-
FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
-
That’s not an answer to my question. I’m asking honestly. What delivery systems require it? Name some for me so I know what exactly you’re talking about and can respond.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
Ok, what are you talking about? What delivery systems require tracks? All of them from my perspective. Some require one thing and another on this track or that but they all require that specific audio be placed on specific tracks. Is this outside of your experience?
Tim
-
Many effects work that way. Including the push slide. Depending on what you choose in the inspector. And it’s always been that way. It’s a feature. and usually, it’s outright annoying when the background gets affected with the transition. When I apply a push or other transition to a layer, not to a edit between two clips, I do not want the background to be affected. I want the effect to be a transition between the clip and an invisible transparent clip, revealing the background. It’s not a fault in an NLE, but rather the logical default way it should work IMHO.
-
[TImothy Auld] “they all require that specific audio be placed on specific tracks. Is this outside of your experience?”
No. I’m challenging your assumptions. If you’re talking about something like sending a project out to Pro Tools for audio mix, let’s look at what they REALLY and actually need. Your average audio mixer will want their import to be in a specific order, right? Dialogue on 1-4, FX on 5-8, and music on 9-12 just to use an example.
Now when the mixer opens his pro tools session is he opening your Avid or FCP7 project? No. Because you exported AAF or OMF to him which translated that audio which you diligently put into tracks. It translated it into the order of tracks that the pro tools session is comprised of. Simple translation. Audio 1 in Avid translates to track 1 in pro tools.
Now throwing out for the moment the mechanism by which you can currently get FCPX audio into pro tools, do you really NEED tracks or do you really just need a way for your audio to be translated correctly into a pro tools organization. I suggest the latter. The idea behind roles is that they allow you to organize your audio for export so that it’s translated correctly for the mixer. I don’t know how well it works because I don’t have pro tools and can’t test it, but the concept bears out. If all the pro tools guy really needs is to have his dialogue first, FX next, and music last, then there’s no need for tracks if the organization and translation of elements can be done another way.
That is the point I wanted to make about needing tracks.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
Quite happy that you don’t have to operate under the constraints that I do, Steve.
Tim
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “I am inclined to think that was actually stupid in the long run.”
I certainly see your point, and I know I have no hope in ever convincing you otherwise, but i don’t find it that difficult to work this way. At the very least it’s no more difficult than trying to replace a clip on V1 in an Avid sequence with a slightly longer clip. Because of the track paradigm, in order to do that, I have to either perform a replace edit followed by a trim, making sure I include any overlapping tracks in the trim, or else an insert edit followed by an extract or lift and then selecting forward and reconnecting the entire sequence so it’s in the right place.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[TImothy Auld] “Ok, what are you talking about? What delivery systems require tracks? All of them from my perspective. Some require one thing and another on this track or that but they all require that specific audio be placed on specific tracks. Is this outside of your experience?”
Whatever, man. You’re trolling or you don’t even understand the basics of X. You give roles or subroles to audio and video in FCPX. Stuff like Music, and a subrole can be Music.Background or Music.Theme, whatever you want. It even makes more sense than A1, A2, etc.; it gets you to think about the CONTENT rather than what track it’s on. From there, you export an AAF for something like Pro Tools (using XtoPro). It will translate these roles to tracks for Pro Tools, all nice and organized. You can even export a master with audio splits instantly cause it can put each role in a separate track in the quicktime. In the old way, an AE would have to take time to organize your crap.
-
I don’t need or want to think about these things. I need them to work. And they don’t in X. I do understand that in a year I may be working with this thing (as I used to call Avid) but right now I don’t care. FCPX does not work for me or anything that I have to deliver. It may work in a 4K workflow (not even remotely a delivery situation) thing that I have coming up soon. But who is starting and ending post production in FCPX in a complex workflow right now? Or in six months? Or in a year? Or in five years? Can anyone out there tell me seriously that FCPX is a part of a five year business plan?
Tim
-
I have forgotten more about organization than you will ever know,
Tim
-
trackless magnetic timeline editing is one of the unique features of FCPX that makes it a powerful and speedy editor. If you don’t like it or can’t adapt to it, obviously you need to move on. Or you can opt to edit storylines similar to TRACKS when desired. https://fcpx.tv/Pages/tracks.html
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up