Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.

[Richard Herd]

[Oliver Peters] “your own transcoded “masters” or editing proxies”

Have you used Prelude for that, by any chance? (I have not and am curious the user experience.)

Thanks!

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “I just threw your name in the title for sensationalism…”

I will make this statement a screensaver.

[Aindreas Gallagher] “I wonder about this notion really if I’m honest. Is reducing clicking code for ‘where’s the magnetic timeline type stuff? You know what has lots of clicking? Maya. Or excel, or cinema 4D, or any complex comprehensive professional software really… Not wanting to drag this back to X – but isn’t that an unusually mouse driven editor? “

We don’t have to dag it back to X, but it’s rather convenient to compare:

The timeline window has some very mousey moments, but other than that, no. X is very keyboard centric with a gold standard contextual keyboard shortcut editor. That is another thing I don’t like about Pr (or anything Adobe) is the absolutely arcane keyboard customization. I know people argue that the interface is customizable, I find it completely annoying. With X, I can open and close what I want with many shortcuts, and the controls are in the same region of the screen every time. It’s similar to Smoke in that fashion, which is a pretty complex interface, and not very straight forward. The nice thing about Smoke is that the tools are in the same place all of the time with great keyboard navigation shortcuts to get to where you need to go, and hide/reveal what you need, but you do have to take the time to learn it. I find similar ideas in Motion (although no where near as complex as Smoke, obviously). What you can get done with the tabbed interface of the Browser, Library, and Inspector (all kb selectable), and the separate layers tab as well as the minimized timeline, you almost never need the full timeline open at al, including keyframingl. It is an extremely efficient interface, but you have to learn where things are. This workflow is really efficient, and I blame Simon Ubsdell for reinvigorating an new found interest in Motion for me;

I’ll mention it again, but you really need two panels open to use the Lumetri Panel to it’s full potential. First, you need the newly designed Panel to access all the sexy GUI stuffl, and then you need the effects panel open on the source as well to access reset buttons. I find it weird and full of crazy amounts of mousing back and forth between the two panels, as well as constantly clicking between the Panel “categories” (Correction, Creative, Curves, etc). Say what you want about the Color Box, but almost that whole entire interface can be keyboard driven right down to opening (or revealing) the Color Box, selecting which parameters to work from, and adjusting the pucks without touching one mouse, one trackpad, or one wacom pen, and then sealing it all back up with the same shortcut to get it out of the way. If I wanted to get rid of the Lumetri Panel in Pr, I’d have to create two custom interface settings, save both of those settings, and then assign shortcuts to each of those settings. In order to make those settings, I’d have to touch almost every single panel in Pr to get them all situated, twice. And those two different philosophies are all over each of the separate programs.

The place where X is missing a lot of keyboard love is vertical navigation in the magnetic timeline, and audio fade handles. They are needed, but I digress.

Getting back to the original post, yes, there has been a lot of work done on Pr. A lot of those features sound like direct feature requests from converts from other NLE’s to make Pr work similar to those NLEs. This seems to show that Adobe is certainly listening to its users and trying to make Pr what everyone wants it to be. I hope it works out.

[Aindreas Gallagher]

yes, I’ll nod along with all that –

I’d only add that I did a complex boolean google search, pulling in wolfram alpha, for the six most stupid things made by human hands –

and surprisingly, the FCPX keyframe editor architecture came up at number four. Surprising, a little harsh, but you’d feel it’s on the money.

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Aindreas Gallagher]

[Eric Santiago] “In the past Ive brought that up with Adobe and have asked numerous times to steal it.”

Jesus christ – take that back immediately. If anyone from adobe is reading this – he’s joking.

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “I’d only add that I did a complex boolean google search, pulling in wolfram alpha, for the six most stupid things made by human hands –

and surprisingly, the FCPX keyframe editor architecture came up at number four. Surprising, a little harsh, but you’d feel it’s on the money.
“

Ha!

Certainly, some things could be better, but I guess it depends on how complex you need to keyframe. I do find this to be really easy, albeit overtly simple:

Simply add a key frame and adjust what you need to adjust in the viewer, move ahead on the timeline, make the transform adjustment by dragging the position/crop//scale/handles right in the viewer, and the next keyframe is already made. Use the arrows to bounce back and forth betwixt. If you need to move (retime) them, then you have to go in to the pop-up (or remake them) but since I don’t do a lot of complex key framing in NLEs in general (mostly because FCP Legend was pretty terrible at it too, at least for video) the X method is alright, if a little weird, just like FCP7. I just wish you could send a f*cking edit to Motion.

Jeremy

[Aindreas Gallagher]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Certainly, some things could be better, but I guess it depends on how complex you need to [stated action]. I do find this to be really easy, albeit overtly simple:”

And that’s FCPX.

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Jeremy Garchow]

Some of it. Honestly, even though it looks weird, the key framing doesn’t bother me a whole lot.

I don’t know if you ever did that exercise of exporting multichannel audio out of X vs Pr, in X it’s very simple and powerful, in Pr it’s overtly complicated, not in that it’s hard to do, but in that it takes a lot of steps.

[Bill Davis]

Nope, A, it’s your VIEW of X – once again.

While X certainly has some areas where someone conditioned to how keyframes work in other apps will be frustrated, there are other aspects of the X key framing that are extremely well designed and powerful.

One example is in ducking voice against music. In X, the range selection capability lets you define a range and duck with a single drag, with X instantly auto defining the 4 keyframes necessary for the ducking. Perfecting the slopes is simple, visual and intuitive. You can even drag the whole ducked range right or left along your audio clip to better position it.

It’s visual, intuitive, and precise. And best of all, while you do it, your brain stays in the task, not in the interface.

When I originally learned about that, I wondered why they didn’t allow the same capabilities for other attributes such as opacity. Then last month, 10.2 came out and there was a major functional refinement of the effects system enabling effects to be applied in stacks so that the order of their effect on the signal can be re-arranged.

It reminds me that X is still young and rapidly developing.

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.

[Aindreas Gallagher]

[Bill Davis] “there are other aspects of the X key framing that are extremely well designed and powerful. “

Nope. there really aren’t – it’s all completely terrible.

[Bill Davis] “the range selection capability lets you define a range and duck with a single drag,”

except for that one thing. everything else is a nightmarish mess. The UN produced a study on it.

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Oliver Peters]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “except for that one thing. everything else is a nightmarish mess.”

One issue I see with the range-based keyframing is that there’s no automatic way to adjust the distance between KF 1-2 and 3-4. So you still end up fiddling with the ramp down and ramp up distances.

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com