-
So now that we have Libraries, why do we need Events?
-
What makes less sense to me is why projects have to go in events. I think just about everyone is going to create an event that just contains projects. Why not have a library automatically separate events and projects so you wouldn’t have to go through the extra step of creating a special event to contain your projects. Not to mention if true sharing happens with events down the road, it will be much harder to sort out when projects are in it. Synchronizing two concurrently open events could be basically just a merge. When you add projects in the mix it gets really difficult.
-
It’s been talked about elsewhere on here but it the new structure is great for episodic tv such as reality. Library is season, event is episode, the you can borrow footage from ep 1 to ep 2.
Would be even better if events were locked but people could work on the same library.
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
[Andy Neil] “I think it’s a good idea for the program to be a little more flexible for how different people think and or want to organize. I for one hate the idea of putting 20 spots inside one sequence.”
I think we may be misunderstanding each other.
I don’t put 20 spots in a sequence. If SPOT #1 has 20 tags, I make 20 sequences (Projects).
What I am arguing is that Events MAY be less flexible as they effectively separate metadata out from one another in the same library.
I just don’t see why this couldn’t be done all in metadata instead of an Event “container” if you can call it that.
[Andy Neil] “I don’t think events have to be necessary in that they are needed to specifically perform a function that can’t be done in any other way. Folders aren’t necessary in the event/collection paradigm, but they make things easier for some people and the way they like to work.”
Folders can only go in Events, and only collections can go in folders. Footage, Projects, anything else can’t go in a folder. So a folder is how an Event should work. It doesn’t get in the way, it is simply a way to visually organize. An Event, with it’s contained Projects, causes a lot more clicking and manually finding footage within an Event. Of course, you can always click the Library and browse everything, just like you could do with an Event in 10.0. My point is, why do we now need an Event?
On the Finder level (or in the fcpbundle) it perhaps makes some sense?
-
[Brett Sherman] “What makes less sense to me is why projects have to go in events. I think just about everyone is going to create an event that just contains projects. Why not have a library automatically separate events and projects so you wouldn’t have to go through the extra step of creating a special event to contain your projects. “
Exactly.
I can setup a Smart Collections to look for Projects, and never have to organize projects again, unless of course I would need to further organize them. But now that Projects can be key worded, it makes it even easier, but only easier in an Event by Event basis, not on the Library level.
Now, I have to always click the Event, make a new project, then click back to the Event(s) with the Footage.
Again, i think Projects could live in the Library and not in an Event.
[Brett Sherman] “Not to mention if true sharing happens with events down the road, it will be much harder to sort out when projects are in it. Synchronizing two concurrently open events could be basically just a merge. When you add projects in the mix it gets really difficult.”
Bingo.
-
[Michael Sanders] “It’s been talked about elsewhere on here but it the new structure is great for episodic tv such as reality. Library is season, event is episode, the you can borrow footage from ep 1 to ep 2.”
OK, but why couldn’t I do this with a Collection? Instead of an Event called “ep 1”, I have a collection called “ep 1” ?
[Michael Sanders] “Would be even better if events were locked but people could work on the same library.”
This is the only reason I can really think of. If you open a Library package, the Events are their own sub database (as well as Projects, which are now ‘Event’ databases). So, if someone needs to work on it, it would be (perhaps) easier to simply lockout that Event folder on the Finder level. There’s a reason that Libraries have a “flexolibrary” extension. It seems to indicate that there will be multiple user access allowed at some point.
But that hasn’t happened yet, so for now, events seems like an unnecessary level of organization when getting footage and Projects between them seems “harder” than it needs to be.
Jeremy
-
if the event has no external reality – and it doesn’t appear to as the library is the visible container now –
why maintain those kinds of serious – copy only – type canonical event rules within a library?
If the event largely exists only as a construct within FCPX – why don’t they just introduce folders and be done with it?
The folders could get the event icon to hide cupertino’s blushes, or, you know, they could just call the folders bins…
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “But that hasn’t happened yet, so for now, events seems like an unnecessary level of organization when getting footage and Projects between them seems “harder” than it needs to be.”
But if it does go there, it will be sweet, f’n sweet. And it will all make sense. 😉
To answer your original question; we bring footage into one event and import an xml of all the re-ocurring elements we use into a second event. So we end up with a footage event, an elements event, a “ratings” event for when we need to add mpaa ratings to movie promos and trailers and the such. That’s the way it happens now, and it seems like logical, nice, compartmentalized organization. You only import the xmls that you need…
So a library is like an fcp7 project and events are like bins I suppose. It is certainly an easier transition for editors to understand coming from fcp7 to x. Is that a good reason to keep it? I don’t know, but we use the separations now anyways. The episodic event separation makes sense though. If you need footage from the old episode, open the library and copy it over or keep an xml of the old episode footage on the network and bring it in to your new project…
I don’t see a problem with putting the projects in events. We had compound clips in them before and occasionally there were edits and editors that would make promo versions as compound clips rather than as projects in the old version of x.
I think from a program standpoint, database organization under the hood might be cleaner with lib/event organization rather than lib/wild dis-organization.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Only one person can be working on a Library at any given time. So, in this scenario, we are working in two libraries anyway.”
Right now we don’t have true multi-editor in one Library workflow, that’s not what I’m suggesting. Let’s say you have 2 blocks of shooting. The material is logged and prepped by an assistant and given to the editor in a new Library as BLOCK1. The editor goes to work.
Footage starts coming in for the second block of shooting, maybe lasting several days. At another station on a common network, the assistant goes about importing and logging BLOCK2 in his copy of the Library. When he’s done, he just exports an Event XML of BLOCK2 and the editor can import it into his copy of the Library. Super simple.
And of course you can still search across all Events in one Library by doing your search while the Library is selected.
-
Here’s an example, I had a TON of footage on my home system from random little shoots at family events in Hawaii, Georgia, California, etc. I made a library called ‘Georgia’, and then created events for things like “Thanksgiving 2012, Thanksgiving 2013, and so on.
I also had a library called ‘Random’ for just smaller non-specific shoot elements. On my home system, all media is stored inside libraries instead of leaving in a 3rd location. When I realized that I had put an event in the Random library called ‘Georgia Family visit’, I decided that event would be better served in the “Georgia’ library. Moving that event to a different library (and all associated media with it) was so so easy. I just dragged and copied the event in question to the Georgia library and deleted from the Random library.
I like the option – if you don’t, just select all the events and then ‘merge’ events. That’s how we do it at work.
John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.
-
Why even have libraries? Why not simply rename an event a project, and within such project one has 2 things – organizational structures like keyword collections, smart collections, folders, etc. and sequences.
Makes sense to me, since more than 1 event isn’t very useful unless you’ve gone the route of a library for each client. And even then, I’m not sure it makes sense. Why not use keyword collections and folders for the different jobs?
In the past I used 1 event for each project. It seems redundant to require me to put that project in that event now, AND add another level of organization called a library.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up