-
macbook air and fcpx- the new portable edit suite
-
Great post, Jeremy. I appreciate the thoughtful reply.
I think I finally understand why you and I have such a different POV on the value of tracks:
[Jeremy Garchow] “I don’t think a magnetic timeline would make sense when working on the audio of a video based project as there’s no reason for the timeline to fluctuate that much during a locked edit.
I think video editing and audio post are two totally different processes and therefore might require different interfaces, but if the software is smart enough, I don’t see why tracks are totally necessary. Really, I’d leave that to the audio folks. “
That’s our key difference, right there. I think of video editing and audio post as one and the same.
Even though my primary work involves video post-production services, I have a background in music and sound design and sound is the foundation for everything I post, whether a music video or documentary style interview. In effect, I use the NLE as both an NLE and a DAW in a fluid, back and forth process to create rhythm, pacing and beats with both picture and sound interchangeably. For me, it’s all the same during the editorial phase.
Now I know your thoughts on FCP7’s audio capabilities 😉 and for the most part I agree. But here’s an example —
On the project I just finished, I posted a four and a half minute segment cut from a ~1 hour interview with a single subject. The speaker is interesting and engaging, but his speaking style is full of pauses and tangential thoughts. His final ~4 minute actuality has close to 300 edits. I craft the pauses, add or pull breaths and even construct entirely new sentences to make him succinct and editorially on point. It sounds perfect. You accept it as his actual speech without question. This is pretty typical of the work I do.
I usually go thru this audio workflow before I even begin to think about picture. My efficiently is high because I checkerboard and use FCP7s timeline tools with surgical precision. Often, the difference of a single frame will make or break the transparency of a constructed acutality. If I need even more precision, I use volume curves to get sub-frame accuracy, or two frame audio dissolves with start, center, or end positioning. This gets me about 80-90% done with audio. I don’t need the real-time effects at this point. After locking picture, I round trip to STP to do any final tweaks, sweetening and mix. Everything is organized because I’ve been organizing track layout as I go. It’s fast and efficient because I’ve already done most of the work in FCP.
This is why I need tracks — they are my scaffolding. I build on top of them and need them to be stable as I edit. Working on the trackless magnetic timeline (especially with audio) with everything rippling and moving up and down by itself whether I want it to or not, it feels like trying to build a house on quicksand!
For me, it’s a very musical process, like scoring a symphony. That’s why when I look at something like Shawn Federline’s timeline, I don’t see clutter, I see a musical score built on a common language that can easily be read, understood and shared across a range of applications and disciplines. And with audio especially, track arrangements, waveforms and clip patterns often make it possible to identify audio type instantly, just by looking. This at-a-glance feedback is a huge timesaver when sharing projects.
On the other hand, if I wasn’t thinking in terms of audio, I can easily imagine why tracks might not seem so essential and even appear as clutter. As long as playback is correct and you can output what you need, what difference would the vertical positioning make? It wouldn’t. Makes sense.
I think I finally get where you’re coming from on tracks. Thank you! I hope this gives you a better understanding of my skepticism and problems with the trackless, ripple-only timeline.
[Jeremy Garchow] “FCPX still needs work, obviously, but under the surface I really appreciate what is trying to be done, and that is catalog and manage a massive amount of data, have it follow you through the post process, and then use it to your advantage on output. There is not one NLE that I know of on the market today that is attempting this inside the editor.”
On this point we’re in complete agreement. The database driven, metadata engine under the hood is impressive and filled with potential. It’s why I’m investigating FCPX as a DAM even if I don’t ultimately use it to cut.
That’s the most frustrating thing about this whole debacle. All that power under the hood and no clear way for editors who work like me to take advantage of it. I hope Apple will address our needs in future updates but I’m not counting on it. Time will tell.
Anyway, thanks for an interesting conversation!
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[David Lawrence]On the project I just finished, I posted a four and a half minute segment cut from a ~1 hour interview with a single subject. The speaker is interesting and engaging, but his speaking style is full of pauses and tangential thoughts. His final ~4 minute actuality has close to 300 edits. I craft the pauses, add or pull breaths and even construct entirely new sentences to make him succinct and editorially on point. It sounds perfect. You accept it as his actual speech without question. This is pretty typical of the work I do.
I do this a lot too, even on videos that, to someone ignorant of what was actually shot, seem simple enough. And this is also why FCPX is slower for me than using track-based NLEs.
-
[David Lawrence] “Great post, Jeremy. I appreciate the thoughtful reply.
I think I finally understand why you and I have such a different POV on the value of tracks:”
Thank you David, for listening to my unpopular craziness.
[David Lawrence] “This is why I need tracks — they are my scaffolding. I build on top of them and need them to be stable as I edit. Working on the trackless magnetic timeline (especially with audio) with everything rippling and moving up and down by itself whether I want it to or not, it feels like trying to build a house on quicksand!”
I totally understand all of this. I work mainly in dialogue based stories as well. Often times clients want to edit the dialogue so that the interviewee says what they want them to say, not what they said on tapeless. Forgive my less eloquent description as your description is much more poetic, but we constantly frankenstein clips together, add breath and pause where they aren’t, basically, editing.
Let me ask you this. Do you think FCPX will ever get tracks? Do you think they will work with the trim tool? By adding tracks, don’t you think we will lose some of the editing efficiency?
Also, do you think that this style of editing simply is impossible in FCPXs timeline? I’m just curious, I am not attacking (and I’m sorry I have to say that). I really want to try and understand why this can’t be done in FCPX. Also, let’s make the huge assumption that Roles to OMF created the tracks and order that you need in a DAW. Maybe a screen grab of a typical timeline if you can? Help me understand what I seem to be really missing.
[David Lawrence] “I round trip to STP to do any final tweaks, sweetening and mix. Everything is organized because I’ve been organizing track layout as I go. It’s fast and efficient because I’ve already done most of the work in FCP. “
With FCPX’s audio filters, do you think you will need STP anymore? Again, just an honest question.
[David Lawrence] “This at-a-glance feedback is a huge timesaver when sharing projects.”
I hear that, loud and clear. We have three people that touch some aspect of almost every project in editorial over here, then we send it out to audio, so at most it’s 5 people that could work on any given project. There is no question that Apple is asking a lot, as we all know. The timeline is a different language, and I think it might be more visual than what people give it credit for. In my earlier post about “up being down” and a scenario of being able to sort the timeline for one’s specific needs, and of course the ability to sort back, I do think that some of the editing devices that people are really confused by (the primary/secondary storylines/clip connections/compound clips) are visual cues. Perhaps after more practice, that language will become more apparent. For instance, I just whipped this extremely simple example together. Can you not tell what’s going on here? I even threw in an easter egg:
I would love to be able to color code Roles, then it would be even easier.
[David Lawrence] “I hope this gives you a better understanding of my skepticism and problems with the trackless, ripple-only timeline.”
Absolutely. Although, I don’t see the timeline as ripple only, so much as ripple default. The P key takes you out of ripple.
[David Lawrence] “That’s the most frustrating thing about this whole debacle. All that power under the hood and no clear way for editors who work like me to take advantage of it. I hope Apple will address our needs in future updates but I’m not counting on it. Time will tell.”
Yes. I do think that Apple is the only one that could have released a product in this way. There is virtually no other entity that has legacy interfaces would have taken this kind of risk. When viewing one of the web presentations that were flying around the internets after the release of X, there was an Avid exec who got up and said (and I’m paraphrasing) that they won’t change the basics of their interface. Ever. I do not adhere to that style of thinking and saw it as a huge disappointment. Change hurts in the beginning. Pain is temporary.
Of course, the other side of that argument is that driving controls haven’t changed much since the Model T.
Don’t get me wrong. There needs to be some interface tweaks and definitely some more precision added to the interface as FCPX is far from perfect, but I see those as programming efficiencies that can and will, get fixed. One idea I think would help is some sort of layer target system. If I am adding an audio only clip to the example timeline above, I’d like to be able to select a clip in the timeline and by hitting a modifier + Q, that new clip would go above or below the selected clip in the timeline. Perhaps Shift Q is above, option Q is below, or something like that (up arrow-Q or down Arrow-q). That would prevent me from adding the clip and then dragging it to the order in the stack that I intend. Also, your suggestion of being able open compound clips in context of the main timeline is simply great. Basically, more control without tracks.
Again, thanks.
Jeremy
-
[David Lawrence] “Even though my primary work involves video post-production services, I have a background in music and sound design and sound is the foundation for everything I post, whether a music video or documentary style interview. In effect, I use the NLE as both an NLE and a DAW in a fluid, back and forth process to create rhythm, pacing and beats with both picture and sound interchangeably. For me, it’s all the same during the editorial phase.
“My experience as well! David, you could be describing my work exactly.
[David Lawrence] “On the project I just finished, I posted a four and a half minute segment cut from a ~1 hour interview with a single subject. The speaker is interesting and engaging, but his speaking style is full of pauses and tangential thoughts. His final ~4 minute actuality has close to 300 edits. I craft the pauses, add or pull breaths and even construct entirely new sentences to make him succinct and editorially on point. It sounds perfect. You accept it as his actual speech without question. This is pretty typical of the work I do.
“Wow. Me, too. I do a whole lot of sentence restructure and rhythm work. On every piece.
[David Lawrence] “For me, it’s a very musical process, like scoring a symphony. That’s why when I look at something like Shawn Federline’s timeline, I don’t see clutter, I see a musical score built on a common language that can easily be read, understood and shared across a range of applications and disciplines. And with audio especially, track arrangements, waveforms and clip patterns often make it possible to identify audio type instantly, just by looking. This at-a-glance feedback is a huge timesaver when sharing projects.
“Again, constructing a trailer or promo is, for me, very much like scoring. Not just music and SFX, but speech patterns and rhythms, VO breaks and bridges. All very musical. David, we definitely think alike in our editorial approaches.
-
The music analogy rings very true with me as well. Music and editing share that they are part organizational and mathematical, and part inspirational. Not eloquently stated but my phone is ringing.
bigpine
-
[TImothy Auld] “Music and editing share that they are part organizational and mathematical, and part inspirational. Not eloquently stated but my phone is ringing.”
🙂 Yes, editing/music/comedy/emotion/life. It’s all timing. How does FCPX hinder your editing timing? That’s what I am asking, I guess. I won’t accept “because there are no tracks!” for an answer. 🙂
And for those that are still paying attention to the subject line, how does the Macbook Air portability factor fit in to your backpack factor, factually? Discuss.
-
Well, as I have stated before – if not here then elsewhere – I find FCP X to be great for rough, broad strokes. I find it much more difficult to work with when demands become more precise. Admittedly this may just be my perspective but just consider if you were a musician in a symphony orchestra and one morning you came in to work and someone, completely arbitrarily, mandated that the conventions you had been used to all your life, the conventions that everyone else in your profession knows – conventions that in the case of music have been around for the last thousand years or so (and have worked fine during that period) all had different names and they all functioned a bit differently and – wait – some of them just didn’t work at all anymore and they never would. What would be your thoughts this?
bigpine
-
Q[TImothy Auld] “What would be your thoughts this?”
The synthesizer
-
[Chris Harlan] “Again, constructing a trailer or promo is, for me, very much like scoring. Not just music and SFX, but speech patterns and rhythms, VO breaks and bridges. All very musical. David, we definitely think alike in our editorial approaches.”
Chris — you, me and thousands of others in our industry. Think about the branding for Avid’s flagship NLEs… They’re named that way for a reason 🙂
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
Jeremy that does not address even in the simplest way what I was talking about. Come on. The synthesizer? Do you think these guys read different music? It’s a different tool to be sure. Does it change how music is notated and understood? No. If I hire a musician and he/she can’t read music then that game is over. Forgive me but what the hell are you talking about?
bigpine
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up