-
Render files: X vs Legacy – Duplicated project (aka sequence) and render file referencing. Also, Compound clip renders.
Did some searching here, but didn’t see this talked about. Back in Legacy, when you duplicated a sequence, the render files already existing were referenced by the new sequence. So this didn’t use any extra disk space to speak of. In X, you must option to copy existing render files.
So, for demonstation’s sake, let’s say I’m working on a 30 minute greenscreen project at 1080. The whole caboodle is a render. And potentially rather lengthy render. I want to version it as I go. Well, I’ve got to include render files. chunkachunka goes HDD space. In Legacy, any changes to the duplicated sequence create new render files, instead of starting with a complete copy of what already exists.
Why? That is, what’s the rationale for this change from Legacy? I see no advantage.
Taking it a step further, again using greenscreen as an example; in Legacy, I had a project creating 24 versions of a 30 minute greenscreen + graphics video. I created it in a modular fashion, so that version 1 would be nested sequences A+B+C+D+E. Version 2 was A+B+E+F. You get the idea. So after I had all the modules created and rendered, it was wicked fast to simply drop the rendered sequences into new “version sequences”. No rendering. No copying of files. Revisions to the “input” sequences flowed through to the “version” sequences. And these only had to render ONCE to appear as rendered in all “downstream” sequences. Mea culpa, I have not tested this in X, but I suspect it doesn’t work, from a render file perspective (I know that the nested of compounds will flow down).
I’m not dissing X here, as I’m working on it fulltime now, but don’t get the apparent backwards step.
Thoughts?
“Constituo, ergo sum”
Bob Woodhead / Atlanta
CMX-Quantel-Avid-FCP-Premiere-3D-AFX-Crayola
“What a long strange trip it’s been….” -
3 Replies
-
This is something sort of being discussed abstractly in the other FCPX forum currently as well.
Basically, your issue with the Project Library is one a lot have had. The solution is to use Compound Clips in an Event as sequences. That returns all the duplicating, iterating, donuts, retagging you want while always referencing a single set of render files and only adding what changes from clip to clip.
I like to do what Oliver does and use the Project library as a sort of canvas or work space for ideas, then when I have a sequence im ready to commit, i compound clip the whole thing. This adds it to the Event as its on standalone editable document. You can then duplicate from there or create new clips in which only tags are changed or whatever your situation is.
For a lot of reasons, I’d say its a good thing both options exist, but Apple certainly never thought of Compound Clips having that purpose originally.
Director, Editor, Colorist
http://www.trsociety.com -
You know, I knew some are using Compounds as “sequences”, but didn’t really see a need for my workflow to date. Were that “modular project” come up again, I might have realized that Compound renders operate as Legacy renders. Which is indeed a good thing. Thanks.
A shame though Dupe Projects don’t reference renders as Legacy does, with the OPTION of making a dupe with it’s OWN render files.
-
I think there was a desire to have projects and events as self-contained as possible, for probably the same reason there’s no support for outputting reference Quicktime files any more. Not sure it’s necessarily the right decision but I can see why they might do it.
Jeff Kirkland | Video Producer | Southern Creative Media | Melbourne Australia
http://www.southerncreative.com.au | G+: https://gplus.to/jeffkirkland | Twitter: @jeffkirkland
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up