-
Progress!
-
I’m sorry, Bill. I didn’t realize this was stemming from a bad day. I read about the fires in AZ, especially the hot shots, and it is a tragic event.
I enjoy Toto as much as the next guy which is why I posted back.
Hopefully tomorrow will be a better day.
In the mean time:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPV-RgW3vcE
Jeremy
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Bill Davis] “According to him, X is so radically different that you have to jettison all your prior training in order to use it.”
Well, he is wrong. And your analogy isn’t close at all.
How can these offered views be anything but totally confusing?
I will agree they are, but here’s the difference.
FCPX’s key difference is a database for the Bin (similar to how Lightroom/Aperture will organize your photos), and the magnetic timeline, which is essentially an “always on” Ripple Delete (unless you change to the Position tool).
Everything else is simple window dressing.
-
Bill, I’m pretty sure this is what happened: you made a point and no one else got it.
It’s OK, you make a lot of points.
Statistically, some of them are bound to be less than resonant. -
My 2 cents. Nothing beats the original but I always loved this guys cover.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHFcg1Bg83w
John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Gary Huff] “Everything else is simple window dressing.”
Not sure I’d buy that.
I’ve often noted that I think the Project Library and the structure of X storing all of your mounted projects in a live, scrubbable and launchable display is as important to X workflow as magnetism.
And the Share plumbing circumventing the traditional processing of needing to create “a single disconnected master” is also evolutionary in general video editing.
That’s just two additional areas of note.
It could also be argued that ditching Quicktime for AV Foundation was a pretty transformative part of the X puzzle. As well as how X lets you take the same timeline full of editor decisions and switch between proxy and full rez underlying clips via metadata, makes for some interesting future possibilities.
It;s pretty easy to imagine cameras that shoot RAW but simultaneously auto-apply an “editors look” via background processing, allowing the editor to work with the smaller reference files at first, and only re-link to the RAW files when it’s time for finishing and grading.
That’s the kind of plumbing that’s already built into X, And I think it’s design philosophy goes well beyond just a different timeline and database approach.
But we’ll see in time.
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.
-
Appreciate that.
We had a cabin in Prescott when I was a kid. Used to drive up Yarnell Hill in my dads old ford with a sisal waterbag hanging over the radiator so the car woudn’t overheat.
I’m no more personally involved than any other Arizonan today, other than having done some video work last year for the 100 Club of Arizona (first responders local charity) but yeah, it’s a kinda a sucky day around here.
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] “I’ve often noted that I think the Project Library and the structure of X storing all of your mounted projects in a live, scrubbable and launchable display is as important to X workflow as magnetism.
So when you boot up X, you see every single project you have ever done in it currently? I doubt most people are setting it up that way. It gets unwieldy with that many projects, plus, for those single freelancers working off of a laptop (as you like to tout as the “new way”) how are they going to be connected to so much storage necessary for that on a routine basis?
[Bill Davis] “And the Share plumbing circumventing the traditional processing of needing to create “a single disconnected master” is also evolutionary in general video editing.”
You need to explain this in explicit detail, because my initial reaction is that you don’t really know what the “Share” function does. The only thing interesting about it is that you can use it to upload to Vimeo/YouTube when it’s done exporting. It’s simply window dressing, something other NLEs should copy, but not exactly “revolutionary”. All it’s doing is exporting H.264 like normal, then using APIs to send it to the online service of your choice which it supports.
[Bill Davis] “It could also be argued that ditching Quicktime for AV Foundation was a pretty transformative part of the X puzzle.”
I doubt that. QuickTime was aging, and AV Foundation took its place to finally catch OSX’s A/V functionality up with the current decade.
[Bill Davis] “As well as how X lets you take the same timeline full of editor decisions and switch between proxy and full rez underlying clips via metadata, makes for some interesting future possibilities.”
Well, that’s nice, but not that revolutionary (you can already utilize proxy media in other NLEs with a minimum of fuss), and I don’t see much proxy use in these one-man-on-a-laptop-future-of-editing kind of “shops” that you tout as the future. The hardware is powerful enough that most of the editing in my neck of the woods is all online. Nice for RedCode, sure (as long as you have a Rocket!), but I see it having very limited usefulness for a lot of editing (though that may change as raw video grows).
However, I did a project using ProRes transcoded media and would like to re-do it so that it references the original AVCHD footage. FCPX won’t do that, according to what I’ve been told in the Techniques forum, and yet I was able to have Premiere replace the footage in a previously Cineform AVI sequence with the original H.264 QuickTimes from a DSLR. Which is more advanced and “revolutionary” now?
[Bill Davis] “It;s pretty easy to imagine cameras that shoot RAW but simultaneously auto-apply an “editors look” via background processing, allowing the editor to work with the smaller reference files at first, and only re-link to the RAW files when it’s time for finishing and grading.”
Step 1: Ingest video raw footage
Step 2: Wait for transcode
Step 3: Wait for transcode
Step 4: wait for transcode
Step 5: Start working. -
[Gary Huff] “However, I did a project using ProRes transcoded media and would like to re-do it so that it references the original AVCHD footage. “
FCPX does not work with native AVCHD media, it is rewrapped to mov.
You can use the smaller h264 rewraps instead of the ProRes “optimized” media if you’d like by simply deleting the optimized transcodes.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “You can use the smaller h264 rewraps instead of the ProRes “optimized” media if you’d like by simply deleting the optimized transcodes.”
Except I did the transcodes in 5DtoRGB, so apparently that will not work.
-
[Gary Huff] “Except I did the transcodes in 5DtoRGB, so apparently that will not work.”
I think I remember this now…
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up