-
Lightworks
-
“For example, try taking clips with dual mono audio. Now adjust different audio levels on each of the two tracks and different in/out points.”
Oliver, what happens in this case?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
Having actually tried the Lightworks beta (in a very limited way), I think its even less usable than FCPX in its present state.
This is not the Lightworks used to cut academy award winning films. Not exactly anyway. This version is much less stable (yes…its a beta). Its also extremely feature incomplete. If you think FCP X is missing stuff, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
Its interface is also very different than Avid/FCP classic and will take a great deal of getting used to for anyone coming from those worlds. Some may find the editing paradigm clunky and outdated, others will find its simplicity very liberating.
I am not as hopeful about open source editing software. While Apple’s hubristic (is that a word?) attitude of thinking they know better than professional editors, and taking no input is certainly troublesome, having a clear vision for the interface is essential for it to work well. I am sure longtime Lightworks users must be a little scared of letting the masses turn their beloved interface into a hodgepodge of FCP and Avid features, just to achieve familiarity, when it does go completely open. Just try to get a room full of editors to agree on anything. One person’s essential feature is completely irrelevant to another.
-
[Robert Brown] “. Like I said before, there is no substitute for actually looking at what was shot even if it’s already been evaluated and sometimes that means going through long reels.”
Well, then the skimmer alone should be worth the $ 299 for you 😉
-
For me selects are more about visualization than organization. Metadata is great for organizing, for finding things you need in a specific situation. I also tend not to discount anything that I think might be useable, so my selects are often more of an assembly of anything I think might be – even marginally – useable in some way, and less a collection of what I deem to be “good takes.” Very often one sentence – or even one word – from what otherwise might be discarded as a “bad take,” will end up to be integral in crafting the best possible scene you can. For me to be able to see all those things together and then be able to play with them like a Rubic’s cube, is invaluable to me. I accept that it may be a limitation in how I approach editing but at present I just don’t see how metadata can achieve the same thing for me.
bigpine
-
Ah, Legacy software. I have fond memories of Montage and Speed Razor, for instance. They were remarkable in their time; trying to use them today would be maddening. I’m guessing a voyage back to Lightworks would be a bit of a challange, as well.
That’s the problem with this whole FCP wasn’t cool (or was a toy) when it was first released. It’s just not the late ’90s anymore.
-
Why would I pay $300 for what I can already do and lose half of the other stuff I do on a regular basis? I haven’t seen the new skimmer but I had no problem with any previous system.
-
[Geoff Dills] “But little talk about Lightworks. I looked at it and thought it had promise. The controller looks like a fantastic way to work with footage. And its strength is its ability to be customized to the editors delight.”
I know Andy and the folks at EditShare well and I think what they are doing is a great attempt. It’s always good to see new blood, even if it’s an older system. This is a totally different Lightworks than in the past. I’m not a big believer in Open Source programs and so far, the development is largely in-house to drive the turnkey film editing system. I also don’t see it ported to any other OS any time soon. The code has very deep hooks into Windows.
[Geoff Dills] “But I made a decision when I switched to FCP to pick one editor and stick with it so I’m trying to continue that approach with X and find out what will make it work, not that it is necessarily a better way in all regards.”
Of course X is completely different than FCP 1-7, so it seems that at this point you could just as easily move to any other NLE.
[Geoff Dills] “As to adjusting two audio tracks, the only way I’ve found is to open in timeline and do it there.”
Yet, it’s absolutely simple in FCP7 😉
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Herb Sevush] “Oliver, what happens in this case?”
Clip parameters largely have to be modified in the timeline or “opened in timeline”. The latter is like making a source-side change (or adding a filter to a master clip) in FCP 7.
When you edit a clip to the FCP X timeline, you then have to change the clip from stereo to dual mono in the audio tab of the inspector. You can disable (un-check) one of the tracks, but you can’t adjust individual levels. You have to actually break apart the interleaved A/V clip into connected video/audio clips. Since these are now separate, but connected clips, it is very easy to inadvertently move one and throw it out of sync. Unfortunately, you have to separate them if you want V, A1 and A2 each to have different edit-in points. Also to have different audio levels for A1 and A2. Now extend this to camera clips than can have 4 or more channels of sync audio.
There are no provisions yet in FCP X to identify out-of-sync timeline elements and nothing to easily move or slip them back into sync. The workaround is to combine the separated clips back into a compound (nested) clip on the timeline.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
I think he means you can’t manipulate individual audio channels across cuts (L or J style) in the main timeline without detaching them from the video, thus putting them at risk of being moved out of sync (with no sync markers to let you know).
Even with mono tracks, FCPX displays all the audio married to video in the main timeline in aggregate. You can drill into individual clips to manipulate the discrete audio channels, (using the “Open in Timeline” option), but you are limited to edits within the scope of the single clip (you can’t highlight multiple clips and “Open in Timeline”).
This all makes handling mono audio channels separately rather wonky.
Best,
AndyEDIT: Oliver answered while I was typing.
-
“This all makes handling mono audio channels separately rather wonky.”
I generally use 4 cameras with mono audio split out among the channels, effectively giving me 8 channels to play with as I cut. This kind of work around stuff, for something I use all the time, everyday, is an absolute deal breaker for me. I wonder in which FCPX upgrade they will figure out they need to address it?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up