-
Musings on FCPX’s most powerful feature.
-
I would disagree that liking FCPX is dependent on understanding a different way of editing, I appreciate your “two stage process” but like many I prefer the tactility of the timeline for composing edits and I would say that, despite some people’s strong doubts, FCPX is great for this.
Steve Connor
‘It’s just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure” -
Steve,
If I gave the impression that X wasn’t great at timeline editing, I’m sorry. That’s totally opposite of my view.
My concern is that experienced editors who come to X with lots of experience in more traditional timeline operations get STUCK with the differences of how X works compared to their expectations, and it often takes a long time for them to overcome the “reset frustration” and start to understand how the differences built into this program have a lot of value to offer.
That’s a story told here time and time again by those of us who’ve made the learning curve climb.
Essentially that until I knew how to operate it, I didn’t really know what I was missing.
That’s not to say it’s ideal for all editors, just that it’s significantly not what they’re used to – and that means it won’t typically be easy to just dive in and swim happily from day one.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
[Bill Davis] “If your orientation remains that editing begins and ends in the timeline, I’d fully agree.
The whole point about X is that it’s built to challenge that historical view.
In X, your editing can easily begin in the event browser. And if you understand that, when you finally get into a storyline, you can conceivably have an extremely large amount of your actual editing already done.
This is one way X can drive immense efficiency.
But you’ve got to understand the difference in order to benefit from it – and it’s still my contention that most editors who have trouble with X (not ALL, but most) do so because they’ve not yet come to understand this new two stage process.
FWIW.”
I edit most of my material in the bins or events as final cut x calls them before goin to timeline, but either way, once i graduate from rough cut to second and eventually final, ALOT of editing goes down in the timeline. Trimming/moving/replacing/deleting, etc ,etc. This is where X needs the most work IMO, especially trimming.
The process doesnt change from NLE to NLE. Same approach as Avid PPro or Final Cut Legacy. I dont know any editors who simply throw a ton of clips in a timeline and go with out selecting outs and doin marks etc. It isnt any different in X as building a rough cut goes and doing basic 3 point editing. X strength really lie in making arough cut, but once i have to do any complicated editing to get to a second cut or final, thats where it falls apart. again mainly in the trimming .
Its not like the timeline is hard to get used at all. Id like to say at this point i understand it and its behaviors really well. I jjust don’t think its superior to other NLE’s and its got a long way to go before it can stand in the same arena with Avid and PPRo
Neil Goodman: Editor of New Media Production – NBC/Universal
-
If you think FCPX fails in its trimming and that means it “can’t stand in the same arena” as the others, then presumably you thought that about FCP Legacy? The trimming in FCPX is better than Legacy.
Steve Connor
‘It’s just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure” -
[Neil Goodman] “I dont know any editors who simply throw a ton of clips in a timeline and go with out selecting outs and doin marks etc.”
And, if they do, they are simply using a timeline as a bin.
-
Bill,
Can you expand on your contention that editing in the event browser is more efficient?
How do you cut together complex scenes with foley, location audio, music etc without going into the timeline?Thanks,
Sandeep. -
[Neil Goodman] “I dont know any editors who simply throw a ton of clips in a timeline and go with out selecting outs and doin marks etc.”
Neil,
As Chris Harlan has alluded, many editors work more or less exclusively in the timeline, doing what might be called “sequence-based” (as opposed to “bin-based” or “clip-based”) selection and editing.
That is the way I work, and all my clips go into sequences without any previous selection or marking.
Franz.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “That is the way I work, and all my clips go into sequences without any previous selection or marking.”
+1
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Don Scioli] “I realized the ability to rapidly skim through the footage clips in the event library, then directly input and outpoint edit points, was a tremendous help.”
Check out Premiere Pro CS6’s “Hover Scrub” feature. Does what you want, as well: https://www.retooled.net/?p=372
Kevin Monahan
Sr. Content and Community Lead
Adobe After Effects
Adobe Premiere Pro
Adobe Systems, Inc.
Follow Me on Twitter! -
[Steve Connor] “I would disagree that liking FCPX is dependent on understanding a different way of editing, I appreciate your “two stage process” but like many I prefer the tactility of the timeline for composing edits and I would say that, despite some people’s strong doubts, FCPX is great for this.”
Totally agree. My editorial workflow is pretty much the same in 7, X, or anything else. What I mean is, it’s the same, but different. 😉 Also, skimming is truly amazing, and I fully expect that other NLE manufacturers are madly trying to copy it as we speak. Hopefully Apple continues to raise the bar while addressing the shortcomings we all debate here ad nausea. 😉
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up