-
Range-based keywording: unique to FCP X?
-
[Oliver Peters] “The stupid part is that FCP 7 with FC Server works (worked) EXACTLY that way.”
I disagree. FCP7 had no idea FCSvr existed. You had to check out your FCP project file from FCSvr and then open it in FCP7. FCP7 and FCSvr could be united atop shared storage and FCSvr could manipulate the project files it was handing out to allow for edit-in-place, but FCP7 never had any idea FCSvr was there doing that. FCP7 just know it had a project file and that file linked to such and such media on the SAN.
If FCP7 had been directly addressing FCSvr, you would be searching for clips on the server from within FCP7’s Browser pane. Not in a separate Java app that you then had to drag your clips into FCP7.
What FCPX’s CoreData store model for Events and Projects opens up is the possibility that you could have FCPX as the client proper, with no separate sidecar app. The keywording in FCPX would be hitting the server directly, not waiting for a save to a file that would then have to be uploaded and parsed by the server. Shared FCPX Events would be like having a live shared Browser window in FCP7, and shared Projects would be like having a live shared Timeline window in FCP7. This is utterly different from the way FCSvr worked with FCP7, and in my opinion, it would be much more powerful.
One of the biggest problems with FCSvr in my experience was that editors saw using it as a chore, they did as little as possible in order to avoid spending time in it, and they really just wanted to have the metadata they were creating in FCP (markers, bins, etc) to “just show up” in FCSvr. But since FCP7 didn’t talk to FCSvr at all, that could not be achieved with anything approaching a practical workflow.
It would be cool if Apple built such a thing, but it seems extremely unlikely that they would.
Best,
Andy -
“I disagree. FCP7 had no idea FCSvr existed. You had to check out your FCP project file from FCSvr and then open it in FCP7. FCP7 and FCSvr could be united atop shared storage and FCSvr could manipulate the project files it was handing out to allow for edit-in-place, but FCP7 never had any idea FCSvr was there doing that. FCP7 just know it had a project file and that file linked to such and such media on the SAN.”
I understand that. All the “management” is on the FC Server side. But it does take care of moving the media and relinking the files in FCP 7, so that there is a very cohesive environment. The point is that Apple started something and then simply dropped it in midcourse. Maybe we’ll see a new version of FC Server in the future that ties into FCP X in a similar fashion.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “Interesting note on the QT reel number issue. The FCP X display (Event Browser column) does not display it, but it is read by the app, because it passes through the FCPXML. I just sent a test file with Alexa clips through Xto7 to FCP 7 and then exported an EDL from there. Reel number shows up in “Modify TC” and also in the EDL. Go figure.”
But that’s a function of Xto7 as it probably grabs the reel from the QTs (or FCP7 does, but my guess is Xto7 does it as it’s controlling the XMLs).
There is no “reel” field in the FCPXML as AVFoundation probably doesn’t grab it at this point in time. FCPX does add the encamping card name to logged and transferred footage, just like FCP7.
-
[Oliver Peters] “But it does take care of moving the media and relinking the files in FCP 7, so that there is a very cohesive environment.”
Cohesive as far as linking to media, but disjointed for metadata and feedback. The editors I worked with found the check-in/check-out process added a lot of friction to their workflow, and they lamented that the places they naturally dealt with metadata already (markers and in the bins) did not translate at all into FCSvr even if they did tolerate the distraction of check-in. For them, FCSvr was a burden they wound up avoiding whenever they could.
Where FCSvr did shine was in automating producer approvals and other tasks external to FCP. In this respect, it saved editors a lot of time and effort. They could and did embrace that. But as far as the core functionality of metadata and media management, there was (is) a gulf between FCP and FCSvr. CatDV and its “magic door” address that using Apple Events and XML, but FCSvr never did.
That’s why I see so much potential in FCPX as a true client. Just by using FCPX, the editor is creating gobs of valuable metadata that would be so much more valuable if it were available to more than one editor at a time. If FCPX were directly interacting with a central Events and Projects database, then the whole thing becomes frictionless. Elegant, even.
Pie in the sky, sure, but it looks damn tasty in my imagination.
Best,
Andy -
[Jeremy Garchow] “There is no “reel” field in the FCPXML”
You don’t need “reel” names since tape is dead, haven’t you heard?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
Hey Andrew…recently I started teaching a High School documentary filmmaking class and a narrative filmmaking class. I applied for and will probably get a grant for 5 iMacs i5s and 5 FCPXs. I was hoping to make all the media available to all the computers all the time. Is there a real way to do that, currently?
I also learn a lot from you posts, so thanks!
-
[Herb Sevush] “You don’t need “reel” names since tape is dead, haven’t you heard?”
Canon has.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Canon has.”
Which, among other things, is what helps explain their enduring preeminence in the video industry. When I see the Canon logo on a video camera, as opposed to the lens, I know it’s a big time production.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “Which, among other things, is what helps explain their enduring preeminence in the video industry. When I see the Canon logo on a video camera, as opposed to the lens, I know it’s a big time production.”
Totally.
Here’s an example of a modern “reel number”. This number connects directly to a file, regardless of physical disk location. FCPX does this with it’s own unique ID system, but with tapeless media, it seems it should use the wealth of info that’s already available in most professional file formats, of which Canon does not have, and don’t get me started on all of that. What a reel number does is point a person or computer to a physical medium. In the case of digital files, the physical medium is intangible for us humans and can also move dynamically. This number is computerrific as it can point directly to a file through a search regardless of directory or location on the disk. Who needs bins and folders? 😉
Jeremy
-
[Richard Herd] “I applied for and will probably get a grant for 5 iMacs i5s and 5 FCPXs. I was hoping to make all the media available to all the computers all the time. Is there a real way to do that, currently?”
Yes, but there is a catch. If you uncheck the box for copying files to the Events folder and do all ingest externally (not via FCPX), you can use any shared storage system that supports your codecs and the client load (aggregate bandwidth). See the SAN forum for that. Then when you import the files into the event, FCPX just links to the media in place a la FCP7. In this case, Projects and Events are still stored on direct attached storage (Movies folder or other local drive). If you wanted to get fancy, you could do home folder syncing with OS X Server and leave the Projects and Events in the user’s Movies folder (default location), but that could get unwieldy since render files are stored with Projects (another thing Apple really needs to fix). Then when they sit at any machine and log in against Open Directory on OS X Server, the contents of their home folder is synced to that machine and will show them the same thing they saw the last session on any other machine. A lot of render files would mean a lot of network traffic, hence the warning.
Xsan would let you put Events and Projects on shared storage via SAN Locations, but Xsan is expensive and complicated and not for the novice (though a lot less expensive and complicated than it used to be). Even for a workgroup as small as yours, you are still looking at minimum $25K just for equipment ($1,500 Qlogic 1400 switch, $850 SANlink Thunderbolt HBAs and cables for each client, twin $1,600 Mac mini Servers for MDCs, additional Gig-E switch for metadata traffic, fiber optic cables, and of course a qualified Fibre Channel RAID). The price goes up if you want more than a dozen usable terabytes or more switch ports for more clients. Then there’s the cost of a qualified installer’s time.
Either way, you’d be spending five digits to get some form of shared storage that can support editing.
Best,
Andy
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up