Is Mixer fixed in 2?

[Shane Chadder]

Thanks for the discussion. I guess I assumed most others would be troubled by the way the mixer works.

Edit actually did mix at the track level, you could see the levels on a track whether clips were there or not. But what I found useful was being able to move entire sections of the timeline (by marking an in and an out) and that would include selected tracks and the mix levels. That way you could mix as you go and not have to revisit that work if the content was reorganized.

When I was done I could even add bars, slate etc to the head and push everything down without worrying about the mix.

[Tim Kolb]

[Shane Chadder] “Edit actually did mix at the track level, you could see the levels on a track whether clips were there or not. But what I found useful was being able to move entire sections of the timeline (by marking an in and an out) and that would include selected tracks and the mix levels. That way you could mix as you go and not have to revisit that work if the content was reorganized.”

Edit* did have an extremely powerful “select range” function, that much is obvious to me as most edit* users seem to keep coming back to that functionality as one of the key areas they miss on other applications.

As far as workflows go…quite frankly I assumed everyone worked exactly like I do until i started to travel and train people. The different types of work and a very logical and efficient workflow in one shop would be completely unacceptable in another…

Combine that with human tendencies to develop a rut and you have me, who absolutely did not like the fact that we lost A/B editing in PPro. It was so easy to train beginners in this way because the idea of the trim overlaps was literal and right there in front of them. It took me a while to adjust to using the new features in PPro to my best advantage, but now that I’ve been using it for several years, I have no idea how I was able to work in Premiere 6.x and earlier…or Media 100 before that…

Each tool has its own strengths and weaknesses. The problem is when we change tools and workflows, but don’t change our expectations. Different strengths…are still strengths.

TimK,

Kolb Productions,
Creative Cow Host,
Author/Trainer
http://www.focalpress.com
http://www.classondemand.net

[Gene Colburn — email address bounces notices]

[Tim Kolb] ”
Actually, to edit audio levels the way you have always done it, you would type the “P” key for pen tool and hold down CTL to make a new point.”

Oh man..Oh man. I became very proficient at mousing over to the keyframe button. I do use the pen tool, just somehow never figured the ctl key with it. I will never forget it now. Thanks

[Tim Kolb] “I am not really a guy who pulls out the old “read the manual” thing very often…but this would be one of those areas where(if I’m understanding you correctly) you guys have apparently been punishing yourselves for nothing…and if you’ve been using PPro since v1, it’s been a couple of years.”

Aren’t all editors masochists? Nice to make your aquaintance Tim, and I say that with sincerity, But if we all read them with clarity there would be no book and dvd sales for Jacob.
Manuals…manuals. It took me three days of reading Encores 1.0 manual before I could burn our first dvd with it. I am in a small market, so there is very little Adobe training that goes on here. It is either book, or self taught. Actually we sell bundled Matrox systems, and provide training support for other editors (Pinnacle, DPS, Avid). So I really do have egg on this one. I have been cursing Adobe much since PPro 1.0. I love some things and hate others.

[Tim Kolb]

[Gene Colburn] “But if we all read them with clarity there would be no book and dvd sales for Jacob.”

I have DVDs and a book as well as do live instruction/consulting for Adobe and CineForm products and Steven Gotz has training materials too (in fact Premiere Pro books and other material seems to be an industry in itself of late). That doesn’t necessarily mean I want users to remain frustrated until I show up.

Plus…if you SELL systems and complain about features not being there that are…that’s not good for any of us.

I’m glad I could improve the software for you… 😉

Regards,

TimK,

Kolb Productions,
Creative Cow Host,
Author/Trainer
http://www.focalpress.com
http://www.classondemand.net

[Steven L. gotz]

I am working on a two Premiere Pro 2.0 books at the moment. One as a techincal editor of a step-by-step book, and the other as a contrinuting writer – upgrading the last one from 1.5 to 2.0. So if it were easy to learn, I would have to do something else to pay for my cameras and PCs. But I would still rather have it be easy to learn.

Steven
http://www.stevengotz.com

[Paul King]

Hi Tim

I am a bit disturbed you say you haven’t heard of this before. I would have thought you would have seen it as a forum topic somewhere we cant talk about.

I am with Shane on this one – it’s broken.

In 6.5 the automation mix affected clip keyframes, not track keyframes.
What poissible reason would you want to record a volume mix on a track?
As Shane says if you alter the timeline the whole mix is out the window so you have to do the whole thing again.

Nesting timelines makes no sense and defeats the purpose of finishing audio in an NLE.

I’m not having a go at anyone but this is clearly wrong. I do understand that there are different workflows, but again, why would you record mixer changes to the track and not the clip? Like 6.5?

Thanks

Paul