Project window unsort

[Steven L. gotz]

If you know you are going to want to do that, pick one of the unused colunds and number the items as a key. Then you can resort based on that key.

[David Cherniack]

Thanks, Steven.

That will work but as I have a large number of items it may be more trouble than it’s worth.

David
AllinOneFilms.com

[Dave Friend]

[David Cherniack] “the chronological order in which you’ve created things”

This isn’t exactly what you are looking for but the “Media Start” column would sort timecode based sources in chronological order – sort of.

Dave

[Marisu Fronc]

Dave-

I think that Dave (the other Dave, that is) actually wants to be able to resort in the order of capture (for example – 3 days after I start I need to find and add a shot from the head of the tape to my job, chronologically it would be last captured although the media start sort would place it first in the list) as sorting by time code is fairly easily done.

It is a conundrum – I’ve resorted to many many little folders (usually inside of larger folders, etc) so I can segregate things that were digitized for a particular cut, producer, etc. (and then, of course, still hunting because I don’t need duplicates, especially when they mislead me into thinking I haven’t used a shot yet!!) No matter how you slice it though I spend too much time scrolling (or moving things around so I can “hopefully” find them later!!) Of course, I know, I know – everyone already yelled at me when I said my average job has about 10,000 or so sources but . . . . . . .

slainte,
marisu

[David Cherniack]

[marisu fronc] “Of course, I know, I know – everyone already yelled at me when I said my average job has about 10,000 or so sources but . . . . . . .”

Gawd Marisu, you are really pushing this puppy past the realms of sanity. My present project takes about 10 minutes to load and the timeline of the assembly takes about one minute to update (when you switch to it). And I have less than a thousand source clips.

Whoever designed the engine for this thing wasn’t thinking of us. I’m betting the limits are imposed by very fundamental specs and I don’t think we’ll see the necessary fixes do do really large projects until version 4. Hope I’m wrong.

David
AllinOneFilms.com

[Marisu Fronc]

David-

[David Cherniack] “I don’t think we’ll see the necessary fixes do do really large projects until version 4. Hope I’m wrong.”

I hope you’re wrong too . . . however, in just a few short months I KNOW I’ll be working on a 2.5 hour programme (the current version has over 4000 cg pages alone), and it WILL be in PPro2.0 so . . . I guess I’ll be taking a LOT more smoke breaks (and coffee breaks, and answer my e-mail breaks, etc, etc) while the system has a few minor nervous breakdowns each day.

On the bright side – 2.0 is behaving MUCH better than 1.5 (at least I’m not rebooting 20 times a day or losing hours of work anymore!!) Of course, everyone also finds it amusing to watch me with reading glasses over my trifocals squinting to read the LITTLE TEENSY WEENSY type in the project manager window anyway (getting old sucks!!) so I’m sure they will really enjoy it when I end up with 20 or 30,000 items to search through!!

slainte,
marisu

[Steven L. gotz]

I have a suggestion for large projects. Use multiple projects and export out AVI files for placeholders. Once the various scenes are ready to go, combine all of the project into one and finish it out.

That way you won’t have issues while working hard on each scene. Only after you have rough cut and a bit more do you really need them all together for color correction and sound work anyway.

[David Cherniack]

[Steven L. Gotz] “I have a suggestion for large projects.”

This is a suugestion that can work – a bit unwieldy but should be possible – taken to extremes essentially it becomes a project per sequence.

I’d rather they fix the underlying architecture.

David (written while restarting from a memory maxxed out crash)

David
AllinOneFilms.com

[Marisu Fronc]

David-

It CAN work – but not for the way my company operates, otherwise I would have done it already!! And, of course, you have to merge it all at some point (and, for us, that’s only about a 10th of the way to finish when the evaluation process starts) – besides, it’s hard enough to keep from reusing footage without having to try to calculate what you used in each of 20 projects(which would all need almost the complete amount of source material available at the start anyway, so only the sequences themselves would be shorter!!)

Bottom line, for me at least, is that it will just continue to be a hassle until the powers that be decide that Premiere isn’t the best fit for what we do. Until then . . . like I said, I’m learning to take breaks!!

slainte,
marisu

[David Cherniack]

[marisu fronc] ” it will just continue to be a hassle until the powers that be decide that Premiere isn’t the best fit for what we do.”

….Or until the people at Adobe fix the underlying architecture to deal with large projects….

Version 2 works better with memory manageent, but it is still not satisfactory by any stretch of the imagination. Matrox gives a small utility with Axio to monitor Premiere’s memory usage. You can watch it gobble more and more ram, always releasing less than it’s used. And the worst is that when you save, it really eats it. How I long for Discreet edit’s saving undos to disk.

The fact that Adobe could only do a partial fix with version 2 does not bode well. The underlying architecture probably requires a complete re-write. But my guess is that Adobe may be waiting to go to a 64 bit OS and solve the memory problem by making users throw more ram at it. What a horrible thought!

David
AllinOneFilms.com