-
what is editing speed ?
-
Hi Jeremy
I totally agree with all of this.
The only point I was trying to make was that having a variety of strategies – which is exactly what you are talking about – is a much healthier editing philosophy, than rigid adherence to one principle or other.
Sometimes, as in the case I cited, string-outs are better and sometimes they’re less useful, or indeed not useful at all. There are certainly instances where I don’t use them, though given the kind of editing I mostly do, they constitute an invaluable and often essential working method.
FCP X does genuinely open up different ways of working – sometimes they are an obvious improvement, but sometimes the old school methods are more appropriate. It’s a shame that FCP X is less well suited to the string-out method (and pancaking, and other associated string-out workflows) than other NLEs. I think it’s only fair to recognise,as you do, that this is a limitation, albeit not a fatal one.
The really important thing to remember is that not all editing is the same. What works for a particular type of editing project, might not work, or might work less well for another type of project. I frequently make a judgement call about which NLE I’m going to use based on the nature of the project, just as much as any personal preference.
On the other hand, it’s hard to argue with personal preference and the way an NLE “feels” to you. Does it free you up or bog you down? It’s a very valid criterion, as Walter alludes to in another post here.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com -
[Bill Davis] ” it’s trivial the push clips to the top of a visual stack in X since the program could care less how many keywords one clip has. Temp create a tag from (space A) and dump your specials in it and boom – it sorts up top of the group instantly.”
What do you mean “tag from Space A”?
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “What do you mean “tag from Space A”?”
He means that non-alpha-numeric tags will float higher than alpha-numeric ones. Just as numeric tags float higher than alphabetic ones.
In FCP X, just like anywhere else, of course.
EDIT: But he clearly meant to say something like UnderscoreA, as FCP X simply ignores an actual space when initialising keywords, although they can be subsequently edited with a space. Why you’d use a space as against any of the many other non-alphanumeric options available I really don’t know. Especially since you can initialise these from the off. Not to mention how hard it is to distinguish a space from the lack of a space visually. Of course, editors have been using this method to sort items for years (computing skills 101) and there is nothing magic about its availability in FCP X.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com -
[Simon Ubsdell] “He means that non-alpha-numeric tags will float higher than alpha-numeric ones. …
EDIT: But he clearly meant to say something like UnderscoreA, as FCP X simply ignores an actual space.”OK, I get that, but it still doesn’t provide the human-ordered visual juxtaposition that re-arranging frames in a bin – or images in a lightbox, for that matter – gives you. Which is my point – FCPX is geared around UI norms for computers, but not necessarily humans.
For instance, in nearly every NLE, EXCEPT Media Composer, your selected column automatically forces an ascending or descending sort. With Avid you actually have to select a column and tell it to sort. I would argue that even though it’s an extra step, it’s actually better. Plus, Avid allows a two-column selection for a two-level sort.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “it still doesn’t provide the human-ordered visual juxtaposition that re-arranging frames in a bin – or images in a lightbox, for that matter – gives you”
Quite so. I don’t use this method myself but I know of very many editors who do, and clearly it has value. Ideally, every NLE should be able to offer it.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com -
[Simon Ubsdell] “I set an IN at the start of the timeline and and OUT at the frame where I wanted to keep something. And pressed delete (Shift X). I set an IN where I wanted that shot to end and then moved to the start of the next shot I wanted to keep and hit OUT and delete. Given the volume of material, I was skimming over a lot of intermediate shots that I was wanting to reject and rejecting them all with a single keystroke”
Maybe I don’t understand your procedure but it appears you are appending one day’s worth of material to a timeline, then you fast forward through the TL setting IN and OUT points and ripple-deleting rejected regions, one by one. Is that right?
Since you have 16 hours of material, you’d be doing this over and over, once for each bin of dailies. Or if the software could handle it I suppose you could append a 16 hr timeline. I tested a 20 hr H264 1080p timeline on FCP X and it ran but was very sluggish. It is definitely not optimized for that.
By contrast when I imported 200GB (20 hr) of that material into FCP X with “leave files in place” this took 5 min and it was ready to skim in the Event Browser and mark ranges. I’d estimate the frame rate during skimming is at least 20 Hz — even on camera-native H264 4k material. This was on a 2015 iMac 27 but it seemed equally fast on a 2013 model.
In your procedure, within a shooting day the order of the non-rejected material in the timeline is based on how that was appended. Since you are working sequentially through a group of bins ordered by shooting day, each “culled” timeline region would be in day order — whether that is the preferred order or not. Then you’d start moving clips around to get them in the preferred presentation order.
I have done that same procedure in Premiere but I don’t see how it’s any faster than marking range-based favorites with the skimmer in FCP X, then appending those to the TL in one step. In either case you must reorder the material once it’s in the TL. The issue is what’s the fastest possible method of blitzing through the raw footage and extracting the selects. On any hardware I’ve tested the skimmer responsiveness is much faster, especially with H264 4k material.
I agree the lack of a “play through” option in the FCP X Event Browser is a mild deficiency. If using only JKL within the Browser, you have to press down arrow to advance to the next clip. A sequential “play through” option is a commonly-requested enhancement. However — the optimal working Browser working mode is skim with the mouse, click/drag to mark ranges, and Favorite those with the left hand “F” key. If the Browser sort order is by date, they are appended to the TL in that order — just like your procedure, except in a single step.
Mouse-based Browser range selection may not always give the desired precision, leading to JKL which then requires manually advancing to the next clip. OTOH you don’t necessarily need that degree of precision since you aren’t making a cut but marking a range. It can always be adjusted in the timeline.
I don’t see how working sequentially through a group of bins, adding them to the timeline and deleting rejected regions produces more “linear”, usable results any quicker than marking favorites in the FCP X Browser and appending those to the TL in one step. For a “fast first assembly” task over a lot of material, the FCP X Event Browser seems faster.
-
[Oliver Peters] ” it still doesn’t provide the human-ordered visual juxtaposition that re-arranging frames in a bin – or images in a lightbox, for that matter – gives you. Which is my point – FCPX is geared around UI norms for computers, but not necessarily humans.”
This is an interesting point. In FCPX you cannot drag clips in the Event Browser to a user-defined order. In Premiere you can, creating a type of “light table” or storyboard. With CC you can even create trimmed subclips, put those in a bin, then in icon view drag them to a preferred visual storyboard order.
It is ironic that FCPX cannot do this since Apple originally strongly promoted a “spatial” UI metaphor. I think that’s why even today you cannot do a range selection in Finder icon view — they are considered spatially arranged so (technically) there is no first and last. In UI design there have been many debates about spatial arrangement vs alternatives. Apple has gradually moved away from this and the Finder behavior is probably vestigial.
The Event Browser in FCPX has various selectable sort orders, just not a user-defined option like Premiere has. It seems like this would be a useful enhancement.
The opposing view is from a relational database standpoint, sort order does not exist. The data is in unordered rows and an order only manifests itself when a query is executed. You query by attribute, not by saying “show me the next item after the previous”. Since FCPX is so database-oriented, maybe this mentality prevailed. However the items in the Browser are more akin to a query result (which can have order) than to the underlying data. I don’t see any reason why they could not be spatially re-ordered by the user, especially since FCPX workflow emphasizes doing as much work in the Even Browser as possible.
-
[Joe Marler] “I tested a 20 hr H264 1080p timeline on FCP X and it ran but was very sluggish. It is definitely not optimized for that.”
Yes, FCP X is dog slow when it comes to handling lots of material like this.
Which is why I moved over to FCP 7 where all was as smooth as butter.
[Joe Marler] “By contrast when I imported 200GB (20 hr) of that material into FCP X with “leave files in place” this took 5 min”
Yes, those slow import times are why i moved this project over to FCP 7 where the import was virtually instant.
Thanks for your considered answer to the question, but I’m not sure you have done anything to convince me that there is a quicker or more effective way of doing this than the string-out method. I think I have addressed the differences both qualitatively and quantitatively in my post to Bill here:
https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/85854
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com -
I was going to do this point by point, but after reading your last few posts, I’m not sure that’s the right approach. Honestly, gently, and based exclusively on what I’m reading of your thinking, (and I’m trying to say this very respectfully and carefully) I’m not sure you really have a very good grasp of how X ACTUALLY works.
It appears as if, like many, you came to it knowing how other NLEs work – and simply decided to dive in without any formal study or understanding of that Randy U had re-imagined. And it frustrates you. That is perfectly understandable.
Please understand that I’m not questioning your editing ability in any way. Lets take that off the table and start with the mutual agreement that you are a far better editor than I am. I’m fine with that. What I want to do is focus exclusively on your actual familiarity with how X works at a very fundamental level.
To help here are some simple notes that I honestly hope helps you to understand the program better..
First, that you were generally unfamiliar with the Favorite/Reject/Unrated system is a WOW to me. It’s the central construct of the database, and where the vast majority of X editing starts if you’re to to use the software as it is designed.
From my reading of your prior post, you seem to think it’s some sort of “separate system” in X. It’s NOT. It’s all the exact same keywording system. User defines a range. applies a TAG to that range.. The ONLY distinction between a Menu Bar Tag (Favorite/Rejet/Unrate) and a user generated Custom tag is that there’s a simple filter stage built into the Menu Bar tags that lets the users filter the EVENT DISPLAY by that class of tags. You can Hide and Show Rejects and Favorites in the Event. Period. Other than that, they are JUST tags. They work the same as all other tags.
Why is this central to X workflow? To help you understand it better, here is my MacBreak Studio about it from a few years back. (I’m loathe to reference this since I’m proudly personally down some 50lbs since I recorded it, but it might be instructive so I’ll shelve my ego in the hopes it helps you learn what the Toolbar Tags can make you tremendously faster during X operations. ESPECIALLY when you have LOTS of material to work with as in your 16 hours situation. If you had underrstood nothing but THIS when you tried to get your “quick edit” done – instead of hopping around through 3 programs and landing on the one that’s been dead 5 years and requires re-rendering for virtually any timeline operation – you would have had a much easier time.
My clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWS8tZSVn8M
ALTERNATIVELY if you don’t want to watch ME explain it, Here’s Tom Carter addressing the same topic just last week in his FIRST tip: https://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/tutorials/1759-four-final-cut-pro-x-tutorials-with-tips-tricks-and-shortcuts-from-thomas-grove-carter
Not only is Tom FAR better looking and more charming, but he covers nearly the same material, and it might be less distractive for you to hear it from him.
Your idea that somehow it’s not “fluid” or it’s somehow hobbled because you can’t play through clips is again, evidence that you really don’t understand what should be happening in actual X editing. I could pull up half a dozen examples, but two will suffice.
You call out the inability to “play through” clips in the Event. Which tells me you have a VERY shaky understanding of what these are and what they are not. They ARE database entries. DIscrete database entries – interconnected to a robust set of metadata. They are NOT timelines, (actually storylines in X parlance – BECUSE they are NOT that at tall.) And they are NOT storylines. They can be OPENED in timelines. And they can be assembled and established as traditional String-outs in Storylines – but they are NOT these things when they are sitting in the event browser! The boundary between clips in the database is just that – a boundary. It’s NOT a thru edit. Trying to treat it like it is – in my opinion – is to once again try to Make X work like your OLD NLE – to SEE that as LIKE a clip in a Capture Scratch – and it IS NOT.
When you are TAGGING clips, it’s NOT an issue. Because a tap on down arrow takes you instantly to the NEXT database entry – e.g. next clip – so if you’re trying to watch stuff that was improperly recorded (I use that phrase because I seldom see clips that have absolutely no pre or post roll involved unless some weird old age camera couldn’t span the 4Gig limit and had to plop down discontinuous clip snippits.) I haven’t had to confront that situation much since 2013 or so. – if you do, again, just down arrow as you go! A hundred down arrow taps costs me what? Perhaps a cumulative second? I can handle that.
Look, I appreciate your trying to help me “learn X” with a variety of your other comments, but I’m already Apple Certified in FCP X Pro Post and while that’s meaningless in and of itself, it merely demonstrates that I’ve made myself FAMILIAR with how the program ACTUALLY works – rather than how I might THINK it works. (I still get things wrong, but at least I’ve put in the time to STUDY it in depth. Have you? Let’s presume we both opened it on the day it was released to the public. Clearly the difference here is that , I didn’t have any reason to divide my time trying to keep using Legacy or dabble in Premiere Pro or Avid and was able, therefore, to NOT constantly view X exlusively in terms of how I used to think about editing. I have now used X exclusively for going on 5 years. So I feel like I’m pretty solid with it. In fact, let me help you out again.
In your “fewer clicks” attempt to argue how slow I must be with X, you neglected some subtleties. Yes, Down arrow sets the playhead at the CLIP beginning without a I keystroke ~IF~ YOU DON”T HAVE OTHER I/O Ranges specified in advance inside your clips. If you do – you still have to set the In Point at the frame one playhead position. When stepping someone through a process I feel they don’t actually understand, I tend to simplify so they don’t get lost. Sorry if I did that here. It wasn’t personal.
Finally, before this becomes too long a novel, let me post another screenshot for you to consider.
This comes from a 24-hour crash edit I did almost 2 years ago in X. It’s pretty analagous to the project you describe. Crews on-site shooting for 3 days before my arrival. They had 16 hours “in the can” by the end of DAY ONE. I had 24 hours on-site to deliver a program for an audience of about 1000 at 6am. I did it AND got 5.5 hours sleep. So I FULLY understand speed on deadline.
And I’m going to contend that if you actually were as fully conversant with X as you appear to believe you are – then you would have had no more trouble with your 16 hour turnaround then I did with a gig with about 3 times that much raw footage and a similar deadline.
I’m VERY likely not as good an editor as you are, Simon. But I clearly understand THIS TOOL a lot better than you do – evidenced by just what you’re written here. And sorry, but the reason you’re not as fast as you’d like in X on a project like this is that you do NOT adequately understand how to employ what X does so wall to make it efficient.
In X, all the work you do is iterative and cumulative. I can spot to the storyline from full cards first, and when I have a free moment before the next reels arrive, I can smash out big chunks of REJECTS from arriving new footage – so I don’t waste my time later on. Or not. No matter where, how or when I’m working – I’m building a decision database that makes my future work MORE efficient. Even 3 seconds spent TAGGING a clip that momentarily streams by my notice, means I OWN that clip for the rest of my edit. When I need it, I don’t have to waste even ONE second making sure I’m in the right stringout or in the proper folder – I just tap a couple of characters or click on a keyword and BOOM it’s AT my playhead ready for use. If you don’t see the speed utility of that – then you will NEVER understand the appeal of X. And, honestly I’m kinda convinced now that you won’t.
It appears that you have contracted a full blown case of the “dismissal infection” when it comes to X. You aren’t seeing – nor, really curious about what you don’t know, as evidenced by how you have described it after all these months of purported use.
So I’m sure you’ll be disappointed with it every time you launch it. It’s going to be a self-fulfilling prophecy for you, Simon. The anger you’re letting slip out here is palpable. So please, Just let it go. Coming back to instruct people who DO use it and enjoy it’s speed and flexibility – while getting so many of the program use fundamentals flat out WRONG is not very productive.
If X annoys you further, please come and ask questions here. There are plenty of people besides me that understand how it actually works. No need to stumble around angry with the fact that it doesn’t work as you WISH it would. Because it never is.
Simple as that.
Take care – and really, happy holidays. Hope your end of year season is bright and full of joy.
Peace.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Oliver Peters] “[Bill Davis] ” it’s trivial the push clips to the top of a visual stack in X since the program could care less how many keywords one clip has. Temp create a tag from (space A) and dump your specials in it and boom – it sorts up top of the group instantly.”
What do you mean “tag from Space A”?”
Oliver,
Sorry my phrasing was unclear. Simon correctly interpreted my meaning.
Temp re-arrangement of assets (as well as wholesale re-tagging using the custom name generator) if deployed intelligently will solve a HUGE array of sort order and “I’d like THIS COLLECTION to be more accessible” issues in X.
Clearly, some editors haven’t gone this deep in the software as yet.
And they often start by thinking about how to solve organizational situations with folders – NOT the most robust process in X terms.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up