The “little things” in X.

[Mike Warmels]

You have me confused. I may not be working with FCPX as long and intensively as you have, but I am sure FCPX doesn’t have timelines, only Projects. So I doubt I’ll be able to find a subsection to something that doesn’t exist. In fact, I doubt the word ‘subsection’ exists in the FCPX vocabulary. So I have no idea if I have looked into that. What do you mean by it?

[Bill Davis]

[Mike Warmels] “You have me confused. I may not be working with FCPX as long and intensively as you have, but I am sure FCPX doesn’t have timelines, only Projects. So I doubt I’ll be able to find a subsection to something that doesn’t exist. In fact, I doubt the word ‘subsection’ exists in the FCPX vocabulary. So I have no idea if I have looked into that. What do you mean by it?”

X absolutely has timelines. The term is used throughout the program. It just doesn’t have the exact same meaning that it used to have. The Project spaces you work in are Storylines in the new terminology – including the Primary Storyline where you make magnetic connections. But there’s also “Open in Timeliine” thougthout X as one of it’s most useful features once you understand it.

The Timeline Index is the formal name of the small clickable area on the lower left of any project that brings up a list of every clip in your program. One aspect that people often overlook is since clips often arrive with default roles, Minimizing clips you don’t want to work with IN the Timeline Index area – then using the Roles assignment module to step though the rest and use the quick keyboard combinations to assign new Roles makes reworking material in an existing project much easier.

As noted, it’s WAY easier to do this up front assigning roles in the Browser, but if you screw up and need to assign them later – there are facilities in X that help.

Again, X often LOOKS simple to editors not used to it. But there is a lot of depth going on inside it.

Hope that helps.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.

[Mike Warmels]

Oh that one. yes that is a very handy tool to get some overview over the timeline. It doesn’t help you assign the roles though. And it also doesn’t change the fact that role assignments between clips in the browser and used section from that clip in the timeline are not connected for some reason. But you are right, you have to do all that up front and work disciplined. On a side note, if this is important here, what’s the problem with working with tracks? I don’t get it. I see many editors and tutorial as talking about cleaning up the timeline to get most of the similar tracks on approximately the same vertical position. That’s almost like assigning tracks.

What I do find a missed opportunity in this subsection is that you cannot give the different roles their own color. That would by far improve the overview of the timeline itself. Now you can only see at “one glance” what is what by:

1. Opening the subsection
2. Select the roles tab
3. Click on the separate roles.

Again: a lot of work for something that could be very simply adjusted. Obviously it is all there: FCPX can recognise where the roles are. Why not allow us to give it a separate color. Again: one the quite immature things of FCPX. (especially since other and older NLE CAN do this).

[James Ewart]

One of the things I most love about working with X is to be able to add a sound effect to B roll or some kind of graphic that might be up on v4 (or equivalent) and to put the associated sound effect right up there with it. In fact I tend to put them sit those audio fx on top of the clip. (Or make it a compound).

Doesn’t matter where it is because FCPX knows what is is through roles.

[Jeff Markgraf]

Mike –

Improved roles functionality is an ongoing feature request. You’re right: lots of opportunity here, if Apple can deliver.

[Mike Warmels] “role assignments between clips in the browser and used section from that clip in the timeline are not connected for some reason.”

There have been several discussions in the forum about browser vs. timeline roles. Some have suggested that changing a role on a clip in the timeline should ripple back to the browser-master clip level.

I’m with the “Why would you want that?” crowd. If I’ve initially assigned a role (say, “Dialogue”, subrole “Bob-lavaliere”) and I want to change it in the timeline (perhaps I’m using a bit of room tone stolen from the Bob-lav clip as an ADR fill), I wouldn’t want the role assigned for that particular instance to change the role as assigned on the master clip.

I think Herb talked about using a bit of “sizzle” sound as part of the dialogue in some instances, while using it as sfx in other instances. He was using the example to support his desire for tracks. But I think it’s a good example of why rippling a role change back to the master clip is a terrible idea.

Perhaps the solution would be to make it an option, as someone else suggested.

[Mike Warmels] “what’s the problem with working with tracks?”

I think roles, especially when more fully implemented, serves the same organizational function as tracks. If we get the roles grouping/colors/etc. that we’re asking for, even the much vaunted “visual reference” function would be taken care of. And using roles sidesteps the “Track Tetris” annoyance. (I for one could go the rest of my life without ever having to patch another audio or video track!)

[Mike Warmels]

Yes, I agree, I think the roles concept is very nice. Especially is ProTools, Nuendo and other sound mixing software can immediately use them. It would save a lot of them. But, as you said, ONLY if it gets fully implemented. It seems more a cosmetic thing at the moment. The only reason why it doesn’t feel very modern is that it kinda harks back to old film editing…

The “why would you want that” is maybe very specific to my work environment where television directors do a lot of rough cutting themselves (like I do) but very rarely have the discipline to assign roles beforehand. That just cause a lot of extra work for the editors.

And also, if we ever get color coding for these clips it would be nice to do it in colors you as an editor prefer. But with that we’re coming to the UI customisation, which is basically not present in FCPX. One of the things FCPX could adopt from FCP7 or AVID is that it would be taking editors seriously if they can customise the window lay-out to suit their own preferences. It’s one of the things I like about AVID: every editor has its own set-up, way of working. You arrive at a set somewhere, insert your settings and poof: it’s like you’re on your own set. With everything set to the way you like it.

[Jeff Markgraf]

Regarding roles in sweetening: X to Pro crates an AAF that gathers timeline audio clips by roles and lays them out in a standard Pro Tools style. So “Dialogue-Bob-lav” clips are all sent over as one track, unless there’s overlap, in which case it sends to one or more tracks in sequence (T1, T2, T3, etc.). Then the next role is handled on the next sequential tracks. Same for music, sfx, etc. As long as there’s a role (and subroles, if any) assigned, the clips are grouped. (Disclaimer – I haven’t used it yet so I may have some details wrong, but I’m pretty confident it works this way.) X to Pro can also send to Logic X more accurately than X’s own send-to-Logic function, apparently. ;-(

So, yeah, roles as they exist now are far more than cosmetic.

I wonder, can the footage have roles set before going to your undisciplined directors?

Also, I THINK you can select multiple roles in the timeline index and add/change roles there. Bill? Confirm?

As far as grouping clips in the timeline to approximate “tracks,” I think it was Charlie Austin who had a method:

Create some dummy titles named “SOT,” Music,” “SFX,” and so on. Pull them underneath the primary storyline. Then place each connected audio clip below the appropriate barrier strip. Do it either as you edit or after finishing a section. Doesn’t take long, and the visual organization is obvious. If the audio is attached to video, it’s probably dialogue/SOT by default. If it’s nat sound, it can still stay attached to the video. Just drag the A/V clip under the primary as you would an audio-only clip. Make sense?

As far as UI: we’ll have to agree to disagree. As I described in a different thread (“Why I like Premiere Pro – looking for serious discussion”), I’m a serious editor who is just fine with the X UI. I prefer a single monitor, and prefer to have my pix monitor directly above my UI monitor, just like in the old linear edit bays. And I’m particularly fine with one UI video window that automatically switches between source & record as needed. But I get that most editors want more customization — I just think it’s mostly habit, rather than a real need. To each his own. I think Apple could easily accommodate this request.

[Mike Warmels]

Yes, the roles work when you’re going to ProTools. But ProTools isn’t the only software used by sound studios. Hehehe

And yes, you can change roles in the timeline and I think even add. The point was always that if you change something for a particular set of clips as you go along, you have to change them AS WELL in the Browser. So you have to do it twice. And not forget it.

And yes, it would be best if the material would be role assigned before it goes to the directors. But to be honest, that basically requires assistent editors and there’s nod budget here for that.

When it comes the UI, I can work with it as it is. It only bugs when I want to do stuff like color correct for instance: you just can’t see all your scopes at the same time, as well as all the correction tools (exposure, color, saturation). This is one those particular things you want to change your UI to see all the tool you need and not click away opening and closing windows, switching.

Luckily I have a very nice Flanders broadcast monitor where I can display one of the scopes and use another on FCPX. But again, this is a bit of a silly work around. (AVID has it, FCP7 had it… so why not FCPX… it’s not like it’s some stupid luxury feature).

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Hi Mike,

I and at least 3 others on the forum here, still think that the concept that when you change a Role in the timeline, it doesn’t switch back to the Browser, is a GOOD thing.

The whole logic from X is:
changes from the browser, trickle down if you use the clip afterwards in a timeline. This is not only true about Roles, but also about volume changes etc.
Changes on the timeline, don’t reflect back to the ‘master’ clip in the browser.

You say it’s a big disadvantage, but I think it’s an advantage. I WOULDN’T WANT the Role to change in the Master clip. That way, it’s (in my humble opinion) logic that if you want a change that persists everywhere, you do it in the browser before you use the clip (the ‘master’ clip). If you want to change something, volume or a role or a channel configuration, that is particular about that timeline, you just do it in the timeline.

[Mike Warmels]

Okay, here’s I thing I’d like to know.

I am currently working on a 4-part children’s documentary series,s hot on Borneo. We shot about 18 hours of footage with separate audio recorded by my sound engineer on location. It’s all synched now in FCPX (and causing huge delays in basic editing and handling the synchronised audioclips).

But here’s the thing: in these clips there are two stereo atom tracks and three tracks individually assigned to three lavalier miss of the three main characters. Is it possible to assign a role to each separate track? So link a mic track to a person? Because it is recorded and logged that way. Would be nice to do the same with the roles.

Because that’s what we would do in AVID and PPro – assign each source track to one track in the timeline.