Renders for sequence and nested not the same

[Shane Ross]

Don’t do this. There is no point in doing this. When you are ready to assemble the show, just CUT/PASTE the entire sequence into the main sequence…and make the changes in the main sequence.

This is an example of the WRONG reason to nest.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Matt Callac]

Shane is right, terrible Idea to do it this way because of the reason you’ve already figured out…NESTs don’t auto update.

I’d suggest you do it the way shane already suggested, however if you are stubborn and refuse to do it that way you can manually update each of the nests with a couple keystrokes. Put the playhead at the first fram of a nest hit x to mark the clip which will set in’s and outs on the timeline, then hit f which will matchframe that nest with the original (which should be newly rendered) then hit f10 to overwrite edit or f11 to replace edit. This should work for updating the nests….but in the long run you’re better off copy pasting into the main timeline once it’s all finished.

-mattyc

[Bret Williams]

Personally I think it’s the exact reason to nest. But it only works if you do it correctly. Which means dragging the sequences from the bin to the timeline. Then they’ll have a relationship to each other. If you copy and paste the nested sequence, or duplicate, or duplicate the sequence they’re in, then they become a new seqeunce all to themselves. And they don’t exist anywhere in a bin either.

What does seem to happen in final cut is it loses track of the renders with nests. Especially if they’ve been rendered in the timeline they’ve been placed in. That render often supercededes changes in the sequence. I usually just unrender it by changing the opacity then changing it back. It then references the changed sequence instead of the render files.

[Frank Laughlin]

Shane: thanks for the answer. Could you give me an idea why this is the wrong way to nest?

Keeping the entire show in one timeline seems far more cumbersome. Thousands and thousands of edits ‘live’ while working on a single timeline. It would seem to me this is the exact reason for nesting: keeping the show cut into 10-min segements and using the assembled nested version for ‘whole show’ viewing, and output to tape.

I’m not disagreeing, I just don’t understand your reasoning.

Thanks.

– Frank Laughlin
Digitonium

[Frank Laughlin]

Matt: You are right about the renders, but if I understand what you’re saying, you’re not quite right about the updating.

If a segment of the show is 5 minutes, and I nest it into the ‘Assembly’, and then go back and edit the segment, making it 6 minutes, that change IS updated in the nested ‘Assembly’. The only thing that doesn’t appear to update between segment and assembly are the renders.

– Frank Laughlin
Digitonium

[Frank Laughlin]

Bret: Your experience mirrors mine. The nesting seems almost ideal, except for the renders. I don’t quite follow your fix for making FCP recognize the renders, though. Are you changing the opacity of the whole nested segment? Or the individual unrendered file inside the actual segement?

Thanks.

– Frank Laughlin
Digitonium

[Matt Callac]

He’s not saying Not to edit the thing is several sections (sequences). he’s saying to wait to put it all in one sequence till you are done with it. Then, rather than placing the sequences into a new sequence…so they are nests…Copy/paste all the edits from each sequence into that main sequence.
-mattyc

[Matt Callac]

Sorry, I was thinking of the problem only in regards to render files, and that’s what i was speaking to…so I wasn’t addressing length issues.

Render files are handle PER sequence. So if you render sequence z that contains nest of sequence W, X, Y. FCP says ok… these renderfiles are associated associated with sequence Z and it doesn’t look inside and say..you know what this thing that i’m rendering is actually sequence w, X, Y.

-mattyc

[Shane Ross]

[Frank Laughlin] “Could you give me an idea why this is the wrong way to nest?”

Because you are still making changes. And nests don’t change duration. And when you need to do all the other work needed for the show…like music cue sheets, stock footage tracking, tracking of ANY kind, you are hosed. When you need to pull the show to time, and need to extend edits, or cut out something, you can’t. You need to go back to the original sequence, make the change…RE-nest. When you export an OMF for audio, you need the timecode to match the sequence…and you need all the separate audio. Don’t have that with a nest.

[Frank Laughlin] “Keeping the entire show in one timeline seems far more cumbersome. Thousands and thousands of edits ‘live’ while working on a single timeline”

Not at all. I do this all the time, and I mainly do 90 min to 2 hour projects. I keep things in separate sequences when I am doing the main cutting of the show…to keep things manageable. But when I need to assemble the cut to lock picture, and output…I copy and paste and have all those thousands of clips in one long sequence. Never had any problems with that.

As you see, nesting isn’t working smoothly for you. You are having issues. It isn’t meant for what you are doing.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Bret Williams]

But if you render it WITHIN the nested sequence, and that sequence has the same settings as the seqeunce it’s nested into, there is no rendering required anyway.

Nested sequences is the only time FCP does destructive compositing. If a nested sequence is already rendered, it will use those render files as the source for effects added TO the nest within another seqeunce. It has to really. Because if the nest is in multiple sequences, and it rerendered the nest from the ground up, it would destroy renders in other sequences. Destroying one point of nested sequences in the first place.