Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Creative Community Conversations Editing scenario

  • Jeremy Garchow

    May 14, 2012 at 10:28 pm

    [Oliver Peters] “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.”

    But during those sections, it looks Ike the voice is determining the length, no? Not so much the music there.

    In the music only sections, you say its probably more about the music, but also about the length of the shot, so it’s a give and take. I’d put the music in the primary, and adjust all shots around it, if I need to extend a gap in to the next section, I’d do that until I time out the music and the end of that section, and since everything is connected up at the end, I don’t have to worry about breaking the end of the timeline. I don’t know, but I don’t see this as a problem for me, personally. I could see how some might just not want to deal with it.

    [Oliver Peters] “Yes, another X nuisance.”

    Keyboard commands would help here, like AE’s layer commands.

    [Oliver Peters] “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 ;-)”

    Sweet one.

  • Andrew Kimery

    May 14, 2012 at 10:33 pm

    [Jeremy Garchow] “Sorry man. In order t get persistent ins and outs, you hit i,o,f. It will stay with that clip forever until you decide to unmark the favorite or change. F. One more key, and you have much more functionality than 7.”
    If I do that then don’t I end up w/a bunch of favorites I didn’t want which have to managed & deleted?

    To me this seems to be along the lines of viewing a PDF and having it always go back to page 1 whenever the PDF is not the top-most window. The workaround, of course, is to bookmark the page you were on so that when you come back to the PDF you can go into your bookmarks folder to pickup where you left off. That sounds like a lot of extra work especially if I’m doing research that requires to me hop between multiple windows a lot.

    Making it so the app doesn’t ‘lose my place’ to begin with seems like a much more elegant solution.

    To me the how I/O points act in FCP classic are persistent in that they stay there until I explicitly do something to remove them and temporary in that I use for short term, quick reference. It’s like putting my finger in a book to hold my place for a moment. Yes I want my finger to stay there until I decide to remove it and no my finger will not be staying there very long.

    -Andrew

    2.9 GHz 8-core (4,1), FCP 7.0.3, 10.6.6
    Blackmagic Multibridge Eclipse (7.9.5)

  • Jeremy Garchow

    May 14, 2012 at 10:37 pm

    [Oliver Peters] “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.”

    And this was my point. People say X is too easy and dumbed down.

    I beg to differ.

  • Jeremy Garchow

    May 14, 2012 at 10:43 pm

    [Andrew Kimery] “If I do that then don’t I end up w/a bunch of favorites I didn’t want which have to managed & deleted? “

    I guess it all in how you use it.

    It really easy to remove, just hit ‘u’. Its even easier than shift-x in 7.

    I find fcpx’s favorites to be just like extended markers in 7, which I use as truly persistent ins and outs.

    That’s what this is about, persistent ins and outs, it always comes up. People act like one more keystroke is the end of the world.

  • Walter Soyka

    May 14, 2012 at 10:46 pm

    [Jim Giberti] “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.”

    That’s fair, Jim. The sentence of mine that you quoted and responded to was a gross oversimplification on my part. You’re right and I was wrong.

    If you look to the paragraph immediately before my poor summary sentence, I think we may agree:

    [Walter Soyka] “The timeline, as it stands now, is a direct expression of the data model revealed by FCPXML. All the tools in FCPX are built to manipulate the unique objects of this data model. Any changes to the timeline must be compatible with the parent/child data model, or the data model must change with it; any changes to the timeline may also require overhauling the NLE tools.”

    What I was trying to assert, in a mistaken response to Jeremy, was that FCPX’s timeline’s data model is foundational to the application, and changing it would be hard. You can work within it, but I think actually replacing it wholesale would require some pretty deep work.

    By the way, I think your method is a brilliant — a truly elegant hack to fit a traditional timeline into FCPX’s structure and seemingly arbitrary container restrictions. I wish Apple had built this in, per Mr. Lawrence’s multiple primaries. I do believe we could have the best of both models coexisting within FCPX.

    Walter Soyka
    Principal & Designer at Keen Live
    Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
    RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
    Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events

  • Jim Giberti

    May 14, 2012 at 11:05 pm

    [Walter Soyka]
    By the way, I think your method is a brilliant — a truly elegant hack to fit a traditional timeline into FCPX’s structure and seemingly arbitrary container restrictions. I wish Apple had built this in, per Mr. Lawrence’s multiple primaries. I do believe we could have the best of both models coexisting within FCPX.”

    You’re far too thoughtful and reasonable Walter but I’m sure you’ve been criticized for that before .

    I certainly won’t claim any brilliance, (at least not for this) but I do wonder if Apple won’t just make some simple menu addition to accommodate the general idea.

    The other simple menu addition that would level this out would be a dedicated track assignment. In other words if you had unconnected Secondaries in this model, you could select them once and until you deselect them, all edits would default to that “track” rather than the Primary and rather than the need to select the secondary for every edit.

    It could even be a preference setting, but a simple “Add Unconnected Secondary” command and a Make Current Secondary Target” button would do nicely.

    Very simple adjustments like this would make the experience very intuitive again for FCP7 users and require nothing from a technical or foundational standpoint.

  • Jeremy Garchow

    May 14, 2012 at 11:07 pm

    [Jim Giberti] “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?”

    I see what you’re saying, but if you need the music to stay at 1:30, why not just put it in the primary @ 1:30?

    Any experimented cuts, happen above.

    I guess from your picture, theres no method in x to select all forward or backward, so when things go askew, they really go askew.

  • Aindreas Gallagher

    May 14, 2012 at 11:08 pm

    [Jeremy Garchow] “People act like one more keystroke is the end of the world.”

    its not keystroke, its the stupidity of having to use the favourite function every time to retain in out marks.

    I know its hard to see, but you are fundamentally wrong on this one jeremy.

    https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos
    http://www.ogallchoir.net
    promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

  • Alex Hawkins

    May 14, 2012 at 11:08 pm

    [Oliver Peters] “Some of the things I like about X are the organization methods, skimming and SOME of the UI design. I also like the growing ecosystem of filters and would like to take advantage of them.”

    Hey Premiere Pro isn’t too bad with these you know. It does have a completely customisable workspace. And 6 now has ‘hover scrub’. (That’s Adobe’s moniker for skimming). It’s filters are pretty good too, although I’m not sure if you mean something else here..?

    Alex Hawkins
    Canberra, Australia

  • Jeremy Garchow

    May 14, 2012 at 11:11 pm

    I see my link earlier didn’t work, try this one (must view on cow):

Page 14 of 30

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy