-
Tedious track based editing
-
[David Lawrence] “You mean like the way they’ve come to dominate the word processor/page layout market with Pages?”
In many respects Pages is very conventional.
Apple has no great motive to bring it to scale with Quark or InDesign.
They’re not even trying. It hasn’t had a major update since 2009.If anything iBook Author is more appropriate but still not a good comparison because it’s very much a closed system tied to Apple’s store and sales revenue development.
FCPX sales seem to be extremely high. I suspect a fair number of people are buying it as their first NLE. Some of those will move into higher end professional markets and will be doing so with FCPX.
Apple’s approach seems to be through attrition. They’re going to attract many more new professionals than convert old guard establishment. It’s a much easier sell.
-
And Motion is still there (and round tripping is another feature that has yet to be implemented in FCPX).
The reality is doing self contained compositing in an NLE is easier and faster for many simpler things. This also using b-roll in a variety of forms ranging from simple cutaway to compositing picture in picture with titles. NLEs are OK compositors but not ideal for “motion” graphics. A large amount of compositing involves very little motion work. As much as I too want to see roundtrip it can be tedious if you need to do it for everything. This is common to all NLEs and, in that sense, FCPX is “traditional.” All NLEs have basic compositing sans complex motion. -
[Craig Seeman] “A large amount of compositing involves very little motion work. As much as I too want to see roundtrip it can be tedious if you need to do it for everything. This is common to all NLEs”
For my work the idea of changing the basic workflow paradigm to accommodate the less than 5% of the time I’m working with compositing would seem much like the proverbial tail wagging the dog, but as Jeremy often says, that’s just me and what do I know.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “For my work the idea of changing the basic workflow paradigm to accommodate the less than 5% of the time I’m working with compositing”
I use compositing loosely as I also include b-roll and related. Anything that one would normally add above another shot in an NLE. When I include b-roll, titles, simple graphic transitions, I can’t imagine it being as little as 5% for anything but the most primitive of pieces. Also consider the layering of alternate shots (which FCPX makes easier with Auditions).
-
[Craig Seeman] “I use compositing loosely as I also include b-roll “
I don’t dedicate a separate “B-roll” track for non sync material, probably because of my near constant use of multi-cam which can make the whole concept of “B-roll” a little vague. That’s why I never liked editing with systems that use A / B roll style timeline tracks such as Media 100. I don’t need the underlying video as a reference of any sort since I have the audio for that. Since I always disconnect the audio from the video in all my clips I never have to deal with L and J cuts and almost all my transitions exist on the base layer. For the way I cut, compositing means compositing – again different horses for different courses, but probably another reason why I miss the appeal of X.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Aindreas Gallagher] “can we not just say it is dying on the vine now?
Isn’t this a deliciously near dead editing system? The motion of editing?
haven’t we actually killed it?
can’t we pop balloons?”
Hang onto your balloons Aindreas, it is so not near dead. Watch this space.
-
[Walter Soyka] “While nothing will happen in a traditional timeline that the user doesn’t explicitly order, the FCPX magnetic timeline has a system of rules that guide operations during timeline maneuvers.”
Are we (the royal we) really saying that FCP7 has no rules? I’d call BS on that one, I just think that people are so familiar with them, they don’t feel like rules and they have somehow morphed in to…..Legend.
[Walter Soyka] “One of those rules is that two clips can’t exist in the same place at the same time.”
And this is different from FCP7 how exactly?
[Walter Soyka] “Just like the floor stops me from falling into the basement,”
I have to remember to not stomp on my floor too hard today. It is saving me from certain death at every step and I should be more respectful of that fact. The problem is, I’m not sure if I can convince my dog of the same…
[Walter Soyka] “The gravity I naively referred to wants to pull clips down as far as it can, but it stops when they hit another clip.”
This is true. And it is certainly different from FCP7. But what’s on top is still on top and playback happens exactly the same as it does in FCP7. Visually, yes, there’s no straight lines in FCPX except the primary. If you need to keep things on top, you can add an artifical barrier like a blank title layer. Any new connected clip you add will always stay on top until you move it below, or move the barrier layer. As I mentioned, this is a work around and should not be necessary with better UI design. For now, it is necessary if you need the visual organization.
[Walter Soyka] “Same deal as above. Clips pull as far to the left as they can, until something else — another clip, a connection anchor, or a gap — stops them. The P key does not let you reposition a clip in time absolutely; it lets you redefine the relationship of that clip to its parents (and antecedents?), either by sliding the parent-side location of the connection anchor point or by creating a gap object that acts just like your “barrier clip” in the above example.
“Perhaps I am simply misunderstanding. You are saying that I can’t put a clip where I want it because it’s always going to pull to the left? THis is crazy. I would not be here if this is actually how FCPX worked.
What I don’t think that people realize is just what the position tool does. Here’s an example.
With the arrow tool on:
Three clips that are exactly 4 seconds a piece:
I make a range of two seconds:
and trim the heads and tails (kb shortcut ‘option-backslash’ (which leaves behind the selected content within the range) which effectively trims two seconds off the over all time of the sequence. Everything ripples. The end of the timeline is now at 9:23 when it was at 11:23. Picture:
Now.
With the position tool on, if I do that same kb shortcut (option-backslash) look what happens:
The sequence remains the same length of 12 seconds.
So how is time relative in this example?
I can now take a clip from my event with the position tool on, and place it anywhere I want and nothing moved. X adds the gap clips automatically:
Again, how is time relative? Because of gap clips? It seems to me that there’s a misconception that you can’t move things and keep things where you want in the X timeline. I am not so sure that’s true.
[Walter Soyka] “[Walter Soyka] “A [traditional] timeline clip object’s temporal position is an inherent property.”
[Jeremy Garchow] “Only until you ripple? I can just as easily move clips out of it’s “inherent time” in 7 as in X. Same tools, different kb shortcuts.”
Same result, but a different operation. “
Yes. Same result. I am not arguing that X doesn’t work differently, but you can get the same result, and in most cases it’s holding a different modifying key, just like FCP7 where you have to hold certain modifying keys, or lock tracks, or select certian clips, but not others.
[Walter Soyka] “A traditional ripple tool offsets the temporal position properties of all affected clips equally. FCPX’s magnetic ripples are the result of a change to a child’s parent(s), not a change to the child itself.”
So, you are saying that everytime I ripple in FCP7, all things get treated equally? Ha! That is a great one. Here’s Le Me trying to ripple everything equally in FCP7. Oops:
If I remove the offending transition that is 5 seconds down the timeline from where I am trying to ripple trim, certain things move, certain things stay put. So tell me how this represents more exact time than relative time? FCP7 moves certain things that I have no control over unless I correctly select a myriad of connection points, and delete certain offending transitions. All of this is mitigated in FCPX at a glance with the connection points (or parent and child or whatever)
Jeremy
-
[Craig Seeman] “FCPX sales seem to be extremely high. I suspect a fair number of people are buying it as their first NLE. Some of those will move into higher end professional markets and will be doing so with FCPX.
Apple’s approach seems to be through attrition. They’re going to attract many more new professionals than convert old guard establishment. It’s a much easier sell.”
No question Apple will sell far more copies of FCPX than Legacy. The price and power alone make it an easy choice for anyone who wants to get deeper into post-production. Especially for people buying it as their first NLE.
But I’m *much* more skeptical about it moving into high-end professional markets.
Historically, Apple’s greatest success has been in creating new markets and new uses through innovative design and technology. The iPhone and iOS ecosystem are stunning examples. Apple’s innovation created not only an entirely new class of product, it created an entirely new market altogether. And because these devices and their ecosystem proved so incredible flexible and useful, even though it started in the consumer space, it migrated to the enterprise space.
The NLE market is *completely* different because it’s already well-established. It’s a very mature market with common standards and practices that have been in place for decades. But more significantly, the NLE market serves an already well-defined need and use.
With FCPX, Apple radically changes the approach to the task of editing, but they haven’t changed the nature of the task itself. FCPX is used to edit and post. Every other NLE on the market is also used to edit and post. But only FCPX works in its completely proprietary, non-standard way.
The barrier isn’t necessarily the old guard establishment, its well-established industry standards and practices. These industry standards and practices won’t simply go away just because Apple thinks they should.
Standards matter. It doesn’t matter if a new generation starts using it, when they go looking for jobs, they’ll need to know the tools that the industry has standardized on. FCPX’s non-standard approach is already proven to be a barrier to acceptance. It actually makes it a much tougher sell.
This is why I think the comparison of FCPX to the NLE market to Pages and the word processor/page layout market is fair. In mature markets, the market decides the standard, not the vendor. The standard is the gate, not old guard establishment.
This is not to say that the market won’t change or expand. I agree change and growth is inevitable. More and more people will start editing with FCPX. Professionals will find all sorts of uses for it. “Pro-sumer” means “Professional” and “Consumer” and FCPX fills needs for both. New tools and choices are a good thing.
But at the high end, I don’t think attrition will be a factor at all. I think it’s ultimately a question of whether the NLE paradigm Apple proposes in FCPX will eventually grow into something compelling and valuable enough to change standards. All the while competing vendors add continue to innovate, improve and develop traditionally designed systems. The enterprise space is an entirely different space than the consumer space where the iOS flourished. The rules are completely different.
Like I said to the OP, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[David Lawrence] “No question Apple will sell far more copies of FCPX than Legacy. The price and power alone make it an easy choice for anyone who wants to get deeper into post-production. Especially for people buying it as their first NLE.”
[David Lawrence] “he NLE market is *completely* different because it’s already well-established. It’s a very mature market with common standards and practices that have been in place for decades. But more significantly, the NLE market serves an already well-defined need and use.
With FCPX, Apple radically changes the approach to the task of editing, but they haven’t changed the nature of the task itself. FCPX is used to edit and post. Every other NLE on the market is also used to edit and post. But only FCPX works in its completely proprietary, non-standard way.”
Attrition battles take time. FCPX is a very young app. As time goes on FCPX may add things that will serve the mature market. All prognostication of course but I’m talking a few years down the road.
I think we’re looking at a few more releases of “catchup” features. At some point they may introduce features that may fit facility needs. Also “maturity” itself is changing as the definition evolves. Actually Adobe Anywhere might be one of the bigger indicators rather than anything by Apple . . . yet. Apple often isn’t the first with a feature. They’re revisioning of things usually works. Time will tell. That’s the nature of attrition battles. I think it will come from “young” adaptors maturing along with FCPX itself.
Pages is not a good example because Desktop Publishing will have to include the growing eBook market and iBook Author offers interactivity.
I’ll probably sound like Bill Davis but the changes are going to be radical even if not sudden.
-
[Walter Soyka] “… you can get absolute time behavior in FCPX by cutting a gap into the primary and then connecting everything to it. You could consider a traditional timeline to be much like this, except that the primary gap clip is invisible to the user.”
Walter,
That’s pretty much my understanding of it. So I guess I understand it. I just have a nagging suspicion that creeps up when people start talking about relative time and absolute time. Maybe I can’t conceptualize the distinction and Einstein was right.
Franz.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up