-
Tedious track based editing
-
[Bob Woodhead] “You were right the first time Craig…. your fingers were talking for you.”
you got me. Nice one
-
[craig slattery] ” I just think there is no ligament reason to stick with track based editing. I’m not saying its difficult, or that it hampers creativity. Its just boring and completely unnecessary, its true! I have seen the light, and its in FCPX. I predict that this argument will be obsolete in two years, because all the systems will have adopted their own version of the magnetic timeline.”
And there is no room, Craig, for an NLE that could works in both ways, up to the editors needs/preferences?
rafael -
not tooting my own horn or anything – but I actually called that three months ago.
https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/35659
BOOM. ok I am tooting my horn. my sources have sources.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
hey craig, are you still going ahead with that london based post facility based around FCPX you mentioned a while back?
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[craig slattery] “I predict that this argument will be obsolete in two years, because all the systems will have adopted their own version of the magnetic timeline.”
This was my prediction also when I first started using X
I thought others would have a track version and then a copy cat X version to try to capture both markets.
I must admit I underestimated people’s willingness to continue to use a 32 bit program.
I thought more people would jump to SOMETHING 64 bit, be it ppr, X or newer version of Avid, but it seems many people have stood still. They are using their same 7 or their same Avid.
Hey, it’s working for them and they feel at home with it. I thought more people hated that render bar as much as I did.Many people have moved, just not as many as I thought would. I think many feel trapped. They want 64 but they have heard or just don’t like X and some don’t want to learn a new program so they have just not moved.
My other prediction was that X would be helped by the bandwagon effect from third party plugin companies.
FxFactory and others have been all over X, as well they should. They just care about selling their products and they see that huge X market. ( like if you are going to sell phone apps you are looking at the iPhone kind of thing)
Third party apps are making X stronger and stronger and even funner to work with.
They also seem to be leading with X all the time. Their demos start off with “i’m in FCP X, but these also work in After Effects instead of the other way around.
-
[andy lewis] “s FCPX as fully keyboard-shortcut enabled as this?”
I find keyboard editing to be very capable in FCPX. In some ways it is better than 7. You still need the mouse for some things but mostly just to direct the pointer, and then you don’t even have to click (like hitting ‘c’ to select a clip).
I also find the extremely intuitive keyboard shortcut editor to be one of the best FCPX training tools out there.
I do find it funny that after working in FCPX, and generally liking where it’s going, and then going back to tracks, is when the reality of how much faster editing can be in X presents itself. I’m not saying its for everyone, or that the X timeline does not need some mechanics tuning, but there are aspects of it that are actually better in my opinion.
I don’t think that anyone will copy it for a long while. It caused way too much uproar and other companies are currently profiting from said uproar. The closest thing out there is Smoke 2013, and it’s not exactly really like FCPX but it does share a small bundle of ideas. Only Apple would show up to the marathon, shoot themselves in the foot and then line up at the starting line. Unlike mr slattery, I am often wrong.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “… but there are aspects of it that are actually better in my opinion.”
I’ve heard that with X, editing is no longer boring and tedious!
Franz.
-
I think Apple will lead the way in building an alternative to tracks for some time.
I’ve had issues with Tracks going back over 20 years when I started on Avid in its early days. Tracks have server two, often conflicting purposes for me. They are a compositing tool and an organizing tool. The result has been years of “track dancing” as I have to push things up to composite followed by re-targeting. Ultimately resulting in unwieldy vertical scrolling.
FCPX is the first NLE to bifurcate the process. Connected Clips and Secondary Storylines are now address the layering I need. The composited elements are now tied to the primary so the composites stay together as I move them. Sometimes though, elements need to be connected to the Secondary. I’m hoping FCXP adds that.
Roles are a step in the right direction in addressing what was the organizational abilities of tracks both from a data management and visual display. The issue is that this feature is still very young and very incomplete. For many it’s not yet a successful replacement. Sometimes when doing structural work one needs to address all VO or all Actor A Close Ups (however the many custom ways one would use the flexibility of tracks to organize). Roles isn’t quite there yet. Sometimes I need to see the linear display of the same to judge pacing. Roles isn’t there yet on that either.
As you might know, I’m a big fan of FCPX. It’s precisely because Apple is addressing problems I’ve had with NLE design. Yet while FCPX is very much data management driven, it’s youngest in its development of the display of that data. i think FCPX will excel in this in the not too distant future. There’s little or no precedent in NLE design for this. The entire FCPX GUI is very young because of it’s radical departure from NLE design.. Apple itself has a good history with interface design. That’s been their forte.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “I’ve heard that with X, editing is no longer boring and tedious!”
If one finds editing boring and tedious, then this is not the profession to pursue no matter what software is employed.
Yesterday, I was editing in FCP7 and had to wedge in changes to add another aspect of the story per client request. Pretty simple piece, interviews, broll, music, nat sound/sound design, not scripted.
Since this still a rough cut, I have lots of disabled clips and potential choices on my timeline as well as two camera angles per interview, audio on each camera, and double system sync sound.
Trying to get everything situated just right took a lot of delinking, locking certain tracks, and generally trying to add pieces to the middle of a puzzle without taking apart too much of what has already been built. You have to move layers around and generally get everything situated in the timeline before adding the new clips, add the new clips, then fold everything back around it. In X, I could have slid things around and kept the groups of clips I wanted together through connections or otherwise and simply added new clips to my timeline without moving much of anything. I can select or deselect the audio channels before or after I add them to the timeline. It is not until you have really used X, and then go back to tracks do you start to see where the strengths lie. It’s not for everyone, but if you like FCPX you can generally see that it is better at certain tasks that involve editing and not quite as obtuse as it has been made out to be. The connections are the timeline metaphor. It is new and different, but there is logic behind it.
I wanted to make a screen capture out of it as I thought it was a pretty good example of how X can make things more efficient, and dare I say, easier, and at the same time allow creative freedom.
Sure, some things need to be kept in place in time, but the X timeline allows that as well if you know how to work it.
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “hey craig, are you still going ahead with that london based post facility based around FCPX you mentioned a while back?”
Yes, scouting for a location at the moment. Opening around Christmas or March. Would really like to know what apple are going to do with the Mac Pro.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up