-
macbook air and fcpx- the new portable edit suite
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “You mean how the Events work.. or how they operate in FCPX”
i mean the basic fact that we’re dealing semantically with events as persistent entities, that default as time based events – it makes sense in photo applications because the items are singular and self similar, literally snapshots, and my understanding of what has taken place is based in part on my participation in it – it was an event, I took some photos at it. I am now doing some adjustments and storing them in my DAM.
If I walk into an editing house to do some freelance, or I’m handed a brief by my boss, the event that is taking place is me walking in the door, firing up FCP and setting the preferences appropriate for the project I’m being paid to cut and reading the brief – that’s the event. the idea that the first thing I see is everything that ever happened on that machine is nothing short of a joke. An editing system is a clean repeat machine – it is not supposed to function as a full blown persistent digital assets repository like iphoto or aperture – editing systems cycle repeatedly through new projects afresh – the idea that FCPX accretes everything constantly, every piece of media its ever used and every project that has been cut on it, and exposes all that to you unless you pay phillip hodgetts to turn it off is really annoying and deeply sad.
Its sad because its a stupid, stupid idea to do that to an editing system, even a single user system, its stupid – and all that means is that there isn’t much of a pro apps brain trust left in apple. I said above in the thread that there is stuff out there saying the XML spec is a mess – its barely documented, and it doesn’t even reliably carry DB levels. The whole thing just reeks of bad news brown.
If apple want a DAM they have to put it in back like adobe bridge – in terms of what’s actually going on in the top left of my application – its one of the things that is wrecking FCPX – if we pull the event DAM back out somehow maybe some space gets freed up up there and they can figure out how to fix all the filmstrip mess and the lack of a source monitor.
I personally think there are massive problems with this software. Big ol’ cracks running up all the supporting walls.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
You don’t have to pay Philip to move events, you can actually do it manually by moving the folders, it’s not a problem and it takes no time at all. Think of events as a box of tapes in the edit suite, if you choose to keep them then they will hang around and stink up the place, however you can choose to put the tapes back in the tape store when you’ve finished with them.
“My Name is Steve and I’m an FCPX user”
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “I personally think there are massive problems with this software. Big ol’ cracks running up all the supporting walls.”
That’s interesting. Just out of curiosity, you think FCP7 was much better? I guess I see it as opposite. FCP Legacy’s database was full of holes, as was XML. It allowed things, but you couldn’t get too deep with it.
The problem you mention of showing all events, is easily solvable. Yes, it might not be “convenient” right now to drag the event folders out of the FCP Events folder at this time, or pay $4.99 for an App that does, but to me, this is simple programming. What is more important is how strong that database is in terms of keeping track of media, and knowing what to do with it, and how fast it can be accessed and flipped, or whatever you need done.
It is true that Apple perhaps should not have released it in this state. Apple releases features slowly, they always have. They build a “platform” test the waters, see how it goes, garner feedback, build and shore up that platform, then add features. Remember, iPhones only had WebApps to begin with. It is no question that FCPX represents a departure from what is becoming the past (FCS3).
I think the entire language of FCPX is not apparent in the design yet. I do believe there is good reason for what we see now, we just don’t have the whole picture.
-
[Walter Soyka] ” I think a professional application should offer deep nuance, immense flexibility and total control. Simplicity and ease do not make an application unprofessional; the lack of these other qualities do.
“Bazinga!
-
Yeah, but – us having to throw things around in the finder to hide them from FCPX doesn’t negate the point that what we’re doing is trying to turn the DAM off, or manually turn off sets of events because its wrecking our heads, because it’s a stupid thing to have put front and centre in a single window editing app in the first place. why is the editing app simultaneously intended to function as a monolithic digital assets repository? why are my project assets in a sea of all the other assets there have ever been? Editorially, commercially, intellectually, that is just the stupidest, stupidest idea.
that we have a way to deal with it is separate from them having wedged the events DAM from a totally different application in in the first place.I think its a mess and I don’t think they can fix it because its burnt in at the AV level. the kind of project container we had isn’t possible anymore I don’t think..
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
yeah, thats really well put.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Chris Harlan] “[Walter Soyka] ” I think a professional application should offer deep nuance, immense flexibility and total control. Simplicity and ease do not make an application unprofessional; the lack of these other qualities do.
”Bazinga!”
As I have mentioned before, when it comes to interface, making things simple is a really hard task. In my opinion, we are watching the growth of the application instead of getting what is supposed to be “finished”.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Just out of curiosity, you think FCP7 was much better? I guess I see it as opposite.”
interesting. yes, yes I think FCP7 with all its faults is a superior editing system.
tell me this much – do you prefer editing in the FCPX timeline or the FCP7 timeline?
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Gary Huff] “Yeah, I don’t understand this whole fascination with “editing on the go” like an iPad or an iPhone would bring. I can already edit on the go on my laptop. Why do I need another level of being able to work?
“You certainly don’t need to do anything you don’t want to do. If it makes no sense to you, don’t do it. I don’t need it either. But, I like it. I like what I do. And, that I can get little bits of it done in many different places makes me happier. Its nice to get out of the bay sometimes. If that is hard for you to understand, then I probably couldn’t explain it to you. Similarly, I’m guessing you would have a great deal of difficulty explaining to me why such jaunts are a waste of time. I guess we’ll just have to live with that.
FWIW, I agree with you about the iPhone and maybe the iPad, but a little Macbook air for doing sellects in a coffee shop by the beach? I could take that now and then.
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “tell me this much – do you prefer editing in the FCPX timeline or the FCP7 timeline?”
There are things I love about the FCPX timeline. Truly. After editing in FCPX for a while, then going back to FCP7, I start to realize just how much clicking and moving and sliding is happening in FCP7 to manipulate the timeline. With FCPX, I think less about that and the trimming is so much more convenient and fluid. An example of the inefficiency, in FCP7, if you need to do an insert edit in V1 underneath something in V2, FCP7 will split the V2 clip. This doesn’t happen in FCPX, things just move out of the way and adjust, and most of the time it’s what you want it to do. If you could prioritize the hierarcy of the timeline in FCPX with some sort of target system, or sort system, it’d be even more powerful, and no, I don’t mean tracks.
The lack of audio tracks in FCPX is getting to be less daunting. Roles aren’t completely fleshed out, but once they get a bit more control, I can see how they will be very useful and in some ways better than audio tracks. I think it’s an excellent start and I look forward to what happens next.
The lack of a viewer isn’t a deal breaker for me, but there are times when I do miss it. I used the Gang function sometimes and when I did, it is very useful. That functionality is simply non-existent in X.
I do not mind trying new systems and watch them get better. If I had video out, I’d start doing real jobs. Not all jobs, but some.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up