-
Re: After a year has perception of FCPX changed?
-
[David Lawrence] “How well is that “F” key working for you in the timeline, Steve? “
You can go between Timeline and Event Browser without losing the Range in the Timeline. It’s lost if you select something else in the Timeline.
I think the issue the programmers need to look at is Range vs Clip selection. Making a Clip Selection (not a Range) shouldn’t remove a previously created Range.
-
That makes sense. I suppose markers or blade tooling are the workarounds so you don’t lose your place.
John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.
-
[Craig Seeman] ” I think the issue the programmers need to look at is Range vs Clip selection. Making a Clip Selection (not a Range) shouldn’t remove a previously created Range. “
Not to resurrect the PIOP debate, but I think one of the conclusions from that was that the only selection model in FCPX is range-based selection, and that storing potentially overlapping ranges is a challenge because of clippish constructs like favorites and keyword ranges which present to the user as clips, but do not function like clips.
Working around this design limitation (or solving the problem, depending on your point of view) requires both a lot of developer work and a step away from the ideological purity of FCPX.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
So I went to add an animated logo bug to a promo in FCPX. Cool, but not enough punch. So I add another instance of it above and use a Vivid Light blend mode. Cool. That’s what I was looking for. Now since this goes across the whole spot I’ll just compound this whole thing and stick some fades on it. But wait…once the compound clip is created the vivid light blend mode on that bug is GONE. It’s stuff like this that keeps me away from FCPX.
And don’t give me the work-around. I don’t need work-arounds. I need it to work. That kind of compositing is a simple but necessary function that I shouldn’t have to jump through hoops to do.
Obviously, Apple got my money. That’s perfectly cool. And I’m cool with it being a $300 product ’cause that’s about how it performs. I want it to work. I really do. I’m the perfect customer for it. Self-contained corporate production. But it’s lost data, corrupted projects and outsmarts itself in so many ways.
If it can’t do all that then it just ain’t all that.
Love the discussion though.
-
[Walter Soyka] “and that storing potentially overlapping ranges is a challenge because of clippish constructs like favorites and keyword ranges which present to the user as clips, but do not function like clips.”
Overlapping Ranges is not possible but neither was that with PIOP on FCP7. At least with Ranges I can save multiple Ranges on a Clip. Keywords can overlap on the other hand.
[Walter Soyka] “Working around this design limitation (or solving the problem, depending on your point of view) requires both a lot of developer work and a step away from the ideological purity of FCPX.”
I’m not absolutely sure it’s the same issue on the Timeline where Favorites don’t exist. The issue is that a Clip Selection (which is not the same as a Range) loses the Range selection.
If you’re referring to In OR Out points, yes, there is only Range (In and Out pair) but I don’t find that much of an issue (at least for me).
-
[Bill Davis] “Change is afoot. Big change. X is part of that.”
“Nothing dates faster than people’s fantasies about the future.”
– Robert Hughes, The Shock of the New (Episode 4)[Walter Soyka] “Not to resurrect the PIOP debate, …”
No debate gets re-opened faster than any given previous debate here.
– F. Bieberkopf, (Episode X+1) -
… in addition to which, I would like to propose “The Persistent In And Out Points Debate” as our very own Godwin’s Law.
Franz.
-
[Clint Wardlow] “It’s not the basic stuff that worries me. It is the complex layers of image and audio that I use so often, that worries me.”
Ok. Fair enough to feel cautious.
I think we should start talking concrete examples. What are you worried about exactly?
-
[Jeremy Garchow] ” think we should start talking concrete examples. What are you worried about exactly?”
A prime example would be a projection piece I edited for an art installation. It was designed to be projected through cheesecloth stretched in front of a piece of sculpture onto the white wall behind it. The cheese cloth presented an ethereal ghost image in front and the white wall captured the brighter image behind the sculpture.
It had a soundtrack comprised of various industrial noises. One of the sounds was a long persistent machine hum that would raise and lower through out the piece (not the main sound clip–but underlying). I had multiple compound images of the sculpture creating the piece, blended with various other shots I had taken of machinery in motion. However I had one lengthy image of construction workers that ran through out. This image would fade in and out to various levels of opacity based on the sound of the machine hum. It would never be completely gone, but often dominated the blended images then fade away. In FCP7 this was fairly easy to accomplish through key frame manipulation. But being as neither this image or the underlying sound was “primary,” I am not sure how I would get the same results with the same precision in FCPX.
-
[Craig Seeman]
You don’t seem to understand FCPX at all.Actually Craig, I do understand FCPX. I’ve used it for over a year, I’ve done the training… …there are some things I like, some things I don’t. It’s funny how evangelists like you and Bill can only see things from your own perspective and assume the rest of us are stupid. Funny, but rather sad too…
Liam Hall
Director/DoP/Editor
http://www.liamhall.net
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up