-
The Position Tool Does Not Disable Ripple Mode – Here’s Why
-
[Michael Hancock] “I’d need to see a video or hear an audio clip or press release to believe they specifically stated they would never change the interface.”
Found it. It’s about 2:20 in.
https://apps.avid.com/getmc/video-brbnk/?elq_mid=4656&elq_cid=4433
Jeremy
-
C’mon Jeremy – that’s a blatant jab at FCPX.
This event was less than a month after the release of FCPX and people were pissed about the magnetic timeline, the loss of tracks, the loss of a source monitor, and Apple telling them they’ve reinvented editing.
Avid is telling their customers they aren’t going to pull an Apple. That’s what people wanted to hear, and in this case I don’t think they’re wrong. Only time will ultimately tell if Apple’s new editing paradigm is a winner or not, but consider Avid’s dominant market – feature films. They’re reassuring their customers that they aren’t going to change everything they know overnight and try to force them into a new way of working.
Besides, with sync lock you kind of get a magnetic timeline. In many ways FCPX and Media Composer are very similar. In other ways, they’re night and day different. I wish I could mash them together and pick the best parts of both.
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
[Michael Hancock] “C’mon Jeremy – that’s a blatant jab at FCPX.
This event was less than a month after the release of FCPX and people were pissed about the magnetic timeline, the loss of tracks, the loss of a source monitor, and Apple telling them they’ve reinvented editing.
Avid is telling their customers they aren’t going to pull an Apple. That’s what people wanted to hear, and in this case I don’t think they’re wrong. Only time will ultimately tell if Apple’s new editing paradigm is a winner or not, but consider Avid’s dominant market – feature films. They’re reassuring their customers that they aren’t going to change everything they know overnight and try to force them into a new way of working. “
I agree, it was an easy jab on FCPX. I also agree that time will tell. As far as introducing a new way of working, like I said, the hard decisions may hurt at first. Time will tell if it will be a lasting pain.
[Michael Hancock] “I wish I could mash them together and pick the best parts of both.”
Yep. I think everyone would want their dream editor. Lightworks is a step in that direction with their open source model. That will be the true democratization if it works and garners support.
Jeremy
-
Have you played with Lightworks? If so, what are your thoughts on it?
I downloaded the beta the day it went up and it crashed constantly so I haven’t tried it again – I assume it’s made some improvements though. When I worked at a TV station that had one the guys that ran it loved it. They were fast with it too. It died before I had a chance to give it a go.
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
[Michael Hancock] “Have you played with Lightworks? If so, what are your thoughts on it?”
I haven’t yet. I am waiting for a Mac beta (I can’t make the leap to another OS quite yet. We have a Windows server and it’s so very clumsy, but I’m weird).
My thoughts that if it works and gets hardware support and all that works as well, it will be a very interesting option. I am looking forward to seeing what will come of it. I really love the open source idea of it.
I should add, that the screen grabs look like a bunch of floating windows, a la M100. that was annoying, but it does look like they have some sort of tab system at the top, as long as there’s a method to the madness, I’ll try whatever. I will reserve any judgement until I can touch it.
Jeremy
-
i think everyones is missing the point. In FCPX – you need to use gaps. You dont really have a chopice and its definately a workaround for the locked ripple timeline . Thats the main problem is that Apple for some reason thinks we all want to work in ripple mode all he time.
In MC and FCP 7, filler and slugs are jsut there, use them or dont, they dont get in your way and are not a necessity to use. Could you imagine FCP x w/o them? I wouldnt want to.
And for those baggin on Media Composers interface ? Seriously ? Buttons can be hidden, and pretty much everything is customizable. Sure it looks old, but its a tried and tested interface thats worked for years , why change it ?
Neil Goodman: Editor of New Media Production – NBC/Universal
-
[Neil Goodman] “You dont really have a chopice and its definately a workaround for the locked ripple timeline .”
A workaround? Or a way to work? In my opinion, there’s no reason to work around the ripple if you you know how and when to use it or not. You need gaps, and they are more flexible than empty space.
[Neil Goodman] “In MC and FCP 7, filler and slugs are jsut there, use them or dont, they dont get in your way and are not a necessity to use.”
It was my understanding that MC5.5 uses them regardless if you want to or not. In FCP7 they are simply dead air and hands off. You can only delete the space, or adjust the space by adjusting everything around it.
[Neil Goodman] “Sure it looks old, but its a tried and tested interface thats worked for years , why change it ?”
Why did they add the selection tools, then, or whatever they are called?
-
[Neil Goodman] “i think everyones is missing the point. In FCPX – you need to use gaps. You dont really have a chopice and its definately a workaround for the locked ripple timeline . Thats the main problem is that Apple for some reason thinks we all want to work in ripple mode all he time. “
Bingo. In FCP7 there are no gaps. The timeline is a wide open space. The only thing to think about is where you want to place your media clips in that space, which has a direct one-to-one mapping to time. It doesn’t get any simpler or more intuitive. Any space between media clips is just space. You don’t have to think about it. It plays black/silence until the next media object is encountered in time.
The beauty of FCP is that you can select this space and delete or close it if you choose to. This is smart, intuitive, and helpful. It’s why I prefer FCP gap handling to Avid’s. Space is space. But if you want to close it it’s easy. If you need a solid object, use a slug.
MC’s approach is interesting and I see the utility, even though I prefer FCP. The important thing is that you can ignore gaps if you don’t need them.
FCPX on the other hand forces you to deal with gaps. They’re the only thing keeping your timeline from collapsing in on itself — oops, I mean rippling. 😉
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[David Lawrence] “FCPX on the other hand forces you to deal with gaps. They’re the only thing keeping your timeline from collapsing in on itself — oops, I mean rippling. ;)”
So without the magnetic timeline, you don’t need gaps. But there’s a magnetic timeline, so you need them. They are a tool, and a decent one.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Mmm. It’s a grey area. “
Do you mean you’re still on the fence regarding whether the position tool disables ripple mode on the timeline? That’s the argument people have been making since June. I think I’ve shown definitive proof this is not true.
[Jeremy Garchow] “That’s not the job of the position tool. That’s the job of the magnetic timeline. The position tools overwrites. It is a tool of intent.”
Yes, overwrite. This is not the same as disabling ripple. That’s my point. If there were a toggle switch on the timeline to disable ripple, we wouldn’t need a position tool. That’s why I consider it a workaround.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up