-
It’s All Connected — Clip Relationships and The Magnetic Timeline Paradigm
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Beyond that, there’s a LOT of empty space.”
Personally, I see the timeline as half-full. 🙂
Are tracks the best way to assign metadata to clips? Probably not, because tracks are many-to-one and metadata is many-to-many.
Are tracks the best way to show sorted clips with metadata applied to the edit? Possibly.
I suppose a lot of this discussion will hinge on whether you view empty space as a bad thing. I think it’s a tool, and I think that FCPX’s designers have made an error in setting out to eliminate empty space from the timeline, because empty space can carry useful information.
In design, it’s called negative space, and it can help to define the subject by contrast. It also supports the principle of alignment, which is a way of grouping like items in 2D space that can be quickly and easily understood by the viewer.
I think we’ve talked about this before, but it would be very cool if an NLE could show you an sorted version of the timeline based not on connections or even compositing, but rather on user-defined metadata. If it’s all just data, why should a timeline have only one static view on it?
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “I suppose a lot of this discussion will hinge on whether you view empty space as a bad thing. I think it’s a tool, and I think that FCPX’s designers have made an error in setting out to eliminate empty space from the timeline, because empty space can carry useful information.”
But look closely at that timeline. The amount of empty space is really the only way to do it if you need things in their own tracks. I would say there are better ways to do it, this is just how FCP7 handles it as it really is the only way it can handle it and stay organized.
[Walter Soyka] “In design, it’s called negative space, and it can help to define the subject by contrast. It also supports the principle of alignment, which is a way of grouping like items in 2D space that can be quickly and easily understood by the viewer. “
I wouldn’t call this negative space design though, Walter, this is “I need to put this VFX sequence up here, but it’s 10 tracks above the other stuff I need to sort, unfortunately, the 10th track is way up here so up here it goes”. Again, take a long stare at that timeline. This was born out of track utility, this was not born of design.
[Walter Soyka] “I think we’ve talked about this before, but it would be very cool if an NLE could show you an sorted version of the timeline based not on connections or even compositing, but rather on user-defined metadata. If it’s all just data, why should a timeline have only one static view on it?”
I agree. This is the only view that FCP7 allows.
I think it was out one of these conversations that we talked about Zones. I think with Roles (as multi-use containers) and the timeline index (as being able to sort) we could have something really useful, efficient, and it wouldn’t take 22 tracks of video and 50 tracks of audio with 8 of those “tracks” being used for nothing.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “But look closely at that timeline. The amount of empty space is really the only way to do it if you need things in their own tracks. I would say there are better ways to do it, this is just how FCP7 handles it as it really is the only way it can handle it and stay organized.”
Yes, agreed. If you want tracks, you will need empty space.
[Jeremy Garchow] “I wouldn’t call this negative space design though, Walter, this is “I need to put this VFX sequence up here, but it’s 10 tracks above the other stuff I need to sort, unfortunately, the 10th track is way up here so up here it goes”. Again, take a long stare at that timeline. This was born out of track utility, this was not born of design.”
What would you prefer? Color-coding? That’s better at showing at a glance what is different than what is the same. It’s not as good a tool for grouping like objects as position or alignment (a special case of position) is.
When I refer to design here, I’m talking about the principles that make track layouts coherent and easily understood. Tracked timelines exploit graphic design principles for conveying information in ways that the magnetic timeline does not.
[Jeremy Garchow] “I agree. This is the only view that FCP7 allows.”
FCPX has only graphical view, too. The timeline index is a tease!
[Jeremy Garchow] “I think it was out one of these conversations that we talked about Zones. I think with Roles (as multi-use containers) and the timeline index (as being able to sort) we could have something really useful, efficient, and it wouldn’t take 22 tracks of video and 50 tracks of audio with 8 of those “tracks” being used for nothing.”
Those 8 tracks aren’t used for nothing, though. They’re quick visual indicators that break apart the zones in the audio track layout. Without them, the timeline would be much harder to read. Their inclusion adds a lot of value and meaning to the timeline, graphically speaking.
This would be a good place for color-coding, on a per-zone rather than per-clip basis, because the color coding would provide the contrast you’d need to easily distinguish one audio zone from another.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “FCPX has only graphical view, too. The timeline index is a tease!”
Just as a historical note, the EMC had multiple timeline views almost 20 years ago. You could go from a traditional graphical timeline to a CMX EDL view of the same timeline with a keystroke. You could edit within the EDL view and then switch back and the timeline would reflect those changes.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Walter Soyka] “Yes, agreed. If you want tracks, you will need empty space.”
It’s not that there is no empty space in any other NLE, but there could be more efficient use of it. If you look at that timeline, it’s obvious there are big groups of related items there, especially in the audio. When you are editing in V18 and A50, this can get tedious if not down right maddening. What you if you could bring V18 in the vicinity of V2 and A50 to A4. Wouldn’t that be better? Once you are done working on it, you could move it back to wherever you’d like (or re-sort). This is how I see Zones working.
[Walter Soyka] “What would you prefer? Color-coding? That’s better at showing at a glance what is different than what is the same. It’s not as good a tool for grouping like objects as position or alignment (a special case of position) is.”
Color coding is good. Pr is awesome for this. If is clear as day what is what. You can also name tracks in Pr to something useful.
Color coded Roles would be good, too. And then a way to sort those Roles. I disagree that FCPX is only graphical. The Timeline Index might not be very powerful, but it is a way to help you find and display the information. You can search for certain elements in a variety of ways and highlight only those certain things. Once you have that selection made, you can change those clips, add metadata to those clips, and generally manipulate those clips. You don’t have to select clips one by one in the timeline (or track by track), you can use the index for selection. It’d be nice if you were able to visually sort them too, both in the index and visually in the timeline. This would get tricky as there are compositing rules to follow, as well as ‘temporal’ rules of sorting. But if a person knew what they were doing when sorting, or if the software was smart enough to always ‘remember’ the ever important time and space flow of the edit, then the tools would simpyl respect those rules no matter how it’s displayed. Next level!
[Walter Soyka] “When I refer to design here, I’m talking about the principles that make track layouts coherent and easily understood. Tracked timelines exploit graphic design principles for conveying information in ways that the magnetic timeline does not.”
Easily understood meaning, there’s a ‘clip over here’, ‘but not a clip over here’?
When I’m working, I am usually working with clips and I need to know where there’s clips are. Rarely do I need to know where those clips aren’t.Easily understood and easily worked on can be two totally separate things. Sure, I can look at Murch’s timeline and see a general idea of what is going on without knowing specifics. But my guess is that it would be a pain in the ass to edit with, which is probably one of the reasons why Murch uses the “Quicktime Skin”. He’s making up for design inefficiency. It’s also pretty clever in that it is a visual way to track changes and help with FCP7 performance. I would say better timeline and NLE design could help you track changes more efficiently and better performance could come out of 64 bit programming and efficient coding.
I just want better. I think there can be better than FCP7, and perhaps even tracks.
Jeremy
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “FCP7 lends itself to this method, but is it the best way? The most creative way? The most efficient way? The most accurate? The most familiar? :)”
Maybe for Water Murch, it’s the most flexible way. 😉
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[David Lawrence] “Maybe for Water Murch, it’s the most flexible way. ;)”
Could be. I don’t know. Certainly, FCP7 allows a hook to FileMaker through XML, and FileMaker is where the meat of the information is.
Also certainly, FCPX can’t do what Murch needs it to do at the moment.
I am talking strictly the timeline and it’s mechanics. The FCP7 timeline could be better.
-
Yes, I found that there were many similarities to the FCPX launch. It made me laugh. The cartographer also mentioned that having a sense of humor about the whole things was a healthy way to move forward, and ultimately, Apple will be OK.
[David Lawrence] “What happens with Maps remains to be seen. Since this is a visible and serious problem for Apple, no doubt it will get much effort, investment and priority.”
Well, there’s this story (link) already floating around.
[David Lawrence] “It may not be as broadly challenging as mapping, but real-time database-driven media software is really hard to do well. Given the comparatively small size of the market and how Apple uses their engineering resources, I have to wonder if they are up to the long-term challenge they’ve created for themselves with FCPX.”
With FCPX, and now with Maps, Apple is banking on doing it their way and controlling the distribution. I cannot imagine even in my most cynical heart of hearts that Apple thought Maps would be an equivalent to Google Maps on launch day. What they have done, and this is my speculation, is taken the risk. The are risking that Maps and FCP can be done in a way that makes sense for their company in the long term, even if that means making shittier applications in the short term. I used Apple Maps this weekend in the car to go apartment hunting. It worked great. The turn by turn was nice, the speed of the app even on shitty Chicago AT&T service and my older phone was incredibly fast compared to a Google equivalent. So there are good things. My first experience was good and accurate.
My phone can’t handle the 3D maps, but on an iPad, even though some of the renderings were odd, I thought it was a great companion for apartment hunting. I could scope the neighborhood before I went and looked in person. I’m not sold on it’s long term viability, but for that specific use, it was actually very decent.
Plus, Google will take care of the iOS experience. I am actually glad that the original YouTube app was dumped on the iPhone. The YouTube web app is much more pleasing, so much so I haven’t even downloaded the Google sanctioned YouTube app. The GMail iOS app is fantastic, though. Holy cow. I’m not worried about Google. They have their own agenda and will make it work for everyone.
Glad you liked the article, it was certainly a fascinating read for me as well. As mentioned in the article, I like how the cartographer responded to nearly every comment n his blog, even the ones he could have easily just ignored.
Jeremy
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Certainly, FCP7 allows a hook to FileMaker through XML, and FileMaker is where the meat of the information is.”
Indeed. I find Murch’s FileMaker workflow pretty inspiring and would love to learn more about it. Especially the custom generated auto assembly from FileMaker to FCP… wow!
[Jeremy Garchow] “I am talking strictly the timeline and it’s mechanics. The FCP7 timeline could be better.”
Agreed!
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
As an ex audio guy, Murch obviously sees the power of both track layering as an organisational tool and clip stacking (the ‘quicktime skin’).
If FCP X had developed with the idea of making the track paradigm more useful than the limited FCP7 functionality and copied the clip overwrite/ stacking idea from DAWs this whole argument over magnetic timelines would be unnecessary. Unfortunately we are now set to argue for two inferior approaches ad nauseum.
If you see how Murch makes temporary groups by making sub mixes and a quicktime of the whole program as his top ‘skin’ layer, you can see that grouping then becomes an editable object along side the broken down raw elements. Group relationships are so often temporary but powerful to make from time to time before breaking them apart and regrouping. Sure this is a Murch’s work around but the concept is the point. I don’t see how pre defining group relationships like Roles in X can be as useful as temp groups with track organisation.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up