Fascinating article on FCP.co today…

[Bill Davis]

[Walter Soyka] “Maybe we have a jargon issue. What does “relational” mean to you? What functionality do you attribute to relational vs flat database design?
“

That was my intent in bringing up the idea of “semi-relational” in terms of Filemaker Pro.

Could you link some fields in some tables? Yes.

Could you link any field to any other field across tables? No.

So it was “somewhat relational” as with, perhaps, Legacy – compared to X.

If the other players are still itchy about “destructive” then just to end the madness, perhaps I’ll consider in the future describing the FCP X the timeline is “ruggedized” compared to it’s competition.

Just to avoid too destructive a debate going forward.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.

[David Lawrence]

[Richard Herd] “X is wholly different. The clips are in projects. This is not simply nomenclature, as I tried to detail.”

Richard, I’m curious to hear more of your thoughts on this. How are FCPX projects not simply sequences with a different name?

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
https://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums

[Jeremy Garchow]

[David Lawrence] “Richard, I’m curious to hear more of your thoughts on this. How are FCPX projects not simply sequences with a different name?”

I would love to hear Richard’s thoughts about it too, but in the spirit of a non-angry Mr Bieberkopf, I will refer to an older post: https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/67419

Also, I think this diagram speaks to it as well.

https://www.fcp.co/images/stories/2014_07/apple-segmented_timeline/a4d-patent-4-hierarchy.png

Jeremy

[Andrew Kimery]

[Jeremy Garchow] “If it quacks like a duck…”

Then it could be a duck… that Apple will keep locked up behind bars forever. 😉

I had some high hopes when Apple purchased what would become Color and FCP Server and all of those hopes crashed and burned pretty quick. Looking at what Apple has shed in the past (Shake, Color, FCP Server, DVD SP) and, to me, one thing they all have in common is a lack of broad user appeal. If it doesn’t apply to the majority of their targeted user base then I don’t think Apple’s wants to put much muscle behind it.

[Richard Herd]

[David Lawrence] “[Richard Herd] “X is wholly different. The clips are in projects. This is not simply nomenclature, as I tried to detail.”

Richard, I’m curious to hear more of your thoughts on this. How are FCPX projects not simply sequences with a different name?”

Well…crap. I really thought I wrote it down as logical subsets. My lack of rhetorical skills need honing apparently.

Here’s a place to start from, a data table notion. PP and 7 could be contained in a single table, where the uniqueID is the media. It gets imported and then the NLE assigns it a fancy number, the mediaID.

I will label this table Browser (because that’s what Legacy called it; PP calls it Project). The table I will use here has six fields: mediaID, in, out, sequence, in, trackID

I need to revise it to include audio, so I will add three fields audioIn, audioOut, audioTrack.

9 fields. We could continue to add fields for effects, loudness, opacity, etc.

A single table.

Let’s start with Avid, and although I don’t like the user interface, it’s database is topnotch. It seems to me that Avid has a relational Database where bins have a binID and the data in that can relate to sequenceID, and this is nuts and bolts of sharing bins without importing an entire project.

Now we arrive at X.

Events, Library, Projects are their own tables because they are shareable; we can get data out of it that is not bound like the table scenario mentioned above. From an editor’s point of view it makes sense to say “yeah the project and sequence are just a presto-magico change the name to win the argument.” But from a database point of view, they are actually separate. I guess we can ask “What data are in X’s project table.” And I think that table might/would look a lot like this: libraryID, eventID, projectID, mediaID, in, out, timeIn, Role.

I think it is important for Premiere to keep the data in a single table because it will need to “snap” into a superstructure called Dynamic Link. Which brings up a point about the FCP article, and why the author thinks a flat table is inherently worse. Well it isn’t. And for Dynamic Link it appears to be crucial! In effect, I get to decide how to link tables. In other words, I can make an AE project for titles and such and then “snap” that table into EVERY SINGLE premiere project I choose. In this way Premiere is a hub, the very tippy top of the superstructure.

Another interesting observation is that I can import PP sequences into other PP projects. I’m ruminatin’ whether it is necessary to have a second table or if the above mentioned data are sufficient.

Whew.

[Walter Soyka]

[Richard Herd] “I will label this table Browser (because that’s what Legacy called it; PP calls it Project). The table I will use here has six fields: mediaID, in, out, sequence, in, trackID I need to revise it to include audio, so I will add three fields audioIn, audioOut, audioTrack. 9 fields. We could continue to add fields for effects, loudness, opacity, etc. A single table.”

I detailed the evidence supporting a relational arrangement in the file structure of a .prproj in a previous post. I have done a bit of work hacking .prproj files for an in-house media re-linking application and I am quite confident that this data is not duplicated in the project file structure as would be required for flat database storage.

For your proposition and my evidence to both be true, Premiere Pro would have to store data relationally in its project file, read it into memory, flatten the database, then de-duplicate/reorganize and store it relationally again upon save. I find that unlikely.

[Richard Herd] “I think it is important for Premiere to keep the data in a single table because it will need to “snap” into a superstructure called Dynamic Link. Which brings up a point about the FCP article, and why the author thinks a flat table is inherently worse. Well it isn’t. And for Dynamic Link it appears to be crucial!”

Why do you feel Dynamic Link can’t work with relationally-organized data?

DL mainly does three things: it is able to peer into a foreign project format to enable the user to select a dynamic link source, it is able to present an element from a foreign project to the local application as if it were project-native, and it is able to intermediate requests among applications for rendered frames from foreign elements.

Everything needed for Dynamic Link to work can be stored relationally in the local project’s database, no super-structure required.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Craig Alan]

Do you create these templates or do the producers/head writer (show runner) give it to you?

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Craig Alan]

[Herb Sevush] “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.”

But they would still need someone who knows the NLE to do this ‘restructuring’, right? Are you saying they could use someone with less experience or no developed creative voice and the producer could just ask them to do this that or the other? What to save a buck? Or am I not getting your point?

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Craig Alan]

But aren’t breaks at set amounts of time? Aren’t credits given in a consistent style? Transitions/music/effects usually of a certain style in and out of breaks and at the end as well as the beginning of a show?

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Herb Sevush]

[Craig Alan] “Do you create these templates or do the producers/head writer (show runner) give it to you?”

Craig, I’m guessing your asking me this question. AS a suggestion, on this forum, especially with long threads, its advisable to refer to a name, or quote the original post so we know who you are referring to.

In any case if this is a response to my post then the answer is I create the templates as part of my job as post supervisor. The graphic packages are given to me by the producers, along with theme music and any other standard elements for the series. Choice of post workflow is mine, I incorporate those elements into a generic project and send that project file to the editors, along with a folder of elements.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf