-
Timecode based review process workflow.
I’ve been working this way for quite a while now, and I always get the feeling that there may be a better way that I just can’t seem to see. I’m talking about getting a review from a client that has all of their changes referenced with timecode. Using the new CS Review process makes this even more pertinent. The first time I got a review from a client with changes to make based on timecode, I tried to start with the first change in the list, but quickly discovered that if I cut the section of a clip out that they specified, the timecode from that point on was no longer in sync with the rest of the changes in the review. So, I always tend to start at the end of their review and work backwards in the change list. That way, no matter what changes I make that affects the length of the timeline, the remaining changes can still be easily referenced to the timecode, since that portion’s timecode hasn’t changed yet.
But again, I get that nagging feeling that there may be a better way.
Steve Brame
creative illusions Productions -
8 Replies
-
Hi Steve,
I just duplicate the sequence, put it above for reference.
Vince Becquiot
Kaptis Studios
San Francisco – Bay Area -
I hope this doesn’t sound like a dummy answer, but have you tried setting unnumbered clip markers at the timecodes specified? They won’t shift when you’re doing slip edits like sequence markers will.
-
Thanks Vince,
As luck would have it, I happen to have a sequence open that I just received a review (via CS Review), and I thought I’d give that a shot. I always duplicate a sequence before doing any review edits like this, and I’d tried to use the original as a TC reference, basically the same as you mentioned, just not placing the original sequence in the same timeline as the working version, but the concept is the same. Unfortunately, though I still have a good reference for the timecodes mentioned in the review, they lie within the original, not the timeline I’m editing, so the sync loss still occurs. For me, having the 2 sequences open in the same timeline, I get a little confused as to which one I’m actually looking at at any given moment, since I have to hide the original in order to see the working one below. But then again, I’m getting old…
Steve Brame
creative illusions Productions -
Actually, if I was reading from a paper change list, it might even be better to number the markers, then note the markers on the actual change list.
Unfortunately, I’m really getting into CS Review, and it’s not possible to make reference to markers it in, so the problem still exists in that scenario – if I change a clip or two, then click ‘Go to Comment’ to jump the CTI to the timecode relative to the another comment, it doesn’t work because the timecode has been altered.
Steve Brame
creative illusions Productions -
Steve….
I’ve done what you are doing on a number of occasions (working from the tail end of the list backward to counteract rippling).
I think what Vince was saying is that you can split your timeline panel vertically so that you can see 2 timelines at the same time.
If it helps, when you do this, lock the tracks on the reference timeline so you don’t accidentally edit it.
Alex
-
I guess I just don’t get it. I’ll still not be able to got to the referenced timecode on my editing timeline. I’ll have to jump to it on my locked reference timeline, then try to locate the same spot on the edit timeline, which could get pretty convoluted on a long program. Since we cut a lot of interviews we may have, say, 25 clips on a timeline. If we get a review that starts with swapping clip 5 and clip 2, then swap clip 12 with clip 21, then cut clip 6. At this point there would be no way to use the original sequence to find anything in the edit version.
I’ve just tried all of these suggested methods, and it really seems that operating backwards is the quickest and easiest way, at least for me. I think I’m just having trouble accepting that I actually came up with a workable solution on my own.
Steve Brame
creative illusions Productions -
Necessity is the mother of invention 🙂
Another approach is to take the initial list and add markers to the clips and not the timeline.
that way even if things ripple you’ll still be able to identify visually that you need to make a change even though it won’t match the time code.
there’s not a lot of magic to your problem in that the changes people are requesting are being made on a list based on a fixed timecode reference. As soon as you make a rippling change, your timeline will no longer match that reference. So the way you have evolved to approach seems the least impacting way to approach it.
If revisions were able to be identified based on the event rather than the timecode…then that would be interesting…but for now….seems like your on the right path.
-
Start at the end and working back is the normal process with a TC-referenced change list. Over the years, haven’t seen anybody find an easier way.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up