-
Towards a better NLE
-
[Brett Sherman] “I wish you could actually read markers without having to double click them in FCP X.”
The are legible in the index of a marker is in a timeline, and hitting control-y in the browser (turning on skimmer info) allows you to read the marker without opening list view.
Again, not perfect, but pretty good.
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “There has to be a better model and I don’t think any NLE has yet come close to addressing the issue.
“I would argue that FCPX does something to move the ideas forward. Look at your “One Smart Collection to Rule Them All”.
And then if you are talking about clips as containers, FCPX has that too. Every clip is a container. It’s not much use, but the framework is there. And then there’s compound clips that could be containers and groups.
And remember, as Walter Soyka always says, all of these containers and elements need to expose the underlying data model, and that information needs to be able to be described in an interchange format (XML and so forth) with the idea that those elements would be able to be translated to other video programs in a way that made sense to that program’s data model. If the needle moves too far, FCPX would truly be it’s own island. Isn’t that what it already is accused of, even if it’s false? If FCPX’s data model suddenly looks like nothing else, then it will be stuck by itself with all these great ideas and innovations with no where to go. Or am I not thinking about this clearly?
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I would argue that FCPX does something to move the ideas forward.”
You’re quite right, I think, both in this and the rest of your comment.
My beef with FCP X is different from most people’s. I’m not complaining that they innovated too much, but rather that they innovated too little!
There’s no doubt that FCP X has given us some very useful concepts that have helped to move the dial, but I’d love to see something that’s a lot more bold and that was a lot more in tune with the way that editors need to work.
In the case of editing between timelines, of course, FCP X is a major step backwards – it’s a lot more cumbersome than any of the competition. I just don’t think there was any thinking about this that went into the concept and personally I feel that’s a really big failing. That’s not to say that the competition performs significantly less poorly, of course, but for want of anything better I’ll take the pancakes that Premiere and Resolve are offering as sustenance enough for now.
Where we stand right now, FCP X is getting long in the tooth – what was once bright and shiny and new is now the “new old”.
It would be great to think that Apple were currently working on the next generation NLE, but I think the evidence suggests that the talent that gave us FCP X is no longer in the building.
Maybe someone else will take up the challenge – because it is still a challenge and there are some clear areas where clever thinking can offer something truly transformative.
But I take your point about the difficulty of bringing something really radical to the market – in many ways Apple have forever queered the pitch on that one!
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Simon Ubsdell] “In the case of editing between timelines, of course, FCP X is a major step backwards – it’s a lot more cumbersome than any of the competition.”
It’s not a step backwards because it’s entirely designed NOT to edit between timelines, just read pretty much any of Bill’s posts and you’ll see how it’s not necessary with the FCPX model if it’s used as intended.
[Simon Ubsdell] “Where we stand right now, FCP X is getting long in the tooth – what was once bright and shiny and new is now the “new old”.”
I might even drag out “poppycock” for this one 🙂
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “My beef with FCP X is different from most people’s. I’m not complaining that they innovated too much, but rather that they innovated too little!”
I feel that. There does some like some opportunity that is not being explored. I also think that Apple moves very slow. They always have.
As far as editing between timelines, I am (kind of) glad it’s not there. In FCP Legend, and subsequently Pr, the timeline selects reel is a result (as you mentioned that others mentioned) of limitations of the interface (Bin > Source > Record). At least I feel like it goes back to bins. Because of the hierarchy of bins, and because of subsequent clip duplication, it can get confusing and can also lead to “lost” takes or sections if the selects reel doesn’t include all of the material, and at that point, you are hunting through bins anyway with no real connection back to the selects reel. I guess it depends on what types of programs are being worked on, but pancaking is not how I think, particularly. FCPX allows a very very nice interface for browsing lots of footage for unforeseen moments.
I do wish, however, for a tabbed timeline interface, as when you are working on a campaign with many many outputs, the web browser style that FCPX employs is not very good. I think a tabbed browser would help as well; or some sort of way to have multiple events open, or at least a way to stick my Projects smart collections so that I can easily navigate between footage and timelines without going to different Events (I have a method of keeping smart collections of the latest version of all the Projects in the campaign) . That being said, I do like FCPX’s organizational capabilities, including the ability to collect across the entire library, no matter where or what Event the element is situated. This may not be exclusive to FCPX, but it is a good implementation that I find very useful.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “As far as editing between timelines, I am (kind of) glad it’s not there.”
That sounds to me like a pretty extreme position!!! Although I understand where you’re coming from.
I know by now that there’s no chance of convincing you over the internet of the many virtues of string-outs and pancakes and so on, but I suspect if we spent half an hour in a room together that might change just a little.
However, just on a really basic, practical level, you surely must run into situations where your client asks for a version that’s a little bit of one other version, a slice of another and a chunk or two of a couple of additional versions.
And I’d be surprised if even without the client’s input you didn’t think in a similar way: “I came up with a really nice section in this version that would go really well in my latest version, etc., etc.”
I find it hard to believe that any editor only ever works with clips directly from the browser. If they do, you’ll have to excuse me because I’m going to have to pass on watching their work. I know beforehand (without wanting to sound unkind) that it will be rubbish.
For all that FCP X lets you access individual clips (or subclips or whatever we are choosing to call them today) very easily, and probably more easily than other NLEs, it really doesn’t make it easy to work from sequenced clips. Both Media Composer and Premiere are better at this, albeit in different ways – and they’re both still far from great at it!
[Jeremy Garchow] “Because of the hierarchy of bins, and because of subsequent clip duplication, it can get confusing and can also lead to “lost” takes or sections if the selects reel doesn’t include all of the material, and at that point, you are hunting through bins anyway with no real connection back to the selects reel.”
I don’t recognise that scenario, to be honest. Any editing method requires a certain degree of discipline in order to keep on top of the material. The idea that selects reels (when executed properly) lead to “lost material” just doesn’t ring true for me. In fact, over the years I have discovered the opposite to be true – it’s much easier for material to get overlooked when it only ever lives in the browser …
But overall I think we are agreed that we like a lot of things about FCP X but both feel that it could go a lot further and adopt a much bolder approach to many aspects of the process.
Cone on, Apple. Astonish us. You know you can do it!
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Simon Ubsdell] “However, just on a really basic, practical level, you surely must run into situations where your client asks for a version that’s a little bit of one other version, a slice of another and a chunk or two of a couple of additional versions.”
CTRL-C, CTRL-V or Compound clip on the rarer occasion it’s needed
[Simon Ubsdell] “I know by now that there’s no chance of convincing you over the internet of the many virtues of string-outs and pancakes and so on, but I suspect if we spent half an hour in a room together that might change just a little.
“
You talk as if none of us have ever edited on an NLE before! We’ve all used string outs and pancakes before
[Simon Ubsdell] “I find it hard to believe that any editor only ever works with clips directly from the browser. If they do, you’ll have to excuse me because I’m going to have to pass on watching their work. I know beforehand (without wanting to sound unkind) that it will be rubbish.”
Good grief that is an enormously patronising statement to make, I’m genuinely shocked
-
[Steve Connor] “Good grief that is an enormously patronising statement to make, I’m genuinely shocked”
Dear Steve, what’s got into you?
This really isn’t like you. You’re usually one of the most level-headed people on this forum and I have a lot of time for your opinion.
What’s with all the red mist?
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Simon Ubsdell] “Dear Steve, what’s got into you?
This really isn’t like you. You’re usually one of the most level-headed people on this forum and I have a lot of time for your opinion.
What’s with all the red mist?”
I was going to ask you exactly the same thing! Do you not see how extraordinarily patronising a statement like this this is
“I find it hard to believe that any editor only ever works with clips directly from the browser. If they do, you’ll have to excuse me because I’m going to have to pass on watching their work. I know beforehand (without wanting to sound unkind) that it will be rubbish.”
Because as someone who DOES work directly from the browser most of the time in FCPX I take great offence at this.
-
Uh for those watching who might have never actually used X,
If you open, say, 3 separate timelines in succession, you can switch between them with the timeline history navigation buttons at the top of your screen…
You can cut and past between them exactly like from pancake timelines.
They’re just displayed sequentially, not stacked. Other than that. No difference.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up