-
Editing scenario
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “I did cut a small piece like this a while back in FCPX and I was amazed at how quickly I got in awkward spots once the client started picking at the edit and the music. “
I’m finding that when the client asks for the usual number of changes and wants to see you perform them, it’s easy to get tied into knots with X. That’s because you are trying to be expedient without necessarily keeping a “clean” timeline.
[Andy Neil] “First of all, I wouldn’t edit the broll as connected clips. “
Actually that sounds like the best approach. Music would be connected clips. That makes it easier to move b-roll segments and soundbites around via the magnetic timeline.
[Andy Neil] “One of the workflows that editors use in a track system that is hardest to drop in X, is the notion that soundbites need to be in track 1, and broll shots in track 2.”
Ironically I never edited this way until FCP. When I first started with NLEs (Avid), I’d come from years of linear. So, my Avid timelines were always only with clips on V1. In linear, you never had a V2 or higher track. Everything was a “primary storyline”, though “magnetic” in a different sense of the word 😉 It’s funny that X has put us back into a mindset that seems somewhat reminiscent of what we did 25+ years ago.
[Simon Ubsdell] “This does raise the question which most of the time seems to be the hardest thing to get right, namely what actually DOES go into the primary storyline”
That’s been my point. I’m trying to develop a working strategy for how to tackle the timeline. Something that I’ve never had to do with any other NLE.
[Steve Connor] “There is a lot of debate about the Primary track in FCPX but for me use of the primary is something that became second nature after I spent time cutting in FCPX”
I think X’s design is optimized for the sort of shows with soundbites and bridging B-Roll shots. Then add music and SFX that lay underneath. Doesn’t work well with these sort of hybrid ideas.
[Bret Williams] “When hey demoed x at he super meet, Randy ( the designer) didn’t mix broll in the primary. “
With all due respect, that was a demo and what was shown was designed to demo well. Same for every polished demo you’ve ever seen. I’d be willing to bet that any one of us could sit over Randy’s shoulder and “play client” and turn that demo into a mess in 10 minutes or less 😉
Good ideas though. Keep ’em coming. Thanks.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Auto coloring of groups would be awesome.
Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Irvine, California -
[Steve Connor] “So apart from having to re-learn some aspect of editing, what do you think FCPX is lacking that makes it “Consumer” and not “Pro”?”
Reliability. I have found more bugs and strange behavior in X than I care to elaborate on here. That is the line in the sand for me.
Michael Garber
5th Wall – a post production company -
[Oliver Peters] “I’d be willing to bet that any one of us could sit over Randy’s shoulder and “play client” and turn that demo into a mess in 10 minutes or less 😉
“Ya think? 😉
-
“It wasn’t designed with a wide range of editing needs in mind. As I have said before I can cut paying jobs on pinnacle studio. That, within this ‘what isn’t pro about it’ reasoning makes pinnacle studio pro. But it is a consumer conceived bit off software.”
Actually Pinnacle Studio is derived from Liquid, which was designed to compete head to head with Avid. Should have won, too.
I’m beginning to think that, considering the depth built into FCPX and the obviously unfinished nature of it, that we should consider introducing what I’ll call the Pro Rule. (Also based on the considerable discussion of who is and who isn’t a pro.)
So, the Pro Rule is that when your argument is that something isn’t Pro, or that someone isn’t Pro because they don’t do the same exact things you do, you automatically lose. That way these endless circular threads that devolve into that discussion might instead stay on topic as shown in this thread, where the original question was not “Is FCPX Pro” but was “How would you handle this scenario in FCPX?”
Or not.
Best,
John -
[stevez] “I actually think editing nightmares like this is where X can shine.”
I want to be clear that in no way do I consider this a “nightmare”. It’s pretty much what every editor deals with when the client variable is introduced. I don’t expect a client to understand the issues they introduce when they make a request. Changes result when they see the product they asked for. They have the right to ask for adjustments when it wasn’t what they thought it would be in their mind’s eye. It’s our job to be the specialists and accomplish the goal. It’s the software’s job to get out of the way.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[stevez] “I actually think editing nightmares like this is where X can shine.”
I want to be clear that in no way do I consider this a “nightmare”. It’s pretty much what every editor deals with when variables are introduced. I don’t expect aclient to understand the issues they introduce when they make a request. Changes result when they see the product they asked for. They have the right to ask for adjustments when it wasn’t what they thought it would be in their mind’s eye. It’s our job to be the experts and accomplish the goal. It’s the software’s job to get out of the way.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “when variables are introduced. I don’t expect aclient to understand the issues they introduce when they make a request. Changes result when they see the product they asked for. They have the right to ask for adjustments when it wasn’t what they thought it would be in their mind’s eye. It’s our job to be the experts and accomplish the goal. It’s the software’s job to get out of the way.”
Well said.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Oliver Peters] “I want to be clear that in no way do I consider this a “nightmare”. It’s pretty much what every editor deals with when variables are introduced. I don’t expect aclient to understand the issues they introduce when they make a request. Changes result when they see the product they asked for. They have the right to ask for adjustments when it wasn’t what they thought it would be in their mind’s eye. It’s our job to be the experts and accomplish the goal. It’s the software’s job to get out of the way.”
Agreed. You’re just describing business as usual as far as I’m concerned. And changes and versions are just part of the normal process.
-
I’ve got to say Oliver, it sounds like the FCPX Trax template I created would do exactly what you’re trying to do.
The secondaries can be used because they’re not anchored to the Primary – they act exactly as tracks to edit into, move clips and make substitutions independent of the Primary.
It gives you a clean visual of all your horizontal elements too.
It’s a simple two step process to get everything lined up to zero at final output.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up