-
Premiere Pro Workspaces
-
[Brian Seegmiller] “Would you like to show us how to use PP with more than one audio track and move things around like Jesús Perez-Miranda did and switch shots efficiently without messing up your timeline? I would like to see that demo.”
I am not saying the trackless system does not have merit. I am saying Jesús Perez-Miranda made Premiere Pro seem more difficult that it actually is. Also his paradigm of linear Vs non linear was flawed. Can you agree with my comments or do I need to actually make a video about it? For the record Jesús Perez-Miranda responded to me by saying he used his own definition of NLE VS linear. Unfortunately people don’t get to make up their own definitions.
-
You can clearly see in the video his examples of how a NLE with tracks get in the way and makes it hard to edit while messing up the timeline. You said, “Jesús Perez-Miranda made Premiere Pro seem more difficult that it actually is”. So with that, I would like you to show us with the same layout of the clips of his timeline how to make it less difficult than it really is. Since I have to work in Premiere sometimes I really would like to see how you would do it.
-
[Andrew Kimery] “Tim doesn’t keep FCP X in the forum title as cheap way to swindle clicks from passersby, he keeps it in the forum title because this place is about how X’s new philosophy compares to the pre-existing philosophy that almost all other NLEs use some variation of. “
Bingo! Absent FCPX, there’s no debate. In fact, I’ve been doing this for over 20 years at this point. There’s never been a debate forum here, period, before FCPX. We tried, heaven knows, if only because it seemed like we OUGHT to have at least one. Ultimately, though, the shape of this thing depends a lot more on the 300,000 members than it does the 3 of us who work here, and you the members let us know when you were ready to debate. It was with the announcement of FCPX. The first 200 or so posts went up while the debut presentation was still underway, being driven by the people in that room.
To another point of yours, Andrew, the current mix of threads on my version of the forum index page is FCPX in 10 of the first 11 threads, and no, I’m not including this one. That’s 90.9%.
So, I guess there’s “Half Full vs Half Empty Debates”, but I’m not sure how 90.9% FCPX threads at the top of the page turns into somehow a lot more than half empty.
(And honestly, you’d be shocked how few people ever see that page anyway, relative to the high volume of traffic that moves through the forum as a whole. Nearly all of our traffic comes in directly to threads and posts, whether through search, or subscription….and do keep in mind that I’m also looking at the numbers of people who read the forum without posting, a number that I know isn’t as accessible to the rest of you.
Also, if any chucklehead looks PAST the Apple FCPX forum on the Forums index page — and yes, we made sure that the FCPX forum comes BEFORE the Debates forum in the listing — then they get what they get. There’s not the least ambiguity in the names. Want to talk about FCPX? Go to the FCPX Forum. Want to debate? Come here…although I maintain that the quality of conversation here is richer and more robust, certainly more diverse, than any monocultured FCPX forum, so keep coming here anyway. ????)
This particular thread is entirely typical of a thread in this forum that DOES start on some other topic — say, Premiere, or Resolve, or any number of non-software topics — in that ALL threads eventually suck FCPX into them.
That’s ultimately the nature of our little community-within-a-community. No thread stays away from FCPX for long. Nor should it, nor could it. Virtually ALL threads here are FCPX threads.
Which is also why I’m not buying for a minute that “THE” debate is over, because there was never just one debate. There have been a zillion of ’em. And yes, SOME of them ARE over, sort of, but some of the longest-stewing are still going on at this very minute. Others will arrive with the next rev, or the next Mac or whatever, which will bring the next wave of new customers, and the next wave of HIGHLY inappropriate rejoinders that “We settled this four years ago” — well, no, obviously “we” didn’t.
The irony is that I think the only way any debate is settled is when you stop moving. “I’ve bought my computer, I’m not looking at other software or platforms, I don’t use products from other companies. I’ve made all the decisions I need to make. I’ve settled.”
See the irony? Exactly the kind of thing so often decried in people who settle anywhere else.
But when you stay in motion, staying attuned to the full context of our creative enterprise, there’s ALWAYS something new to debate. Every new release, not just from Apple, but from everyone, creates a new set of lenses through which to view FCPX, Apple, and the many, many other things we talk about every day.
(Contrast this with the Adobe debate forum, which really WAS only about one topic, and that one really HAS been settled. That’s also why I doubt that the forum will spring back to life — the people who shaped that forum as a venue to vent vented, then largely vamoosed. But hey, the forum is there if anyone needs it. YOU shape the forums. I just work here.)
Look, my feeling is the same as it ever was. The current name is the 4th or 5th we’ve had for this forum, so it’s not that other names are out of the question. I do like this one, though. It’s concise, and serves as a warning: try to start a thread on another topic, and it WILL be an FCPX thread soon enough. ????
But if there’s a next name, whatever it is, it too will have “FCPX” in the name, because that’s the only reason we’re here and the only thing we keep coming back to, and it will have “Debates” in the name, plural, because there’s more than one debate.
Yr pal,
TimmyTim Wilson
Editor-in-Chief
Creative COW
???? -
[Tim Wilson] “There’s never been a debate forum here, period, before FCPX.”
There was one, asterisk, in the old days ????
The forum formerly known as *edit (until copyright issues caused the Cow to rename it) was an excellent debate forum in its latter days.
Until Ron got exasperated with the full-on nature of the debate and zapped years of excellent discussions and analysis into the cyberspace trashcan ☹ ;-( :-0 ☹
Years of excellent and informative debate gone. ☹ ;-( :-0 ☹
As a read-only lurker these days, when does this forum get zapped? 😉 -
[Tim Wilson] “Also, if any chucklehead looks PAST the Apple FCPX forum on the Forums index page — and yes, we made sure that the FCPX forum comes BEFORE the Debates forum in the listing — then they get what they get. There’s not the least ambiguity in the names. Want to talk about FCPX? Go to the FCPX Forum. Want to debate? Come here…although I maintain that the quality of conversation here is richer and more robust, certainly more diverse, than any monocultured FCPX forum, so keep coming here anyway. ????)
“Sums it up nicely I think, not that there’s exactly a large amount of people who want the the name change.
-
[Steve Connor] “Since the last major update to FCPX I’ve completely stopped using PPRo completely as the updated FVPX interface was good enough for me.
“One thing that never seems to be added into the discussion here regarding the debate between FCPX and PP or other NLE’s is how the projects that editors get hired to work on are oftentimes NLE dependent.
One example would be projects in which an editor gets hired to update a previously made video. I have several clients that send me projects that have been originally worked on by another post production company or ad agency. In my area, PP is the dominate NLE and so I’ve only dealt with a FCPX inherited project once. It would be a huge waste of time to migrate these projects out of PP in order to work in FCPX.
Another example is getting hired to make a video by a company that has an in-house media department. These companies also often dictate how they want a project to be created because in the end they usually request all of the project media for archiving and potential future use. And in my area, virtually every company that I deal with is on Adobe.
Perhaps these situations aren’t the norm for the regular contributors to this debate but I think it’s a reality for many freelance editors. Therefore the notion of switching to another NLE is a much larger issue than just deciding which workflow an editor prefers.
I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
– Orson Welles -
[Brian Seegmiller] “So with that, I would like you to show us with the same layout of the clips of his timeline how to make it less difficult than it really is. Since I have to work in Premiere sometimes I really would like to see how you would do it.”
As if I don’t have anything better to do with my free time. Having said that if I do post the video will you be able to post on the FCPX website that Jesús Perez-Miranda made things much harder than they need to be? Will you also provide a link to my video at the FCPX website? If I educate you I could only hope you would want to educate others. Is it a deal? You could also leave a comment on the FCPX website that Jesús Perez-Miranda’s NLE VS Linear paradigm has some serious flaws. You don’t have to do that but it would be the right thing to do regardless if I make the response video or not.
-
[greg janza] “Another example is getting hired to make a video by a company that has an in-house media department. These companies also often dictate how they want a project to be created because in the end they usually request all of the project media for archiving and potential future use. And in my area, virtually every company that I deal with is on Adobe.
“I used to have this a lot, I’m very fortunate that I get to choose the tools now!
-
[greg janza] “One thing that never seems to be added into the discussion here regarding the debate between FCPX and PP or other NLE’s is how the projects that editors get hired to work on are oftentimes NLE dependent.”
In the Florida market, there are places that use Media Composer/Newscutter, FCPX and even FCP7. But it’s predominantly Premiere all over. If you know Premiere and After Effects, you have a much better chance of working regularly.
The shop I’m currently at has 7 to 10 regular editors in and out. I’m pretty much the only one who knows and/or is willing to use FCPX. A couple of others, plus me, know Media Composer, too. So on our current projects, which are in a fully collaborative situation, Premiere is the only option.
If we had to staff up with MC or FCPX editors, we simply wouldn’t find enough who are both technically and creatively competent. That’s not a slight at people who cut in X. Merely an issue of supply.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Oliver Peters] “If we had to staff up with MC or FCPX editors, we simply wouldn’t find enough who are both technically and creatively competent.”
Same story in the Bay Area. MC editors are an endangered species and FCPX editors are few in number and so that reality plays into post-production facilities and freelance editors gravitating to an all Adobe platform.
I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
– Orson Welles
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up