-
swapping two shots
-
ASKED –
“[Bill Davis] “The thing is, nobody’s saying that tracks have NO advantages. . ”
[Herb Sevush]”No, somebody was.”
[Robin S. Kurz] Really? Who exactly? Sure would love to see that quote. Oddly I’ve gone through the entire thread and can’t see that anyone ever did.”
AND ANSWERED.
“[Herb Sevush] “but to believe there are no trade-offs is just silly.”
[Robin S. Kurz] Silly is to suggest that there are any …”
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
IF you happen to have all of the audio attached to that particular shot. If you have several shots sharing audio, then its a completely different story. This thing simply shows what X has been able to do well since day one. If that’s the extent of your editing, then swell.
-
[Robin S. Kurz] “Seeing that you’re so steadfast on the subject to the point of a crusade, you must have a whole long list of things you’ve been keeping from us the whole time?
“Crusade?! You should talk! I think Herb’s being quite reasonable, and I can’t tell if you are purposely ignoring his observations and questions, or simply not understanding them. Believe me, Herb’s not your enemy. He’s a reasonable guy who sees things differently than you do.
-
[Herb Sevush] “AND ANSWERED.”
I unfortunately have no idea how you figure that there is any type of “answer” in there. Certainly not to the questions who supposedly made the claim or what I or anyone has supposedly “lost”. Never mind the list of “trade-offs”. Oh well.
But then, it’s not like I was actually expecting anything on any of it… 😀
-
[Robin S. Kurz] “I unfortunately have no idea how you figure that there is any type of “answer” in there. Certainly not to the questions who supposedly made the claim”
You make the claim Robin. You make it when you state that there is nothing lost when going to a trackless timeline – if nothing is lost then by definition tracked timelines can have no advantages over trackless. Since that is your position, and I have no doubt that it is your sincerely held belief, I don’t see why you have such a hard time acknowledging it.
As to the “long list” of what’s missing in X, I was referring to visual coherence. The lack of these visual clues is why some of the biggest X proponents on this board have asked for such things as “colored roles indicators” so you could see at a glance the nature of the audio clips on the timeline, or “lanes” whereby certain types of audio could always be found in certain areas of the timeline. These are repeated requests by editors using FCPX all the time. The lack of these features are certainly not enough to cause them to switch NLEs, but the request for them shows the trade-off required by switching to X, namely the speed and flexibility of moving clips around the magnetic timeline for the innate visual coherence of a tracked timeline.
And you should note that I’m not making a value judgement here, I’m not saying one is better than the other. I’m merely stating what to me is obvious, that they are different approaches, each with their own advantages, and the decision of which to use should be based on the individual editors workflow and preferences.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “I’m merely stating what to me is obvious, that they are different approaches, each with their own advantages, and the decision of which to use should be based on the individual editors workflow and preferences.”
But Herb, just to be clear, you don’t use FCPX correct? I think that is what I remembered you saying in some post? You have looked at it, perhaps own it, but don’t use it in a real world environment. Is my memory correct on this? I just want to be clear on where you are making your judgment calls. So many times, on this forum and others, you see posts strongly criticizing one thing or another from a person who has never used the product! If I am wrong, I apologize.
regards –
Scott
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
[Scott Witthaus] “Herb, just to be clear, you don’t use FCPX correct? I think that is what I remembered you saying in some post? You have looked at it, perhaps own it, but don’t use it in a real world environment. Is my memory correct on this? I just want to be clear on where you are making your judgment calls.”
Scott you are correct, as I have stated many times I have never used and never even downloaded FCPX. Weigh that however you’d like when evaluating my posts.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “you state that there is nothing lost when going to a trackless timeline”
Nope, sorry. You’re the one speaking of supposed “losses” of which I’ve merely stated that I personally am not aware of. Whereby I’m still waiting on that list to even know what it is we’re even talking about? Pretty straight forward and simple task I would have thought. And sorry that I can’t prove a negative btw.
[Herb Sevush] “… so you could see at a glance the nature of the audio clips on the timeline”
And even though I already wrote (more than once) that there is a very easy way to do just that, you choose to ignore it and go by insinuation/assumption as opposed to actual knowledge (which seems to be the archetypal pattern of the whole discussion). Which was my point from the beginning. Merely making claims for argument sake and for lack of knowledge of even the most basic facts. Wow… quite the hubris.
And I also predicted that anything I could see one pointing to, could at best fall into the realm of “personal preference” or “habit” and certainly not “loss”, which that color-coding “argument” is a perfect example of. One night argue that that could be a nice enhancement, but it’s kinda hard to “lose” or “trade-off” something that one never even had (even elsewhere) to begin with, don’t you think? I do.
[Herb Sevush] “These are repeated requests by editors using FCPX all the time. “
Oh! So enhancement requests are a completely unique quality of X! I had no idea! 😀
[Herb Sevush] “shows the trade-off required by switching to X”
Either you can clearly define your ever reoccurring “trade-off” with a specific example, or… you’re blowing smoke (i.e. trolling). Simple. I can’t see how someone basing his entire position upon logical fallacies and hearsay can be considered “a reasonable guy” by any stretch either, sorry. But I guess that’s just me. I’m more of the “Put up, or…” type of guy.
[Herb Sevush] “I’m merely stating what to me is obvious, that they are different approaches, each with their own advantages, and the decision of which to use should be based on the individual editors workflow and preferences.”
I’m merely stating what to me is obvious, which is, no, that’s not what you’ve been saying or suggesting. Not even close, sorry. I can only assume you’re being willfully obtuse if you want to act as if that’s all you’ve been talking about. Disingenuous at best. You have said nothing other than that there are losses and trade-offs (is there an echo in here?) inherent with the switch to X. None of which, despite repeated requests, you are able to name specifically, but instead choose to make patently false claims and unsubstantiated presumptions as if they were fact. No idea what that has to do with “the individual editors workflow and preferences”.
Especially if you’re (all of a sudden) graciously allowing us those “individual workflows and preferences”, in which case I have no idea what the point of the whole argument even is. Because again, that’s just plain not what it has been about, so let’s not pretend. Saying (to repeat it for the umpteenth time) that I’m “losing” and “trading-off” something (whatever that something is) by using X is something entirely different.
In case it’s still not clear…
LOSS = if I were to go back to FCP 7 or whatever NLE it applied to, I would LOSE things like the magnetic timeline, superior metadata management, alternatives, audio-syncing etc. etc. etc. etc.
TRADE-OFF = If I were to go back to FCP 7 etc. I would be TRADING a sleek, modern interface for a fugly one.Someone that hasn’t even so much as seen or used THE DEMO of an app but still vehemently insists on “participating” in a forum for said app, can clearly only be defined as one thing. Making this whole discussion even more of a farce than it already is.
-
Robin and Scott, Herb’s personal experience has no bearing on whether his argument is right or wrong. If his argument is wrong, either his assumptions or his logic must be wrong, so let’s look at the argument rather than the man making it.
If I may paraphrase the argument (presented without value judgement):
1. A tradeoff between systems exists their sets of benefits and liabilities do not overlap.
2. Tracked NLEs provide a mechanism for the benefit of at-a-glance timeline legibility (via alignment).
3. FCPX is a not tracked NLE, and its current competitors are.
4. Requests from numerous full-time FCPX users for color-coding indicate a need for more at-a-glance timeline legibility.
5. Therefore, FCPX has a need for more at-a-glance timeline legibility — something its competitors already have.
6. Therefore, this imbalance in benefits represents a tradeoff.
If you disagree with the argument, let’s discuss where either the assumptions or the logic fails.
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[Robin S. Kurz] “Someone that hasn’t even so much as seen or used THE DEMO of an app but still vehemently insists on “participating” in a forum for said app, can clearly only be defined as one thing.”
This forum is not “for” FCPX, it for the discussion around it. Read the name of the forum, I’m the “or not.”
[Robin S. Kurz] “Especially if you’re (all of a sudden) graciously allowing us those “individual workflows and preferences”, in which case I have no idea what the point of the whole argument even is”
There is no “all of a sudden” — the following quote is from my very first at the top of the thread:
“If the way you organize your work leads to a Yes to that question, then FCPX is clearly for you. However the opposite holds true as well. There is no free lunch and choice of NLE is based on individual workflow.”
As to not having any idea of the point of this argument, well you’ve got me there.
[Robin S. Kurz] ” One night argue that that (color coding roles) could be a nice enhancement, but it’s kinda hard to “lose” or “trade-off” something that one never even had (even elsewhere) to begin with, don’t you think? I do.”
While it’s true that no other NLE has color coded roles, that’s because no other NLE needs color coded roles because they inherently have the tracked structure that color coded roles seeks to emulate. So yes, that visual structure is lost when going to FCPX and ALL tracked NLE’s have it.
The fact that you don’t miss it because it had no value to you does not mean there is no loss, it merely explains one of the reasons that FCPX is right for you. I never use dynamic trimming, so using FCP7 was not a problem for me, even though if I were an editor coming from Avid I might see it as a great loss. And in analyzing the two NLEs I would acknowledge that it was a deficiency in the software comparatively speaking even though I didn’t use that feature.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up