-
The Magnetic Timeline – What’s The Paradigm?
Thanks again for your interest everyone. If you’re new to this thread you can learn about my background here:
https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/9060
I originally started writing a brain dump of everything I was thinking about FCPX. It quickly snowballed into more than would make sense for a single post so I’m breaking it up into a short series. This is the first with a few more posts to follow.
Standard disclaimer – Everything in all my posts is my opinion only. I have no special insider knowledge or connections with Apple. I’m just calling it the way I see it, having thought about this stuff for a while. If I get something wrong or if you have information I don’t, please feel free to correct me and/or add your knowledge to the pile. I’m all ears.
One more thing, I’m going to focus on the meta – more so than you’ll probably find in most of the other threads. This forum has many outstanding discussions on nuts and bolts issues and many smart participants. I want to dive into the more conceptual and philosophical realm. Any user interface reflects the assumptions, priorities and values of its designer. How does the philosophy behind a tool’s design determine how we’re able to work? What does “better” mean in the context of usability? These are the sorts of issues I want to tackle.
Let’s dig in and start with the basics. This is stuff you already know but I think bears repeating.
Let’s start with Time.
Time is linear.
Our experience of time is linear.
We can subdivide it however we like, but our normal perception is that time always moves forward. This is hardwired into our bodies and brains.
Editing is the art of structuring media experience in time.
When we edit, what we’re actually doing is making intentional, creative, decisions for every moment of the experience of our piece. We intentionally choose exactly what the viewer sees, hears, and consequently feels. Most importantly, we control how and when this happens. This precise sculpting of time-based experience is the essence of the art of editing.
In an NLE, the timeline is a fixed, spatial representation of time itself.
The beauty of the “open” timeline is that it gives editors unlimited flexibility in placing media – represented as objects – exactly where they want in the linear timestream. Objects are freely, precisely placed in time to create linear experience. It works exceptionally well. This is why the timeline metaphor has been in use since the invention of NLE almost 25 years ago.
Tracks are layers of timelines dedicated to specific media types. They’re a great organizing tool. An important thing to remember about tracks is that all tracks share a fixed frame-of-reference in regards to time.
The other important thing is that all tracks follow a common spatial model. The timeline is a direct, one to one mapping of spatial position to temporal event. When you look at a complex timeline at the wrap of a project, what you’re seeing is an exact, crystal-clear 2D map of every creative decision you chose for every frame of your piece. It’s a map of experience in time.
FCP 1-7 is designed around the “open timeline” paradigm. It has a fairly robust toolset for manipulating objects on the timeline(s). The tools aren’t perfect, but overall they’re very good. IMO, they just feel better than the tools in other systems — personal taste I suppose. The main thing is once internalized, they do the most important thing a digital tool can do – clearly express user intention and stay out of the way.
OK. So now Apple drops FCPX in our laps and introduces a fundamental change in the NLE timeline model — the “Magnetic Timeline”. It’s a whole new paradigm that will change how we edit! Tracks are gone! Clips are sequenced and synced with “connections.” It’s locked in ripple mode! I can see the gaps! WTF!!! And so on.
There’s no in between — right now you either love or hate this thing.
But what is it exactly? Why does it provoke such a visceral reaction in so many?
On the surface, there’s nothing groundbreaking or even new about the magnetic timeline. As others have correctly pointed out, it’s a 1V 2A fixed ripple mode timeline — with lots of other seemingly arbitrary constraints.
So what?
But under the hood it’s actually deeply radical. In FCPX, Apple has abstracted time away from space. The timeline is now a container-class object. It is no longer just a fixed spatial representation. The implications and potential are huge. Once you wrap you head around it, a lot of things fall into place – things like the new names (“Storylines” instead of “Timelines”), the lack of tracks, even the gaps.
Apple is going all-in on a pure object model for media representation. They’re building around an object and database driven architecture. The FCPX UI and toolset directly reflects this shift. It’s radical. It’s innovative, and IMHO, it’s seriously flawed for advanced editors. Because there’s a fundamental truth that not even Randy Ubillos can avoid. Even in FCPX, it’s right in front of your eyes.
We’ll talk about that in my next post.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
92 Replies
-
Very interesting post, can’t wait for the next installment.
Thanks
-
David,
This is the first cliffhanger post I have ever read.
Well done!
OSX 10.5.8; MacBookPro4,1 Intel Core 2 Duo 2.5 GHz
; Camcorders: Sony Z7U, Canon HV30/40, Sony vx2000/PD170; FCP certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A. -
-
I dont get it, I mean did apple think that Track based editing was “So yesterday”? Avid has ripple witch works exactly like this Magnetic timeline.
I wear many hats.
http://www.gregburkepost.com -
You see, CoreData and AVFoundation are parts of the system, so they are sort of “free”. The real plan was probably to kill Pro Apps for good but someone said he can do a complete rewrite on the cheap and got a greenlight. Of course he had to use spare parts and iMove sketches to make a deadline.
-
-
David, I’m glad you’ve posted this. I’ve been trying to explain to people how AV Foundation impacted the fundamental changes in FCPX GUI/paradigm but couldn’t have said it as elegantly as you. Trying to model FCPX with tracks would have been an awkward and technology defeating shoehorn. I’m looking forward to your next post.
-
[Craig Seeman] “trying to model FCPX with tracks would have been an awkward and technology defeating shoehorn”
Wasnt It Steves Job said…. ” The Foundation is already there….and to change it would make it 10% Better, but 50% worse…”
Non track Based editing could very well be the future, and so could flying cars, but we dont stop making cars if “someday” new ones are coming out. Just my Thoughts.
I wear many hats.
http://www.gregburkepost.com -
Quicktime which is 32bit had to go so there was no foundation to take FCP to 64bit. Apple is working with an interesting concept which has advantages (I think) but I’m sure David will do a much better job explaining it. I’ve been using NLEs since the late 1980s and have always felt I was working around the limitations of tracks. While FCPX needs lots of work, I think the fundamental concept and the framework AV Foundation provides holds promise.
-
If only Apple had taken a good look at how audio DAWs have tackled the same issue. The big problem is destructive overwriting. A magnetic timeline just pushes things out of the way. In audio DAWs (good ones like Fairlight) you can stack clips on top of each other on a track. So your other edits are safe underneath. You always hear the top layer.
Furthermore you can have interaction between layers on tracks – simple case in point is a crossfade to the lower layer. This is the same concept of top to bottom layering in video, just on a single track. So Apple could have done the same thing. Non destructive overwrite and complex layering WITHIN tracks and between tracks. This would solve nesting messiness as well.
Instead Apple have tried a new paradigm which is functionally messy. If it is a hybrid between a linear approach and a node style then lets see where they goes and if it it is more powerful than stacked layers within tracks which retains the good old linear time feel.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up