-
metadata vs notes and diagrams
I’m interested in opinions about using metadata – to which as a result of an upgrade I now have access – to organize clips within Premiere Pro. It’s clear that a lot of thought has gone into this feature which may be in high demand. But do folks find that the time entering data pays off in workflow efficiency? Or have a system of abbrievations to speed it up?
In the past – even (and especially) on a project with 24 hours worth of footage – I’ve identified each clip uniquely by name only,using a volumenumber/date/name from a consecutive letter/number system and/or set of very short abbrevations about content, (that way they naturally sort in a ‘sort-of’ logical order) and then orgnanized them ‘logically’ by type/tape volume/date/whatever with folders and sub-folders in the project window. No digital tag-notes attached at all to the clips. Instead I’ve jotted down quick notes (refering to time-code as necessary) on a pad about each clip or sub-clip or whatever, usually organized chronologically by shot time/date (often whatever order I’ve brought them into the computer.) This collection of notes is created quickly and potentially expressively (usually colour-coded), and allows for elaboration – and diagramming when required. The loosely-formatted note pages are quick and realtively easy to peruse by hand and eye. But of course it’s limited in terms of how many ways the collection can be automatically sorted, searched, transformed, organized and set up for collaboration. I’m leary of committing to the amount of field and window navigation and typing (and no diagrammatic information) involved in duplicating this resolution of organization in a metadata system.
(In an analagous situation, I use a humble pocket notepad for note-making and diagramming at meetings and wherever else I go, and a hardcopy pocket daytimer; both instead of a pda. Though I’m ever on the lookout for a software substitute improving on these, nothing really seems as versatile and efficeint to work with. I’m not a luddite in anything else… I even draw my animation right into the computer from a tablet.)
Are folks finding Metadata is really changing/improving their workflow?
-
3 Replies
-
That’s a nice analysis of your methodolgy. I find that I still use a combination of the notepad and the metadata. Although, since I’ve been using After Effects for a very long time (way before metadata), I had to come up with a system of file naming which would serve me well.
I still use that system, in combination with the above. To simplify it, I use file names for my projects which are descriptive of the project (i.e., “MadgeTech_Open_10sec.aep”). I follow that as my versions are save sequentially, with a number sequence (i.e., “MadgeTech_Open_10sec_1.aep” and on…). Once I hit the revision stage, I start adding “_rev1.aep” as I go along. Enough of that.
Since metadata, I’ve also started putting descriptions in the description field, and using keywords so that I can sort the various opens, bumps, rejoins, etc. as a project goes along. I still have to use the notepad because not all of my files are combatible with Adobe XMP. I have .3ds and .max files, and a whole lot of others. I suppose that if I were doing file sharing or workgroup stuff, that I would be a lot more anal with my tagging the metadata.
But with all the gee-whiz stuff available, I rely on the yellow pad probably a lot more than I should, and I file the pages I rip out into project files in my desk. Granted, the critical stuff that I’ll need to get my hands on quickly, I sometimes transcribe into a word file (PMS colors, key file names of master projects, plugins used, etc.).
To be honest, nothing replaces organization, whether you do it with a yellow pad, a laptop, or metadata. I don’t think that any one of them is the cure-all, but the keywords and metadata make my life a whole lot more organized, and I can get at files very quickly when I need them, using Adobe Bridge.
Joe Bourke
Owner/Creative Director
Bourke Media
http://www.bourkemedia.com -
I would say try managing one project solely with metadata and see how you like it. Not to say you’ll fall in love with it but maybe there will be a grain of “hmm, this may be worth pursuing”.
Personally, we shoot a lot of narrative stuff and use one editor so our notes usually come from the script supervisor or client emails. We use paper and digital notes but no metadata.
I would be more anal with metadata under 2 conditions:
1. If there were multiple editors
2. If the product was a documentary or a reality show where interviews or long clips needed additional notes that had to be readily searched.-Angelo Lorenzo
–https://filmsfor.us -
Thankyou. I’ve been experimenting.
I’m actually thinking the speech transcription feature – hilariously garbled as it may be – may be useful to me. There appear to be enough key words to search to places in the script. (Or at least speed up logging.) We’ll see.
Judging from the assumptions it comes up with, it must be designed for news reporting. (But not always – winning error so far: Actual line in passionate spat, from 40ish guy to 40ish gal “So say it again – I need to know. Do you love me?” PPro’s transcription: “So say it again – I need to know she was eighteen.”)
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up