-
The Position Tool Does Not Disable Ripple Mode – Here’s Why
-
First of all, nice one, Andy. Hold option.
And you can have a gap connected to a gap, but it has to be in a secondary storyline.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “And you can have a gap connected to a gap, but it has to be in a secondary storyline.”
I disagree. It’s semantics I know, but in that scenario it’s the secondary storyline that is connected, not the gap.
You cannot create a secondary storyline with only a gap. You must first create the storyline from a clip and then add a gap and delete the clip. Once that’s done, if you Break Apart Clip Items, the gap inside the secondary storyline simply disappears.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[Andy Neil] “You cannot create a secondary storyline with only a gap. You must first create the storyline from a clip and then add a gap and delete the clip. Once that’s done, if you Break Apart Clip Items, the gap inside the secondary storyline simply disappears.”
Yes, I hear you. But you can have a gap above a gap.
You can also use the position tool in a connected secondary storyline to create a gap in the secondary.
Pic:
Jeremy
-
I wasn’t debating that. I said simply that a gap cannot be a connected clip. That is why the position tool acts as it does when you attempt to move the gap above the primary storyline. It was an explanation of the behavior David was seeing in his video. I wasn’t debating the merits of having a gap above the primary storyline.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
All good, Andy. It’s all good…
-
Personally, I’ve asked (in a feature request) to have gaps behave exactly as regular clips, and even have a gap clip generator in the generators tab (FCPX treats gaps as a generator in function). Then you could use the position tool to lift a gap into a connected clip if you want. Why? Because then you could use it like an adjustment layer for effects.
I know you can create your own adjustment layer workaround with a published title project in Motion, but to me this is a more intuitive solution as it mimics Avid in that fashion.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
Another good one.
-
Guys,
I’m sure this all makes sense if you’re using FCPx but if you’re not do you realize how completely, insanely, complicated this dialogue sounds. Like out of some bizarre alternate universe.
The one thing about the fixed track timeline is that it’s simple, spatially one to one intuitive, and does not require a gap object (MC and FCP may have versions, but Premiere, edit*, EMC, and any other NLE I know of do not). Space in such a timeline is not a negative gap object. It is simply space, the absence of an object. The gap object appears to me to be necessary by-product of the magnetic aspect of the FCPx timeline. It makes sense only within the context of the magnetic paradigm. The real question is whether the magnetic paradigm itself makes sense in this market. I don’t believe we’ll know that for some years to come when we see whether Apple can build any additional intelligence into it that makes it more efficient for editing complex projects or so simple that it can be picked up by all the non-editors out there to edit their home videos. Right now it seems about as revolutionary as the Ford Edsel…someone’s bright idea for shifting gears that sounded good at the time, but didn’t fundamentally improve anything, despite all its supporters claiming it was a game changer.
The other thing to be mindful of is that Apple has not announced any sales figures for X…perhaps as good an indication as any that the new paradigm is not catching on like wildfire. It raises the question whether the pro-apps division, much reduced in products of late, can continue to survive.
David
AllinOneFilms.com -
[Andy Neil] “Personally, I’ve asked (in a feature request) to have gaps behave exactly as regular clips, and even have a gap clip generator in the generators tab (FCPX treats gaps as a generator in function). Then you could use the position tool to lift a gap into a connected clip if you want. Why? Because then you could use it like an adjustment layer for effects.”
Great idea!!!!!
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[David Cherniack] “do you realize how completely, insanely, complicated this dialogue sounds. Like out of some bizarre alternate universe.”
No it doesn’t. Honestly, I don’t see what’s so difficult to understand. Gap clips make sense to me completely. They are not to be feared but rather a tool to be used.
Do you know what I found virtually useless? Slug in FCP 7. Now THAT was a ridiculous concept.
I see the magnetic timeline as merely a reversal of the previous timeline conceit. At the end of an edit, you are not going to want any gaps or black flashes, so the magnetic timeline exists to prevent that. In FCP 7, you have to manually remove gaps to ensure there are no black frames. In FCPX you have manually add them if you want them. Doing it one way is no easier or harder than doing it the other way in my opinion.
People learned to work the way that David Lawrence showed above because of the nature of non-magnetic timeline. The timeline wasn’t created to suit the workflow. Therefore, new workflows will emerge which make use of how the magnetic timeline is set up.
What was wrong with the old way? Nothing. I don’t have a problem working either way. My manner of cutting differs in FCPX from FCP7. But then again, my manner of cutting differs in Avid from FCP7 as well. I don’t find the magnetic timeline non-intuitive any more than I find FCP7’s shortcuts non-intuitive compared to Avid.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up