-
Tedious track based editing
-
[Craig Seeman] “Your comment is IMHO a perfect example of constrained thinking in that the “conventional” is the best.”
Not at all. Merely snarky and rhetorical! My son is a gifted guitarist and guitar instructor and I can see first hand through him how difficult it is to accurately notate the kind of sounds that are second-nature to a non-classical player.
I don’t think any of this is a matter of better or best. Merely a set of options. Apple is not the first nor the only company to design an NLE that doesn’t use conventional tracks. Yet, for whatever reason, the majority of the market ends up right back at that place and the other solutions have changed or been marginalized. The reason can’t be laziness or unwillingness to adapt to change all the time.
I can’t say if tracks are better or not. Sometimes, yes, and sometimes, no. Nevertheless, tracks seem to “feel” more comfortable to most editors, regardless of experience. At least that’s been the case, so far. FCP X may be more successful, because of the power of all things Apple.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “Yes.”
So then you know a notes position on the staff is absolute. In the same key, a G can never be an F. The staff defines a specific tone, the note defines the time. Written music is an alphabet of sorts.
Digital editing is not that exact. A video clip doesn’t always have to be on the bottom row, or the top. With composting modes, even the top most visible layer doesn’t need to visually be in the top of the layer stack.
While I agree that there is a modicum of similarity between NLEs, the timeline is not a musical staff and is much more flexible. Meaning is often implied, clips don’t have as much meaning as notes on a staff.
I’ll check out your links.
Jeremy
-
[Herb Sevush] “First of all his quote had to do with composing symphonies,”
That’s an artificial limit. I don’t want an NLE to force me into pop tunes and classical orchestration.
In the early days of Mac music software there was a wealth of innovative programs and interface designs.[Herb Sevush] “unless you have a better system to recommend”
“better” is relative to what you’re trying to achieve or what limits one accepts. As per above, that software existed for a time (and may still).Since we’re talking about FCPX, I think it’s a healthy step in addressing limitations (conventions) in NLE design even if it’s still very young.
-
[Herb Sevush] “After a few thousand years are round wheels the best we can do?”
Wheels? Or is it the round shape? What is a wheel made up of? Is rubber the best we can do? Steel? There are many questions. It’s not the wheel, it’s the shape of the wheel and what it’s made up of that can change. No, we don’t need to reinvent the circle, but my guess is that we might be able reinvent the components that ultimate make a better wheel.
Also, jets.
[Herb Sevush] “I’m just saying that appealing to change for change’s sake isn’t a good critique. “
I am not appealing to change for change’s sake. Certainly not. I just asked a question if it’s really the best we can do.
-
[Oliver Peters] “My son is a gifted guitarist and guitar instructor and I can see first hand through him how difficult it is to accurately notate the kind of sounds that are second-nature to a non-classical player.”
That’s why exploring interface design, breaking from convention, is important. Certain in a market driven society there is significant capital risk but nonetheless, I’m glad there are risk takers. Apple can do it because there’s very little capital risk (especially compared to Avid or Adobe).
[Oliver Peters] “I can’t say if tracks are better or not. Sometimes, yes, and sometimes, no. Nevertheless, tracks seem to “feel” more comfortable to most editors, regardless of experience. At least that’s been the case, so far. FCP X may be more successful, because of the power of all things Apple.”
Yes. this is both Apple’s to create a new kind of NLE which may land a beachhead in younger people who have not yet internalized conventions and as per above, they can take the market place risk.
-
[Craig Seeman] “Since we’re talking about FCPX, I think it’s a healthy step in addressing limitations (conventions) in NLE design even if it’s still very young.”
Actually at the moment we weren’t talking about FCPX, we were talking about the logic of this statement:
[Jeremy Garchow] “But after those 20 years, are tracks really the best we can do?”
And the counter argument that the passage of 20 years is neither an argument for or against change. Some things should be changed after 20 minutes, others still have purpose after 2000 years. Music notation has been around for well over 300 years and while flawed, is still the best we’ve come up with.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Jeremy Garchow] “I am not appealing to change for change’s sake. Certainly not. I just asked a question if it’s really the best we can do.”
My bad, I took it to be a more rhetorical argument. As to the answer I have no idea – maybe, maybe not.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “Music notation has been around for well over 300 years and while flawed, is still the best we’ve come up with.”
For the printed page and for the instruments that benefit from this method.
What about digitized music creation?
We have transferred from the analog to digital in the imaging world. Does the analog model still fit?
-
[Herb Sevush] “Music notation has been around for well over 300 years and while flawed, is still the best we’ve come up with.
“There are cultures much older than that that have produced music. The assumption that modern EuroWestern music notation is a “standard” is wrong IMHO. The premise is wrong because it’s EuroCentric. It’s not even either/or but a matter of musical intent in which there was music communicated before those methods of notation and there’s branches of modern music using other forms of documentation to be communicated. Basically it’s not “the best” nor even appropriate in some circumstances nor can it be in some cultures.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “What about digitized music creation?
We have transferred from the analog to digital in the imaging world. Does the analog model still fit?”
I notice your still using the alphabet in this digital world. Are letters the best we can come up with? Apparently yes, for the moment. I don’t see anybody using binary or hex when leaving post-it’s to our kids. Hell, we can’t get Americans to switch to the metric system – I think the possibilities of switching shared symbolic conventions are smaller than you think.
Humans seem to be very attached to their conventional visual representations of information for sharing and storage – be it letters, numbers or staff notation. The actual symbols change and grow over time – look at mathematical notation for instance – but these are additions and refinements – not wholesale change.
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