-
Spatial awareness and memory recall
-
[Herb Sevush] ” In Legacy sometimes the best bin is a timeline.
“For me? If you dumped the “sometimes” I could definitely agree with that statement.
-
[Chris Harlan] “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.
“Which is exactly why FCPX should let you open keyword collections and projects in separate multiple windows, I understand this, I’ve seen enough Editors working like this to know how common an approach it is. I’m just pushing back against the idea that somehow you have to sit there and keyword all your clips in FCPX, rather than just dragging a bunch of them into “bins”
Steve Connor
There’s nothing we can’t argue about on the FCPX COW Forum
-
[Chris Harlan] “For me? If you dumped the “sometimes” I could definitely agree with that statement.”
When searching thru clips I agree. However there are, for me 2 great advantages of bins over timelines which occasionally come in useful.
First of course is re-sorting. A timeline is fixed, you’ve already made your sort by the order in which you laid them out. there are times you want to resort by a clip feature and bins are perfect for that. It’s also much easier to see the clip properties in a bin if you need to check that sort of thing.
Bins are also great baskets for odds and ends you want to group together. In my cooking series I have a bin labeled “generic” where I keep my basic music stings, my title open, my underwriter spots, end credits, lower thirds and segment graphics. Each of the separate elements are held in folders within the main bin. This sort of “grab bag” is a perfect way to hold them, much more efficient than a timeline because I don’t have to search them I just need to get at them.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
Agreed. I should have used a smiley-con. I was just being overly enthusiastic.
-
[Steve Connor] “Which is exactly why FCPX should let you open keyword collections and projects in separate multiple windows, “
That would be cool.
[Steve Connor] “I’m just pushing back against the idea that somehow you have to sit there and keyword all your clips in FCPX, rather than just dragging a bunch of them into “bins””
Ah! Understood.
-
Avid was around in ’93, but it was still single field offline only for a couple years. The cube had some amazing features. It was wavelet, so it was good quality for being 12:1 compression! And 60i too. Probably AVR 75 ish quality. But the graphics were completely uncompressed. It was a hybrid. It didn’t ever render in its first iteration. The video never entered the Mac. The Mac just controlled playback and capture from the media processor, which was essentially a switcher with hard drives. The Mac did supply graphics to the videos, which was completely downstream, uncompressed, so they were sharp as could be. Satellite feeds we created with it were broadcast weekly on local stations and nobody ever questioned the quality.
-
My fantasy for FCP8 organisation turned out to be almost exactly the opposite of the direction apple went in. They went more verbal when I was hoping for more spacial and visual.
I imagined some kind of supercharged storyboard mode for rough organization of clips. Just filmstrips on the screen with one tiny viewer. You drag clips around, arrange them how you want, group them, sync them, write notes on them or next to them. Circle a group while holding command and the clips form a timeline. Not sure how practical it would have been in reality.
I’m sure that some kind of modal interface for compression and output would work well though. It would be nice to be able to copy and paste entire output pipelines between projects and be able to see at a glance exactly what you are doing.
Doesn’t seem as if any NLE is going in that direction. I’ll just have to cross my fingers wait and see what’s announced a NAB for windows moviemaker
-
Ahem… I meant nodal not modal.
-
Have you looked at Lightworks? It’s the closest thing to your dream scenario that I’ve seen – complete flexibility and interface customization with multiple bins and timelines out the wazoo… It’s pretty funky at first but then it starts to make real sense…
Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1 -
[Steve Connor] “Which is exactly why FCPX should let you open keyword collections and projects in separate multiple windows, I understand this, I’ve seen enough Editors working like this to know how common an approach it is. I’m just pushing back against the idea that somehow you have to sit there and keyword all your clips in FCPX, rather than just dragging a bunch of them into “bins””
Steve, when clips are viewed in a keyword collection as thumbnails, can you manually arrange them or color them? I’ve never tried so I’m really curious. If not, something like this would be valuable along with multiple windows because color-coding and gathering physical piles is another strategy many of us “spatial” editors use.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up