-
still driving me nuts
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Funny. I can do it in three key strokes. Sometimes, two.”
Thank you I’m going to try that Jeremy. A little nugget.
-
In AVID you can.
You forget you have to select the clip first (action no.1). Then CTRL-bracket (action no.2), trim (action no.3) And you have to tuck it back in again (action 4.) If it’s video a few more. And then I am not counting the audio fade business if the cut needs to sound a little nice.
In AVID: Ctrl-MOUSE click on ANY cut and you can drag the track (or tracks if it’s audio) you want immediately – ONE move by mouse. By keyboard: one keystroke for trimming mode, select left or right and then nudge. And you don’t have to be ON the cut exactly… just anywhere near will do. Plus you don’t have to tuck it in again. Audio crossfade: two key strokes.
I know it feels like nitpicking… but after four weeks of editing straight on a few shows back to back… it feels tiresome in comparison.
But I do like the fact that FCX can be very short-cutty by keyboard. At first glance it’s very mousy… and that doesn’t do the wrist much good.
-
if you’re using the mouse, just expand all the audio and use the mouse. It’s one shortcut.
Now, adding a cross fade, yes, there’s currently no on shortcut for it. I wish there were, but I can do split edits Very quickly in fcpx, it’s so fast that I don’t even think about it. Two keystrokes is nothing.
-
[James Ewart] “I can never understand who you manage to keep your head around all the different NLEs Oliver.”
That’s why I’m already nuts! 😉
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Mike Warmels] “My biggest issue is: is FCPX really better or faster. I have grave doubt about the latter.”
Faster or slower are always a function of the task at hand. For example, for one client, I frequently cut spots that require a lot of versioning. Custom 800 numbers and end tags and then batch exports in a variety of formats. At this site, I’m on Adobe and hands down that process would be significantly slower using FCP 7/X or MC.
It’s also about end-to-end workflow. Roundtripping using FCPXML or even standard XML can be less than satisfactory, compared with other options, like AAF.
But in general, given 4 years of experience with X, I’ve got to say that for me it’s a draw. The front end is faster, the back end is often faster, the middle isn’t. Most of this for me relates to X’s poor performance on nearly any machine when I really want to be in the groove and editing quickly.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[David Roth Weiss] “When you start to make the kinds of changes to long-standing universal terms as Apple has chosen to do in X, all you get is confussion, misunderstanding, and inaccuracy, which are antithetical to good communication.”
Apple doesn’t have a great track record with standards, unless they are de facto “standards” created by Apple. I’ve been personally told by Apple managers that it doesn’t go into standards like AAF, because most of the IP was developed and contributed by Avid and, therefore, in Apple’s opinion, the standard favors Avid. OTOH, FCPXML is tailored for FCP X. Never mind the fact that FCPXML is incompatible within Apple’s own software with XML – something they first championed.
So standards, best practices and terminology are very important and something Apple too easily casts aside. Speaking of which, how long do you think you can count on Thunderbolt being around?
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Bill Davis] “The reason they have Storylines and call Projects Projects instead of calling timelines projects isn’t an accident, IMO. It’s a calculated decision to construct a new set of ideas and adapt the existing the language to reflect that. “
I’m not sure this is true. Storylines, I agree. But a “project” is the same as a “timeline” or “sequence”. Why would Apple call it a Timeline window or a Timeline Index or the magnetic timeline concept? Why not a “Project” window, “Project Index”, or “magnetic project” concept?
The reason Apple called sequences “Projects” has nothing to do with innovation. It’s purely a naming convention that put X in sync with other Apple software. They really could care less whether it’s consistent with standard naming practices within the industry.
The way you work within a Project is different than the way you work within a track-based Sequence. But what the two are – and the end result of each – is still the same.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Good grief, it’s just a name, there are many things to think about in this business, what Apple decided to call a timeline isn’t really one of them.
-
[James Ewart] “For sure they must have thought about it a lot and decided it would rock the boat.”
I think they did it because they thought it made more sense that way. Why would they say to themselves “hey this is stupid, let’s do it”
The only time I even think about the word “project” in X is when I’m creating a new one, and it won’t even let you create one unless you NAME it.
If you named it “project” then that would be silly.
When I was working on my doc, I didn’t want to string the whole film out in the timeline. I thought it would bog down, so I would work in sections at a time. (like chapters of a book)
When I was working in the “Weldon” section that was the name of that project. Weldon.
The people that I worked with knew the film wasn’t titled Weldon. They knew that was a section of the film. They would say, “this or that needs to be changed in WELDON” not. “change this in the “project”
At no time was it ever difficult for any of us to understand what we were looking at or talking about.
Granted, my film was small budget, but I didn’t hear those guys complaining about miscommunication on FOCUS because of the name “project” Shouldn’t it have come up then? On a film that big?
There are changes they have made that I hate. Like Greying out iTunes. That makes it harder for me to see what’s what.
I think Photos looks bland and ugly.
I think the icons for the apps look bland and ugly and cheap.
I’m sure they, and others would disagree : )
-
[Mike Warmels] “You forget you have to select the clip first (action no.1).”
[Mike Warmels] “By keyboard: one keystroke for trimming mode, select left or right and then nudge.”
I find it funny that you mention how you have to select the clip in FCPX to use keyboard shortcuts, but neglect to mention that you have to select the track in Avid to do the same thing.
I work in Avid all day, and personally I find it MUCH slower in terms of overall performance. I hit buttons fast and find that sometimes I’ve hit two shortcuts in quick succession and the second one doesn’t register. So I wait and then have to hit the shortcut again to do what I want. This is particularly a pain when using the smart tool. I select the smart tool, move some clips, then turn it off. Only because the Avid was concentrating on the move I was making, it doesn’t register that I hit the shortcut to turn it off and then when I attempt to scrub in my timeline, I end up grabbing a long piece of slug and erasing an entire track of video.
Don’t even get me started on the autosave. After working with a program that always saves everything you do without interrupting you, waiting for the Avid to save all your open bins (sometimes in excess of 15-20 seconds) every 15-30 minutes is worse than annoying. And heaven forbid if you have a bin open that you don’t own the lock on. Yes, it’s not as enjoyable as it sounds being told that this bin won’t be saved and requiring you to click “don’t save” each time autosave kicks in. Yeah, that doesn’t ever interrupt the flow of my work.
And Avid can have a long delay playing a sequence too since it has to load the whole thing into RAM first. It’s been my experience, especially in the most recent version that FCPX is much faster on that front. Everywhere I look, there are delays with the Avid interface. Like to see your waveforms? Better wait for them to draw. Want to zoom in to your timeline after that, better wait for them to redraw. Perform a few functions, oh wait, suddenly the waveforms have to redraw again for no apparent reason. Need to move some clips? I hope you don’t have audio scrubbing on because that’s going to take a while. What’s that? You can’t turn off audio scrubbing while you’re in the middle of moving the clips? You have to stop what you’re doing, turn off audio scrubbing, and then go back to moving in order to regain any speed? How about trimming? Surely, making one frame trims with audio scrubbing on isn’t hard. Oh, delay again. Wow. Lovely.
I like my Avid, but I’m also not in denial about how slowly it handles in comparison to the newer, faster NLEs. If Avid would stop adding functionality for niche film workflows long enough to improve the responsiveness of the UI, I would be happy. But alas, if the marker window has taught me anything, it’s that Avid doesn’t see any issue with the UI, or else is afraid to make any changes, even to performance.
Andy
https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up