-
The NLE that keeps moving forward?
-
I take that you mean Apple and NOT adobe ?
What exactly do you mean by ‘proper’ relinking ?
I find the relinking in 10.0.6 to do what I need it to ?
-
[Morten Carlsen] ” I know you are going to smile over this and further classify me as incompetent in your book which is fine.”
Morten,
If you’re going to make wild claims like “ten times faster”, you’ll probably get called on it. Making up numbers is a not uncommon feint here.
I have no idea of your competence or processes – I’m only going on what you’ve posted.
This was your comparison:
Imagine a project with about a 1000 media files. In a normal NLE that would take about 1000 double clicks alone to view them. In FPCx ZERO.But my point – and I’ll repeat it here again – is not accusations of incompetence, imagined or otherwise; a common refrain in the boards has been that FCPX has certain optimum uses, and users should learn those uses to get the most out of the NLE (in lieu of the non-optimal uses). But this is true of any NLE, and actually not a bad way of assessing them – how broad and deep is the set of optimized uses? how do the optimized uses fit with my needs?
But you’re not going to get good answers to that out of absurd 1000 to 0 click comparisons.
You seem pretty happy using FCPX. There are those still trying to figure out what is next for them; they need insightful comparisons.
Franz.
-
[tony west] “I call it patching because fcp calls it a patch panel that you are clicking on. I don’t see that as broadening the meaning.”
Tony,
Yes, that’s what I thought you meant.
I don’t touch that panel.
Maybe “never in ten years” is a slight exaggeration, but pretty close to never.
Franz.
-
[Steve Connor] “It’s always thin ice when someone starts to question other peoples style of editing to make a point.”
Steve, Morten,
True enough. Apologies to Morten if you feel attacked.
On the other hand it shouldn’t be sacred ground – a lot of good discussion has come from people explaining how they do what they do, and why. (after being challenged).
Also, I’ve just seen a lot of bad practice lately.
Franz.
-
[Chris Harlan] “Hey, Charlie!
I don’t know where you are these days. Are you cutting most of your promo work on X now? Or are you still going back and forth? And what are you seeing around you? Most of the contemporaries I interact with are Avid/moving to Avid, 7, or moving to Premiere. You and John D., of course, sing X’s praises to the sky, and I believe you. What’s happening around you? How about a progress report?”
Hey Chris. 🙂 I’m trying to do as much as I can in X. I’m at a small shop and some sequences need to move around to different editors still on 7, so I’ll either cut that stuff in 7, or use Xto7, which has gotten pretty damn good at conversion. I don’t really know what folks at other places are doing, I’m kind of on a little island here, though I’d imagine Avid folks are probably sticking with that, and 7 folks… no idea. 🙂
I think at some point we’ll all switch to X here. It’s just a matter of finding enough time for everyone to get used to using it. That’s really the biggest hurdle. Also I’m still not completely comfortable with the ability to get stuff out to finish. The audio elements move pretty flawlessly with XtoPro, it’s the EDL stuff that makes me a little nervous. I mean, I can get good EDL’s out, in fact EDL-X is incredibly good at listing/manipulating source data, but the info regarding effects/transitions etc is still a little thin. Not a problem for a forgiving post house, of which there is maybe uh… one I can think of. 🙂
The biggest hurdle to getting people onto X, IMO, is all the crappy feelings and FUD left over from the initial release. I still hear the iMovie Pro comments all the time. It’s really too bad, because once you get past the “it’s different and I’m confused” phase the app is amazing. I’m at a point where the only time I think about how X works is when I find some new crazy feature that makes my life easier. That happens a lot, the latest being the ability to assign roles to individual tracks in source clips. I may not need to break out feature audio anymore, it can just ride with the picture now. 🙂 Fortunately, as long as I can get stuff out for finish, nobody really cares what I’m cutting on. 🙂 The next year or so should be interesting…
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
-
OK../.. For this who did not understand the meaning of my posts…
FCPx will make you CLICK a WHOLE lot less when searching for your source media. as a matter of fact it will make you click zero time to view ALL your source media… All it takes is a scroll wheel and slight mouse movements..
To those of you who misunderstood my 10 times faster… I did not actually measure the exact amount of which FCPx was faster…
It might be 100 times faster for you or even slower… 10 Times was a figure of speech… I could have used MUUUUUUCH….
But then again, then Franz would have counted the Us in mUch and deemed me a legasthenic ! -
Steve,
I dont mind being challenged in an orderly fashion. However, the minute I sense condescension – all bets are off !
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “Why not just open them as sequences? Why do you need them in the viewer window?”
That’s how I edit. I open media items in the viewer and set ins and outs and then I insert that into the sequence. (That was the whole PIOP debate.)
Sequences open as sequences and I can’t figure a way to set in and outs in a sequence so they can be entered into a second sequence. So for the previously mentioned workflow, I copy and pasted, which was pretty slow. I thought about exporting the sequences into QT and then re-importing, but I did not–again for time. There were about 12 locations.
How would you do something similar?
The reason I did it this way, btw, was so the client never saw the untimed dailies. They wanted a saturated look.
-
[Morten Carlsen] “It might be 100 times faster for you or even slower… 10 Times was a figure of speech… I could have used MUUUUUUCH…. “
Get outta here. Like, leave the bar.
😉
-
[Richard Herd] “Sequences open as sequences and I can’t figure a way to set in and outs in a sequence so they can be entered into a second sequence. So for the previously mentioned workflow, I copy and pasted, which was pretty slow.”
Richard,
I would just do it in sequences – first selecting – either with one of the selection tools (usually group selection) or with in and out and option A – then copy and paste.
However, it sounds like you found that unsatisfactory (or slow). Why?
Personally I find the process I’ve outlined much more flexible and the timeline display give much more information (particularly once audio and multiple tracks are involved) than simple viewer in and outs.
Franz.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up