-
FCPX and skeuomorphism
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I don’t understand it either”
Reading “Reel” in QT is really my “Canary in the coal mine” test for Apple that will tell me Apple has listened and responded by adding a seemingly super obvious and simple to implement ability that pros require.
Fingers crossed the Canary survives.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Or AVFoundation isn’t ready.”
Thankfully AVFoundation can create QT files with embedded “Reel” or as it’s called in the QT API “tcsource”. This opens up the ability to export movies with a user defined “Reel”, which I also requested. If Apple and people like Bill, are hung up on the original physical container Reel has traditionally meant, then refer to it as tcsource if that will help shake it’s legacy baggage.
[Jeremy Garchow] “I don’t understand it either. Even when using 7toX, “reel” is now put in the “notes” column.”
Unbelievably “Notes” is the only metadata field that is exported in a FCPX xml.
Apple may be concerned about “flooding” an xml export with all the metadata available in FCPX. Our recommendation to Apple was to include an option that only exports metadata in a specific Metadata view. Users could create custom metadata views and add metadata fields they what, much like columns, and then select that group to be exported in the xml.
John
-
[Michael Gissing] “Personally I am used to making the card folder the reel. Doing double system sound I make the sound folder identical to the camera plus an A for audio. So it dead easy to associate the sound folder to the picture folder via the reel name. This becomes critical for auto reconform with cameras that do timecode.”
Aha! Exactly as I suspected.
You have a specific vision of how you want to ID your clips. The video clips and the audio clips need to be set to YOUR specifications. So you need to take a moment and set the ID in the fields where it’s of most use to you.
So what you want is a system that lets you do it your way. Not how the camera MFG determined is should be. Use REEL if you like. – but also don’t use Reel if you don’t.
But those with traditional workflows are arguing that EVERYONE needs reels such that software is somehow “crippled” if that field isn’t baked into the workflow such that no matter what camera, from what manufacturer, shooting to what media – it must present everyone with a lonely REEL field (even if bereft of content) to be worthy.
I suspect that what REALLY hurts is that Apple probably simply prioritized managing REEL data lower than, for example, managing card ID data. X rocks at managing card ID data. It’s essentially flawless, not caring a jot if the user screws up and mislabels, duplicate lables, doesn’t at all label, or uses a Prince like typographic glyph to label a disk – It’ just keeps working using the embedded IDs that makes the system shrug off human error and keep operating sensibly. Dev team mission accomplished.
Anyway, I’ve probably WAY over beaten this REEL subject to death. Moving on…
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor
-
[John Heagy] “Now’s it making sense… How can someone appreciate Reel if they don’t need TC from their camera.”
Well to be completely fair, I only had about 20 straight prior years working with camera tapes – so you can presume that I “appreciate” the place that REEL ID used to have in ones workflow.
I just don’t miss it now that it’s finally gone from mine.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor
-
[Bill Davis] “But those with traditional workflows are arguing that EVERYONE needs reels such that software is somehow “crippled” if that field isn’t baked into the workflow…”
Nobody insisted EVERYONE use reel in their workflow. Just think of reel the same as you do all the other metadata fields in FCPX you don’t enter data in.
It’s clear reel is used to facilitate interchange and custom workflows. One man “bands” that don’t interchange with other processes or devise custom workflows have little need for reel. That’s all fine, nobody’s forcing you to use it.
Please don’t insist it’s useless because you don’t use it or understand how others do.
Apple clearly targeted FCPX, at least initially, to the one man bands and pajama editors of the world. I for one hope Apple wants to have FCPX used in high end professional “facilities” where “out of the box” workflows and hand holding just don’t cut it. Responding to the needs of pros who use time tested workflows will help FCPX make in roads into “pro facilities”.
John
-
[Bill Davis]”Anyway, I’ve probably WAY over beaten this REEL subject to death. Moving on…”
Amen brother. We get that you don’t get it so lets all move on.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up