactly as you would a fixed audio track in 7 – say, for instance a music cue for 1:30 that was exactly where it should be as you experiment with different cuts.
The point is you don’t use pseudo tracks if you want them connected.
You have both options – the 7 way and the X way at the same time, in the same timeline.
How is that a problem?
-
[Oliver Peters] “As I said, the timeline structure isn’t the concern. It’s the nature of client changes and how they affect the timeline. In other words, how best to position clips in the X timeline in order to make changes easily.
“I’m telling you Oliver, if this is the conundrum, then simply starting with the template I created would enable you to work with a client exactly as you would in FCP7 replacing to your hearts content as fast as you need. It would act and respond precisely how you want it to.
-
[Carsten Orlt] “The short version is that for me it clicked with X is when I noticed that X basically uses something that 7 (and before) was using all the time: “
Trust me. I completely understand the concept.
[Carsten Orlt] “So I would edit the main soundbites from your talents on the primary, put cut aways in connected and have music and sound effects in connected as well.”
In this case, IMHO that’s actually the design that works least best. Either B-roll AND A/V clips on the Primary as Andy suggested or using Jim’s “trax” template are the two methods that seem the easiest to make the various changes without getting tied up into knots.
[Carsten Orlt] “In X you just insert a gab clip on the primary and extend this clip. everything including all connected elements move with it. No need for track forward. “
Which is how it’s been done in the Avid world for years.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Jeremy Garchow] “Let’s put it this way. Let’s say you have multiple clips in your event and you are sorted in chiclet view, not list view. You mark a range on a clip, you skim to the next clip, you expect the range to stay on the first clip, and then stay on the second clip too? So when you hit an overwrite, which clip does X put in the timeline, both? So if I had ranges marked on all clips in my event and I hit overwrite, that means all ranged clips go in to the timeline?
Come on guys, you have to think this whole thing through. Hit f, it does exactly what you want, and more.”
I’t’s not rocket science, Jeremy. It’s UI 101.
Just look at what happens to a range on the timeline when you click in the event browser. It remains but grays out. Just do the exact same thing for clips in the event browser. Gray out ranges for all clips except the one in focus. The clip in focus is the one that get edited into the timeline. Problem solved. You’re welcome.
The ones who need to think this thru are the UI geniuses at Apple.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Jeremy Garchow] “Really? It was way more basic in 1989. X has those same basics. Smart Tools weren’t available until recently, avid has a “mode” style of editing. Are those “right” straight out of the gate?”
Basic, yes – and plenty has been added over the years. But the underlying UI design has been essentially the same.
Nothing wrong with modes. FCP 7 was always modal and X is even more modal. Smoke is modal. Premiere is modal.
As far as Smart Tool, if you analyze them, they are more-or-less macros for things Media Composer has done for a long time, such as segment editing. They are also NOT universally appreciated by experienced Avid editors.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Surely. People that have to no NLE experience move on ok with fcpx.”
I could care less about how easy it is for people who have no NLE experience. I’ve taken tons of students with no prior NLE experience and in 1-2 weeks had them up and running on various NLEs, including Premiere, Media Composer and FCP 7. I resisted the urge this year to use X for teaching film students, because I actually want them to have skill that can be used at a real job. 😉 Today (maybe not tomorrow) that still means a track-based, “traditional” NLE.
Ease of learning for newbies is a pointless argument unless you mean people who also get no training. In that case, I would argue that an awful lot is hidden and not very intuitive in X. Quite frankly, of the various UIs out there, I feel like Quantel actually has one that’s easiest for a newcomer to grasp. If they want to be professional, a bit of an investment in learning is essential. Given that, any NLE will do.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up