Premiere’s Automagical Timeline

[Robin S. kurz]

[Simon Ubsdell] “One of the most talked about features of FCP X is that fact that you can throw anything at a timeline without worrying about tracks and patching and the rest of the hassle that comes with “conventional” NLEs.”

That pretty much sums it up, yes.

[Simon Ubsdell] “I wonder how many editors overlook the fact that this option is also there in Premiere.”

Er, no, it definitely isn’t.

[Simon Ubsdell] “Grab any clip from the browser and drag it to the upper centre of the Program Monitor, at which point the Overlay option becomes available, which will automatically ensure that the added material, both video and audio, does not overwrite anything in the timeline. “

It doesn’t even have a shortcut (gee, wonder why?). That is also no different than simply dragging a clip to the timeline and positioning it above any other clip. So why even go to the same amount of tedious mousing around for the exact same result?

Also, how do you e.g. get your overlay on your V2 if there is already a clip there in the V2, so inbetween two clips? Drag and drop? Hell no. Not without prep work. Shortcut? Nope. None exists. Dragging it to the overlay option? Ah, sorry. Another no-go. It’s patch’n’drag’n’fiddle all the way, no matter what.

So… how exactly does that compare? No “worrying about tracks and patching”? Really? You’re sure about that? I certainly am not.

Would also love to know how the “same thing as connecting”-grouping thing in PPro is made visible in the timeline? How do I know what and if I’ve grouped something just by looking at it? Oh, I don’t. And how do I achieve the ever so simple task of MOVING say for example a “connected” audio effect by itself after the fact? I mean without going through some ungrouping-unlinking-regrouping-relinking-removing etc. etc. etc. etc. dance first and last? Right, I can’t.

Again. How does it compare? Somehow I’m just not seeing it.

You completely disregard the fact that by the virtue of Roles, the “track” a clips audio lands on/in is not decided by “nearest convenient slot and ever higher track number” as well. Meaning that even if I stack 10 clips on top of each other, their audio will ALWAYS land in the respective lane associated to the audio role. Would love to see you do that in PPro “just as in FCP”. No “automatically ensure” of anything there. Any way of doing anything even vaguely similar just with a single key (or otherwise) in PPro? Erm… no. Have six clips stacked anywhere, then you better like having at least six audio tracks, too, four of which could easily be completely empty and otherwise useless space hogs. But I guess that’s “a feature”? ????

And what if you’ve predetermined 1&2 for dialog, 3&4 for music and 5&6 for effects in Premiere? Well gee, then I hope for the sake of your organization you never have a V7 or higher with your method. And, as in most cases, what if you never even have anything more than a V1 and maybe V2 and still need he same organization? Then saddle up enjoy your patch-dance! ???? Because bingo, your audio is going all over the place and that’s the exact moment (one of many) where your entire comparison falls apart completely.

How about you always want all foreign language audio isolated, say on 7&8 and another language on 9&10 etc. etc. as you edit? I mean without once having to think about it or having to go back to clean matters up at the end? Not possible, period. OR be sure to saddle up once again and have those patching shortcuts memorized and never ever forget to use them.

How about switching the order of e.g. dialog and effects audio? Dialog on 5&6 and effects on 1&2 without changing a single video track, all in one simple click? Now there’s some “Fun in editing!” with PPro. ????

Ever hear someone say something to the effect of “Final Cut Pro X moves all the technical mumbo-jumbo out of the way and simply LETS YOU EDIT and immerse in the creative process without the constant technical considerations as brain baggage along the way”? Well, I sure have. Often. And that would be one of those (many) things that they’re referring to. ????

“Unique” doesn’t even begin to describe it for me, no. Nor can something like that ever be “oversold”. Clearly there are many left that still haven’t gotten it nor even begin to appreciate it for what it is: an absolutely brilliant and very unique concept and a massive time-saver, plain and simple.

[Simon Ubsdell] “Conceptually there is no difference between this and hitting the Q key in FCP X.”

Actually: zero comparison. Neither functionally and most certainly not conceptually. Complete apples and oranges. Mere visual similarities, which is all there is, are irrelevant. I’d have to be willfully obtuse or have never once worked with X to even consider such a comparison and I suspect could only be manufactured by someone who doesn’t actually even edit for a living beyond maybe a YouTube vlog? But even then…

[Simon Ubsdell] “Of course, the auto-connection is a very useful default if you are placing titles that go with a specific picture or sound effects that sync to a specific frame. But I don’t think anyone can argue that these represent anything like a majority of the edits you are performing when you use the Q function.”

Wow. Then I can only guess that you edit very very different things from me and pretty much 100% of every other professional editor I know. No narrative, no commercial, no image? At least I have yet to ever see anyone place something like a title or sound effect (or even a simple cutaway) into their timeline completely at random without any relevant relation to the underlying picture/story whatsoever as opposed to the other way around. Still waiting for that title/effect that fits perfectly no matter where it is!

That for me being the most bizarre notion yet.

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!

[Robin S. kurz]

[Oliver Peters] “This is incorrect. In Premiere, if I have clips on V1 and V2 and I insert something in the middle of the V1 clip, it splits both the V1 and V2 clips and slides them both to the right, as well as everything else that follows.”

Well I sure hope for the sake of your edit, that you don’t have any unlinked audio lingering around that insert that doesn’t need useless splitting! Or imagine making the unfortunate mistake of dragging it to the timeline for said insert (with ⌥⌘) and have spotted audio somewhere behind that point. Oopsy… be sure to bill those extra hours.

Once again, apples and oranges imho.

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!

[Simon Ubsdell]

The roles of Quixote and Sancho Panza have already been taken.

So that means you’ll have to settle for being Rocinante.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki

[Robin S. kurz]

So you agree. Good for you. Then that’s settled. ????????

– RK

[Jeff Markgraf]

[Simon Ubsdell] “[Jeff Markgraf] “le sigh… Here we go again.”

As for this …”

Simon –

So sorry you took a bit of humor referring to the often overwrought tone of this board as being condescending toward you. Wasn’t meant to be condescending, and certainly not directed toward you personally.

Sorrier still that you chose to double down on that perceived condescension with a moderately well wrought, but ultimately kinda’ ham handed, condescension-wrapped-in-a-literary-reference of your own. Garnished with a side helping for Robin. I had hoped for better.

(On the other hand, if you really were in on the joke, and were actually trolling at a very high level, then I salute you. Well played!)

At any rate, I think my original reply stands: dropping clips in to a Premiere timeline via the method described, while achieving superficially similar results in terms of avoiding overwriting or clip collisions, is not conceptually or practically equivalent to connecting clips in FCPX. At all.

[Ronny Courtens]

So happy to see that Final Cut Pro X has become a benchmark for other NLEs (-:

– Ronny

[Robin S. kurz]

[Jeff Markgraf] “dropping clips in to a Premiere timeline via the method described, while achieving superficially similar results in terms of avoiding overwriting or clip collisions, is not conceptually or practically equivalent to connecting clips in FCPX. At all.”

+1
Hear hear (on all counts btw).
Just as I said. Neither conceptually nor practically.

– RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!