that ain’t right…

[Don Smith]

Further, just remember that expanding a clip to make an L or J cut is a simple matter of double-clicking on the audio part. Double-clicking again tucks it back in. That only affects the one clip. I’ve come to really like the quick double-click thing because then I don’t have to hold the Option key to move the audio independently of the video like in FCP7. I understand Bret’s wish for a visual indication that a cut is an L or J with a visual thin line extending and it’s a good idea.

NewsVideo.com

[Bret Williams]

Ill never see how double clicking, then dragging one side of audio, then another side is faster than a single click drag to create a split edit between 2 clips. And if you then want a cross fade, you have to click drag out the fade handles on two clips. In 7, if you don’t have link selection turned on, then the solution edit is as simple as a single click drag on the audio. Ok, with the R key enabled.

That said, X is always 2 steps forward 1 step back. They may not have the simple split edit, but its been replaced with sub- frame audio edits and easy lopsided audio dissolves. While slightly more tedious, I find my audio to be much more precise now.

As for visualization, I would think they would show the split in a similar way to how they show the audio split when the two aren’t expanded and there is an adjacent clip. OR, just show there is something there like the first part of my example. Notice that when expanded, there is audio both preceding and following the video. When unexpanded, the first part doesn’t get “tucked back in” and it would appear as if there is video. Obviously contradictory behavior to what you suggest is sensual in some way.

[Bret Williams]

Oh, wait it just shows a gap clip. But it could show a gap on the second half as well. Both SHOULD show darkened audio on the bottom half just like a split between 2 adjacent clips. Ill make a mockup.

[Don Smith]

I’m just trying to understand what you want. Saying “Obviously contradictory behavior to what you suggest is sensual in some way.” sounds insulting while containing no actual meaning. I’m not here to insult you or anyone. I’m here to debate a point.

*IF* you don’t have linking on… *THEN* its simpler in FCP7? For me, I found it to be much less clicking to have linking on in FCP7 normally and then using the Option key to independently move audio only when needed. I don’t understand how making sure linking is always off and its inherent need for much more clicking in normal editing just to save a Option key once in a while.

Back to your issue; you want to see extended audio both when a clip is expanded and when it’s not expanded. That’s my take on your original post at least. Am I misunderstanding this? I can understand the want for a thin line indicator but how do you display the extended audio that’s darkened or not darkened without covering adjacent video unless the audio is on a different level (expanded from the clip)? That’s what I’m trying to understand. There’s a simple way to see the extended audio but you’re not happy with that.

And, back to that ‘darkened’ desire. ‘Darkened’ means ‘disabled’ in FCPX. Don’t you think darkened but active audio would be a violation of consistency?

NewsVideo.com

[Bret Williams]

Hmmm. Well there is definitely some room for improvement here. Why would an interface make it a point to display a darkened area where there is no audio, but not strive to show you when there is extra audio? If unexpanded is supposed to be this dumbed down basic mode, then either we do or don’t care about the audio positioning. Why would I care to only know where audio has been removed but not extended? There is just so much Apple could do make things more visual/intuitive. Attached is an idea of how it could all be more visual immediately.

I would replace this unexpanded view…

With this color coded view below, in which the darkened area still represents exactly what it did before – that there is no audio from the above video clip being heard. But with the addition of the visual L cut incorporated directly from expanded view, showing the extension of audio from the outgoing clip. The blue and green colors are just icing on the cake that would help visualization across the board.

If a clip is a split edit, but contains audio from both sources (overlapping audio) then it wouldn’t contain a darkened area, just the visual split edit. Or a combination. None of this is actually new except for the color coding. This is simply expanded view data incorporated into regular unexpanded view.

A clip that has a split but is not adjacent to another clip could look like this in unexpanded view…

And the related expanded views (below) would simply be color coded. Ditto with audio components view. Make the audio tracks green. And as I look at it, there would be no need for expanded view if we could simply edit the same way in normal view. My wouldn’t that be useful. Edit splits without expanding AND the unexpanded view shows the split properly. Expanded view could basically be audio components view.

But ya know what? Maybe the best thing is to just bring back audio tracks. Or how about the way Motion handles audio? We could keep the current editing method, but have another window that can open at the bottom that shows all the audio in a track view. Each track could be a role or just a track. You move the audio around to organize it into roles by placing the clips on tracks. You wouldn’t be able to move them horizontally, just vertically.