macbook air and fcpx- the new portable edit suite

[Gary Huff]

[Chris Harlan]Of course, what do we mean by editing? While I was Google-exploring whether or not FCP X could work on a MacBook Air, I came across a bit of video that somebody claimed to have edited with X/Air. In fact, they head-lined that fact on their blog. It was family footage with four or five cuts that went on for three or four minutes. So, I’m guessing iPad/X will be just fine for him.

That’s a good point. I would say “editing” in these modern times is not only cutting clips together, but also motion graphics/VFX (even if limited in fashion)/color correction. How many job postings looking for “editors” also want After Effects or even Maya experience as well? How often do you simply do a straight edit and leave it at that? It’s super rare for me to just edit.

[Craig Seeman]

[Walter Soyka] “Why do you think Aperture was meant to be iPhoto Pro, but FCPX was meant to be more than iMovie Pro?”

I don’t think Aperture sells hardware. I’m not sure if Apple knew where to go with it and it’s while Lightroom may have eclipsed it. In fact Lightroom (and Bridge also) are much more of an “ecosystem” tool that Aperture has been. I don’t think Aperture has had a clear direction other than being a more feature rich version of iPhoto.

There’s a lot of reasons to believe and see FCPX being a device to move hardware. Some are overt such as the need for systems with newer GPUs. Others, although speculative, I think are related to Apple looking to sell more computers of various types. That’s why we see discussion on this forum of MacBookAir with Thunderbolt ports. That doesn’t mean other NLEs won’t take advantage of that but Apple tends not to be reliant on third party software to sell their hardware.

I also think whatever replaces the MacPro as something Apple will want FCPX to sell. I think Apple sees FCPX eventually being a “hub” in both a portable and facility post environment. It’s a very long way from here to there though. I don’t see any business motive for FCPX to repeat Aperture’s current situation.

[Gary Huff]

[Jeremy Garchow]In what program?

Adobe Premiere CS5.5 primarily.

Imagine being able to sort the timeline as you want

I never really need to “sort” a timeline in the way FCPX does it, but under Premiere/FCP7, I’m currently editing a mini-doc (in FCP7) and I have different segments of the interviews as nested sequences. I’ve been playing with the order and the clips that bridge them with ease. There’s not been another way I’ve wanted to sort the timeline outside of what I can already do.

being able to add/remove effects as you want,

Do this all the time. Click on a clip in Premiere’s timeline, select the “Effects” tab, I can delete it, adjust it, copy it or even turn it off temporarily if I need to speed up the response time of the NLE and it’s a CPU-heavy effect. I find Premiere is easier in this regard than FCP7, though about the same with FCPX (except for the copying aspect which is much quicker in Premiere as you can copy only selected effects).

export only what you want (by Role, or whatever)

I haven’t played around with Roles in FCPX yet, but I’ve constantly had to export either a screenshot of a frame, isolated audio, video segments, ect. Just select the range, go to export and adjust for the right format that I want. I fail to see how it could be substantially faster than what I already do. Only difference is that I do have to be organized if I want to, say, export only video or only motion graphics or whatnot, but I’m organized and so I can just turn off and on tracks to get what I need. I wouldn’t be surprised if assigning the Roles in the first place evens out the time spent with assigning by tracks.

arrange Roles in the order you want to export to other programs.

I have no idea what you mean by this. Off the top of my head it doesn’t sound like something I’ve needed a solution for.

[Jeremy Garchow]

Cool. Then good luck to you on Adobe.

[Gary Huff] “I never really need to “sort” a timeline in the way FCPX does it,”

Let me be clear, FCPX does not do this yet. I imagining some day it will and I will like it.

[Gary Huff] “There’s not been another way I’ve wanted to sort the timeline outside of what I can already do.”

Yes, but you have tracks, FCPX does not. I know what your response to this is going to be, and that’s OK.

[Gary Huff] “Click on a clip in Premiere’s timeline, select the “Effects” tab, I can delete it, adjust it, copy it or even turn it off temporarily if I need to speed up the response time of the NLE and it’s a CPU-heavy effect.”

If you have 25 clips of “Gary” spread out all over the timeline, can you, with a click or two, find those clips of “Gary” and turn off or remove or add an effect(s)? This is how I envision the Index eventually being able to work. I am not talking about one clip at a time, that’s easy in any program. In FCPX, you can even turn off effects by copying and pasting a turned off/empty effect. This is not easy or very convenient. FCP Legacy allows you to remove all the effects from a clip. It does not allow you to remove only one effect from a stack of effects.

[Gary Huff] “I haven’t played around with Roles in FCPX yet, “

Oh. Got ya. Then I will leave you to check it out before I comment any further. If you don’t check it out, I understand. Good luck with CS 5.5.

Jeremy

[Chris Harlan]

[Walter Soyka] “[Craig Seeman] “While I or anyone else, not privy to their discussions, can only speculate where Apple is headed, I’m surprised at how many “creatives” here can’t imagine that they have something powerful that at least they (Apple) has in mind.”

I don’t think a lack of imagination or creativity is the problem here — I think it’s a lack of trust. Apple seriously damaged their credibility with the launch of FCPX. Given this, can you really blame people for wanting to see before they believe?
“

Agreed. Craig, it really is not that we cannot “imagine” a more muscular future for FCP X. I think the potential is possibly there, but the big picture is very much a Rorschach test. Some of us look at the inkblot and see the future of video, and some of us see a discarded pro system on a voyage that is purely prosumer. Sadly, Apple has done little to clarify, which some people read as “Apple’s way” and others take as there being nothing more to say. So, trust, or lack there of, is really the problem.

[Gary Huff]

[kim krause]do me a favor and save this message. in 2 years time mail me back with an apology if what i’ve observed doesn’t come to pass.

I think you meant to say that we should e-mail you with an apology if you’re correct. I don’t think anyone will care one way or another.

[I] don’t know why people get so upset with me when i mention that things are changing.

Kim, here’s a helpful life hint for you: don’t toss around the idea of people getting “upset” simply because they don’t agree with your assessment. If they call you names or pull their hair out or start typing in all caps, then you might be correct in referring to it as that. But if you say, “I think the sky is red.” and someone says, “No, Kim, I think the the sky is blue.” and your response is along the lines of, “Why are you upset with me?!?! Is it because you know I’m right and don’t want to admit it?!” then that makes you look like a tool.

[David Lawrence]

Interesting sub-thread, really enjoying the ideas here.

[Jeremy Garchow] ”
You don’t see any use for a role based vertically sortable timeline? Meaning for any given primary storyline clips and everything connected to it, if you want your audio to always stack as dialogue, then effects, then music? I can think of some really practical reasons, especially when there’s no tracks. “

[Jeremy Garchow] “And it’s not there yet. Roles are just the beginning the jumping off point, of how a database driven design will help manage data.”

Agree that roles have a lot of potential, especially for data management. What I don’t see is how they make it easier to edit. Cutting and data management are two very different tasks. They may be related, but the actual work and the tools I need to be efficient are completely different. One of the thing I need is structured visual organization, something that tracks intrinsically provide.

It might eventually be possible to assign a lane index to roles to simulate tracks, but I think things things will start getting messy fast. I’d be happier if the limit on a single primary storyline went away and became user definable. Let me set up my sequence to fit my organization needs, then add data management tools to that.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl

[Gary Huff]

Wait…so all those benefits you touted are where you see FCPX going and not anything you’re able to actually do yet?

Let me be clear, FCPX does not do this yet. I imagining some day it will and I will like it.

Yeah, and the NLE I can imagine that we might have one day is awesome too.

If you have 25 clips of “Gary” spread out all over the timeline, can you, with a click or two, find those clips of “Gary” and turn off or remove or add an effect(s)?

At first glance, that sounds impressive. But then:

This is how I envision the Index eventually being able to work.

Ah, yet another instance of a feature you’re touting in FCPX that doesn’t actually exist yet?

Wow.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Gary Huff] “Wait…so all those benefits you touted are where you see FCPX going and not anything you’re able to actually do yet?”

Did you read the posts?

[Gary Huff] “Ah, yet another instance of a feature you’re touting in FCPX that doesn’t actually exist yet?”

Relax, eh? I think I was very forthcoming in saying this is what I see being capable in FCPX very soon as evidenced by what is in the program today and right now, and possible explanations of the trackless timeline. I did not tout everything as being available today, although one click export of roles/tracks is available today, albeit with limitations. Sorting the timeline is not available, you have to do it by hand for now. The Effects Index is not available, but you could see there’s room for it. Where would that be in CS5.5? It certainly isn’t built in and it’s already on v5.5. 😛

I also mentioned a 15″ iPad with Thunderbolt. That’s not here either.

[Gary Huff]

You’re right, you were touting these “future” abilities of FCPX that currently don’t exist. However, I can do that now.

Why should I wait? Why should I even care?

I also mentioned a 15″ iPad with Thunderbolt. That’s not here either.

And may never be. Not everything is a given.