The NLE that keeps moving forward?

[Franz Bieberkopf]

Richard,

Thanks.

[Richard Herd] “Been editing in FCP since 2003 and never thought to drag a sequence into the viewer.”

Yes – it sort of speaks to the depth of certain functionality in FCP7 that there are things many experienced editors don’t know it can do. There was someone (experienced) a while back complaining they couldn’t solo audio in it (though there is a “Solo Selected Items” function right there in the sequence menu). There have been other examples too.

This suggests one of the recurring undercurrents on the forum – we all tend to be a bit blind to features, functionality, and requirements outside of our own workflow, or even just our habits.

(The recent “FCPX audio functions are better” thread was interesting in this light, because it essentially amounted to the idea that if you ignore the audio functions that are lacking in X (like a mixer) and focus on the audio functions that are better (like plug-ins) then you can come to the conclusion that FCPX audio is overall better). (The comparison was, of course, chronically, once again to 7).

[Richard Herd] “I hope that answers some practical stuff.”

It sounds like much of what you’ve talked about is based around colour work, and I do very little of that.

But if I’m reading your correctly, there is little difference between compound clips and sequences beyond their location. I may look into it a bit more, though to be honest my motivation for exploring X right now is quite low.

Thanks for the write-up, though. That kind of thing makes this forum really worthwhile.

Franz.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Richard Herd] “Although it’s not the compound clip v Sequence dialectic, cutting Js and Ls, for me, is the biggest practical advantage because the audio is embedded in the clip. CTRL-S and the audio shows up. Double-Click the “space between the clips” and the precision editor shows up. Then I either use the keyboard or mouse to adjust where the L or J is. WOW! That has been very accurate. I”

playhead on cut.

backslash.

Shift Left Bracket, shift-period

Shift Right Bracket, Shift-comma

Drag handles on left/right side.

If you need more,

Shift Left Bracket, shift-period or just period
Shift Right Bracket, shift-comma or just comma

[Chris Harlan]

[Steve Connor] “I’m interested if anyone who is now happily working in FCPX also worked this way in Legacy. It’s a technique I used to use when I had a LOT of source material but I didn’t like doing it very much, perhaps it’s a factor in whether you can get on with FCPX or not?
“

That may be. I work this way–or nearly this way–also.

[Chris Harlan]

[Franz Bieberkopf] “This suggests one of the recurring undercurrents on the forum – we all tend to be a bit blind to features, functionality, and requirements outside of our own workflow, or even just our habits.
“

Yes! I, for one, didn’t know you could sub frame audio edit in Legacy, and I’d been working on it daily for over eight years. One of the benefits I’ve gotten from hanging around this forum, is a much wider view.

[Richard Herd]

Great subthread Franz, your tone and professionalism are top notch, so thanks! I always look forward to your posts, even if I don’t always comment. These are my reduced comments, not to be obtuse but this is all heard by google.

Although there are gaps in a lot of what I ought to mention about compounding, there is one thing that X is worth all of its weight in gold. (Okay it’s software and has no weight, so that’s a joke.) I did not mention it in the previous post because it has nothing to do with your question vis-a-vis compounds and sequences.

The Optical Flow slow motion is better than 7 and better than PPr and better than AE. I suggest the following very simple experiment:

1. Edit something in 7, Avid, or PPr (using APR422)
2. Export a clip that you think needs some retiming
3. Use X to Optical Flow the slow motion.
4. Export that as a stand alone APR422.
5. Import and cut in.
6. Compare as necessary.

I compared optical flow to s-s-s in 7, and the flow is better. In this metaphor, X is a plug in.

Rich😉

[Richard Herd]

Gracias!

To be sure, I read all your posts and you’ve already posted this. Thanks again!

I view the mouse as an improvement over DOS. Let’s hear it for Windows 3.1 and Apple IIe. Lode Runner anyone?

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Richard Herd] ” I always look forward to your posts, even if I don’t always comment.”

Richard,

Thanks. If you like them now, just wait until I sort out homonyms and spelling.

[Richard Herd] “The Optical Flow slow motion is better than 7”

Thanks – that’s something I may check out. The thing is with Apple software though, I find they develop a feature and then never touch it again. Adobe seems a bit more likely to revisit and improve features over time. (Lightroom features are a recent example of this).

Franz.

[Gustavo Bermudas]

At the end of the day, FCX is for kids than when they grow up they’d like to be editors (and for that I mean cutting features in AVID)

[Charlie Austin]

[Gustavo Bermudas] “At the end of the day, FCX is for kids than when they grow up they’d like to be editors (and for that I mean cutting features in AVID)”

Thanks for that clever observation. Very helpful!

————————————————————-

~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~

[Steve Connor]

[Gustavo Bermudas] “At the end of the day, FCX is for kids than when they grow up they’d like to be editors (and for that I mean cutting features in AVID)
“

Very funny, although you have to wonder, bearing in mind their current financial state, if there will even be an Avid when these kids grow up 🙂

Steve Connor
‘It’s just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure”