-
Fascinating article on FCP.co today…
-
[Bill Davis] “It was largely a flat file structure, but there was a facility to cross-link between what were essentially it’s discrete spreadsheet data storage cels to form a uni-directional reporting relationship across the flat file structure.”
Those cross-links (keys) between flat tables are precisely what makes it relational.
[Bill Davis] “Just pointing out that I’m not sure that the database nature has to be so binary – flat or relational. “
It’s not binary — there are other database designs — but if you have multiple tables in your database that are related to each other via unique keys, you have a relational database by definition.
[Bill Davis] “Perhaps it would be better to discuss them in terms of the flexibility of the tools they give the user in order to empower them to do meaningful operations that enhance their access to and use of the data.”
Yes, this is a point I’ve been trying to make here for some time. While understanding the back-end helps us understand the tool, really the front-end matters more to the user than the back-end.
Really, I think the most important data structure to understand is the timeline. It’s hierarchical parent/child design informs the entire relative-time magnetic model exposed to the user.
[Bill Davis] “Whether legacy was relational or not (and HOW relational) isn’t so germane as the fact that the user wasn’t given access to the same type of flexibility in it’s implementation.”
Maybe we have a jargon issue. What does “relational” mean to you? What functionality do you attribute to relational vs flat database design?
FCP X has a collection of features that expose data to the user in ways that no other NLE does. Taken together, these features are unique and powerful. It’s just the attribution of these features to the design of the database and the implication that other NLEs are not databases that strikes me as odd.
If you promise to stop using the words “relational database” when describing the basis for a new feature in FCP X, I promise to stop pointing out that this design likely underpins basically every NLE ever made. 🙂
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
I’m not sure I understand. Versioning scenes -as compound clips- using auditons works quite well. It’s actually one of my favorite features.
-
[Marcus Moore] “If when you start a project you have the option to start with a blank page or open a project template where you’ve defined segment lengths, commercial breaks, lower3rd and inter-title styles, broadcast safe parameters… I’d like to see that.”
That’s called a project template. Since most of my work is episodic TV every series has a blank project template that contains the graphic styles, timeline and output styles, and every other standardized feature for the show. You start a new show by duplicating and renaming the template and away you go. If you wanted to include a timeline that had pre-determined commercial break bumpers and slates, no one would stop you. I’ve worked this way in every NLE I’ve used – what’s missing?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
To be fair, I think you could have made the same “what’s missing?” statement about the bins and sub-clips structure in Legacy, until ranged key-wording and Smart Collections came along.
I too am working from a template project for this series, but it seems to me to be an analogue solution to what could be a more seamless experience. Theoretically.
This type of thing only makes sense where there’s lot of repetition. Of assets. Of structure. But there’s loads of scenarios like that. Like the 39 episodes of this show I’m cutting. Or the 70 quarterly fund manager updates I do.
If you could define what a project is (common assets, default transitions, graphic inter titles and lower 3rds), then common quick keys would apply those elements because FCP X knew they belonged to a particular job. COMMAND-T just doesn’t give you a basic title, but a title in the right font with the right style and right build- because you’ve defined it.
Again, milage may vary. But I would like this very much.
-
[Marcus Moore] “To be fair, I think you could have made the same “what’s missing?” statement about the bins and sub-clips structure in Legacy, until ranged key-wording and Smart Collections came along.”
Yes, but that the point. Key wording and smart collections ARE new. defined templates are not. I will agree that it isn’t a keystroke defined operation. But it’s close. In legacy all my lower thirds, as well as slates, were motion templates. It wasn’t CTRL-D, but it was basically 2 mouse clicks and the blank title was ready to be filled in; all fonts, colors, backgrounds, positioning and animation pre-defined.
What this patented software seemed to be interested in was the setting up of a hierarchy of structure so that you could easily assemble and re-arrange the different parts. Which is why so much of the patent had to do with joining the overlaps between 2 segments.
I think most modern NLE’s have the tools to do this already. This software seemed to be designed for non-editors to be able to restructure a show – a way for the producers to avoid dealing with editors once the scenes were cut.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “I’ve worked this way in every NLE I’ve used – what’s missing?”
This is more than a template, at least it seems that way to me.
Have you made a compound clip in FCPX, and then opened that compound clip? That’s how I see this working.
You are working in segment 1, I’m working on segment 2, and someone else is working the third. Our timelines are part of a whole timeline, and our timing is locked (just like the ins and outs of a compound clip in FCPX today).
All of our work is then stored in a master timeline that a fourth editor could master, add interstitials, or other.
The X timeline structure is absolutely suited for this. I’m not saying other NLE’s couldn’t do this, I’m sure they can on some level, but X already has the foundations to do this today. Now, we just need a true collaborative way for multiple people to work on a Library at once. nyuk nyuk nyuk.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Have you made a compound clip in FCPX, and then opened that compound clip? That’s how I see this working.”
If you look further up the thread I specifically asked about compound clips. I’m not surprised that they would work well for this purpose – although I might find the absolute length thing a bit of a straight jacket to work in, often I need to expand in order to contract – I’m just questioning the need for this new patented Apple software. If, as you say, X can do all this already – then what’s the big whoop-de-doo – story structure diagrams?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
The difference between what I’m suggesting is the same as the difference between changing individual clips in the timeline and existing Audition clips.
Select a group of clips that make up the sequence you want to version. Right click and MAKE SEQUENCE AUDITION.
Immediately your current cut of those clips is saved and a duplicate version is created. Now you can edit away at those clips any way you like, not in a compound but right in the Project timeline. They’d have to be bounded somehow, like with a Storyline container or colour or something to signify the clips that make up the sequence. It can be longer or shorter. With different A/V bleed in/outs. Different music.
Then when you want to bounce back and forth between the versions just use the same command key CTRL+OPT+arrows.
You’re right there’s a lot of stuff in this patent that’s hard to see how it plays out.
Before any of this though, I’d like to see a better connection between media in the Project and the Event. Have new metadata that’s added to Event clips filter down to parts already in a Project, or have metadata (like Roles) you add in the Project filter back up to the Even (and all subsequent instances).
-
[Herb Sevush] “then what’s the big whoop-de-doo – story structure diagrams?”
Again, it’s not that these things can’t be done in other NLE’s, it’s that FCPX’s particular (peculiar?) structure lends itself to this style of working. Many editors working on a Project (and I mean Project in the FCPX definition of the word), but staying separate in their own timeline interface.
It reminds me of that article where the editors were saying that they don’t have enough time to edit the entire film by themselves because they can’t even get through all of the footage, so they have multiple groups of editors working simultaneously on one film. Now, I can’t find that article.
[Herb Sevush] “although I might find the absolute length thing a bit of a straight jacket to work in, often I need to expand in order to contract “
Eh, details…
[Herb Sevush] ” I’m just questioning the need for this new patented Apple software. “
That’s why this forum was created, and it’s why Apple made FCPX so they could patent it. You want a reason why they changed all the terms and conventions? There it is.
Jeremy
-
[Marcus Moore] “Before any of this though, I’d like to see”
Roles Inspector where each role has a volume, pan, send, fx, and also master fader.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up