-
Spatial awareness and memory recall
-
[Bret Williams] “. You can see it at the bottom of the timeline at 2:40 in this video “
Cool video, Bret. Thanks for posting. Never used it, I think we went straight from Avid to Media 100 around that time.
[Bret Williams] “Just kept possible clips in this area below the timeline. Without this area, I’ve becom accustomed to throwing different choices on different tracks and enabling/disabling as needed. But this area was so much better than that or putting chunks at the end of the sequence, because you never had to clean anything up. Your thoughts were always there. It was so ridiculously simple and useful.”
Super cool. Wish we had something like that in any of the NLEs today!
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
A part of my brain loves the idea of obsessively tagging all my footage and then being able to quickly refine searches. What we need here is a girl smiling in the park – fantastic! Type… girl, park, happy… Done!
The thing is though, that projects consisting of those kind of tasks are the kind of projects I’d rather do less of. In my experience, the literal-mindedness usually goes all the way to the top. As the editor I am looking for a shot of a girl smiling in a park because the project was conceived in a crudely literal way. She’s happy because her whites wash whiter!
I’m not snobbish about marketing – there is plenty of marketing to which this doesn’t apply.
[Aindreas Gallagher] “I feel there is a pay off when you start to draw on it at the critical back end. that you are not simply staring at a list of tags – rather that you have a few mental fold iterations of the set of assets”
When I’m thinking like this it means I’m properly engaged in the edit. And actually the sorting process (I use markers a lot in FCP7) is just a means to an end – an intuitive grasp of the whole and the specifics of the material. It’s only on “decent” projects that this kind of intuition is of value. Definitive labelling and automatic sorting of everything doesn’t look helpful to me when the goal is knowing the material with any kind of depth and subtlety. It seems more like a (very seductive) barrier.
In short, FCPX looks perfect for exactly the kind of jobs I’d rather avoid.
That said, I use classic FCP in ways it wasn’t designed to be used – I use timelines as scratch pads for example. So my question for FCPX users is – are there ways to usefully subvert the literal nature of metadata tagging?
I’m not ruling it out and like I said, a part of me loves the idea.
-
[andy lewis] “That said, I use classic FCP in ways it wasn’t designed to be used – I use timelines as scratch pads for example. So my question for FCPX users is – are there ways to usefully subvert the literal nature of metadata tagging?”
Interesting discussion and I absolutely agree with much of what has been said about the processes involved However i would like to make a few points.
The first one is important so I’m going to say it in caps, not because I’m shouting, but because it’s a very important point to bear in mind if you’re not familiar with FCPX
YOU DON’T HAVE TO USE KEYWORDS.
Use of keywords and automatic importing of folders into keyword collections is OPTIONAL, I hardly use it myself because like Aindreas said I like to familiar with ALL the material I have.
The next point is this, sorry it’s going to be in caps again.
YOU CAN USE KEYWORDS IN ALMOST THE SAME WAY AS YOU USE BINS, or even “rooms”
Simply set keywords and drag your clips over them to put them in the “bin” exactly the same as FCP Legacy, you can even have the same clip across different “bins” However as mentioned you can only view one “bin” at a time, hopefully people have been submitting user requests to enable multiple windows for keyword collections.
[andy lewis] “I use timelines as scratch pads for example. “
You can do the same things with projects, although once again you can only have one open at a time, however it’s a quick keyboard shortcut to get back to the project browser to open another though.
.
The other advantage is that you can have ALL of your footage in one window if you want and in icon view you can scrub through ALL of it without ever clicking on a clip. I recently worked on a project with 2500 clips and there were times when I literally went through every shot.If FCPX affected my awareness of my source material, I simply wouldn’t be using it.
Steve Connor
There’s nothing we can’t argue about on the FCPX COW Forum
-
[Steve Connor] “YOU DON’T HAVE TO USE KEYWORDS.”
there are only keywords steve. tagging ranges is the only organisational avenue available to you – I’m kind of surprised you haven’t realised this.
[Steve Connor] “YOU CAN USE KEYWORDS IN ALMOST THE SAME WAY AS YOU USE BINS”
no – its not a container, and objects can’t be physically moved to a new container or positioned within a container.
You can go all caps til the cows come home. It is in no way a bin. Its a database keyword tag. Again – I’m kind of surprised you don’t see this.https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Bret Williams] “but there’s no way to view all footage in legacy that I can remember.”
You throw all your clips onto a timeline and search away. In Legacy sometimes the best bin is a timeline.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Aindreas Gallagher] “there are only keywords steve. tagging ranges is the only organisational avenue available to you – I’m kind of surprised you haven’t realised this.”
I haven’t realised it because it’s not true. Make a keyword and it appears in the event library, exactly the same as a bin would in the project window of FCP7, drag a WHOLE clip from the media browser (no tagging of ranges involved) onto this keyword and that WHOLE clip will be contained within the keyword “bin” .
Click on that Keyword in the event library as you would click on a bin in FCP7 and ALL the clips you have dragged onto the keyword “bin” appear in the media browser (no ranges involved)
[Aindreas Gallagher] “no – its not a container, and objects can’t be physically moved to a new container or positioned within a container.”
Yes they can, you can have the clips in as many of the “bins” you want, the only limitation at the moment is that you can’t have more than one “bin” open at the moment
Steve Connor
There’s nothing we can’t argue about on the FCPX COW Forum
-
I think the point–well, at least the point for me–is that what you can’t do is have multiple bins open and floating around or tucked behind various parts of the screen or screens. I often place bins (or timelines I’m using as bins) on different parts of the screen or screens and muscle memory of spatial relationship becomes part of my categorizing. Those or up there. That’s down there. These are off to the side. The bins are more like containers you’d place on a work bench.
-
Here I’ve drawn you a picture
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciMOB-5nEMoSteve Connor
There’s nothing we can’t argue about on the FCPX COW Forum
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Chris Harlan] “I think the point–well, at least the point for me–is that what you can’t do is have multiple bins open and floating around or tucked behind various parts of the screen or screens. I often place bins (or timelines I’m using as bins) on different parts of the screen or screens and muscle memory of spatial relationship becomes part of my categorizing. Those or up there. That’s down there. These are off to the side. The bins are more like containers you’d place on a work bench.”
That is correct, at the moment FCPX actually has containers but they are fixed to the desk.
Steve Connor
There’s nothing we can’t argue about on the FCPX COW Forum
-
Organizationally, there is no question that its a valid approach. I think the point, though, is that some of us tend to use spatial relationships as a big part of our organizational techniques. The screen(s) becomes a desk or workbench. I’m definitely like that. Its the thing I miss most about Legacy; I could bend and shape the layout into anything I wanted. Now, some people hated that, felt that the interface could become needlessly cluttered, and think that of X as bringing new clarity and focus. I’m not like that.
Since its release, I’ve thought that this was one of the central determiners of how people react to X. And, I don’t think there is any right or wrong to that reaction, though I did not think that at first. I wore heavy blinders as to how others worked, and assumed that everyone worked just like me. Having spent so much time on this forum, I of course realize that that’s not the case.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up