What makes X fast? Tom Knows.

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Nothing new but still a great demo for people who don’t know X that well.

https://mathieughekiere.wordpress.com

[Claude Lyneis]

I think he is more amazing than FCPX. I have rarely seen an editor edit a full speed.

[Bill Davis]

Yes.

I think I can speak for Tom and quite a few other X editors I know in that what’s really the greatest boost to personal productivity is when the software disappears and you’re just thinking of nothing else but expressing your ideas and will on the content you’re manipulating.

And, of course, it’s not confined to X. Every editor in every NLE does the same thing. But the X way is still singular in how the facits of the system work in concert – first dynamic pre-trimming using Reject and Favorite alone with keywords as he demonstrate – and then how the magnetic timeline lets you work with that pre-trimmed material to group and connect visual and audio elements in persistent arrangements and the move/trim/manipulate them as units safely with collision avoidance – insuring that you never overwrite anything unless you specifically choose to do so.

Those things drive a LOT of the friction out of X editing when you’re “in the zone” working.

FWIW.

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.

[Oliver Peters]

I would tend to agree. He’s clearly a fast editor regardless of the NLE. I’m sure he’s faster on X because it lends itself to his style. Plus there are things you can do in X without stopping playback, which is a great feature. What’s interesting is that of the 6 editors at Trim, 4 are FCPX, but 1 is still on FCP7 and 1 on Avid MC. So for whatever reason, X isn’t the right tool for them (yet).

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Steve Connor]

[Bill Davis] “But the X way is still singular in how the facits of the system work in concert – first dynamic pre-trimming using Reject and Favorite alone with keywords as he demonstrate – and then how the magnetic timeline lets you work with that pre-trimmed material to group and connect visual and audio elements in persistent arrangements and the move/trim/manipulate them as units safely with collision avoidance – insuring that you never overwrite anything unless you specifically choose to do so.

Those things drive a LOT of the friction out of X editing when you’re “in the zone” working.
“

I’d like to add something to this, Bill is a regular and very enthusiastic contributor here and is a great proponent of FCPX, so if you’re reading this forum to get some ideas on whether to use FCPX then you might think that you have to adopt the structured workflow that Bill follows to get the best out of it and that ISN’T necessarily true.

Lots of us are more tactile Editors, we like to get the material into the NLE and immediately start shaping the edit on the timeline without all the prep work that some do, organisation comes later and if this is how you work then FCPX is GREAT for this. The skimmer gets you through all your material extremely quickly and the magnetic timeline works brilliantly for chunking sections around the timeline without worrying about losing sync or losing clip positions. The fact that every action DOESN’T stop playback means you can tweak on the fly really easily. I’ve been using X since the beginning and to be honest I rarely use keywording and I’m still faster and have more fun on FCPX.

No offence to Bill but I just wanted to add that in to the mix!

[Bill Davis]

[Oliver Peters] “So for whatever reason, X isn’t the right tool for them (yet).
“

Absolutely.

Of course that view kinda ignores the room sitting elephant that in a high level shop with presumably free access to any tool required to get the work out – the majority of their editors (66.67%) HAVE elected to switch to X.

That’s gotta raise a few eyebrows amongst those who have elected to tread perhaps a more traditional path.

Or not, I suppose.

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.

[Gabe Strong]

Yeah, I’m one of those types of editors who does NOT use all the organizational keywording and
such. But it works great for the way I edit, which is exactly the style Steve mentioned.

Gabe Strong
G-Force Productions
http://www.gforcevideo.com

[Claude Lyneis]

I edit lacrosse games from about 80 minutes to start with down to a highlight of about 5 minutes. The clips are usually a few minutes long and the interesting parts are only 10’s of seconds. I have finally learned to use jkl and i and o and then keyword the interesting part as a goal, hit, score, etc. Then I use a smart collection of those key words and dump it into the time line. It is quite efficient compared to dumping everything into the time line as I did after using FCP7. Hardly revolutionary, but it works efficiently and makes doing a highlight reel at the end of the season easy.

[Bill Davis]

Look, it makes total sense to me that an editor who’s been using string out techniques his or her whole career will carry that into X.
And if you never warm to the incredible power of keywording so what? You get to decide how to use your tools, nobody else. That’s a given.
Tom Carter uses Rejects and Favorites somewhat differently than I do. Why? Because his his organizational goals are different than mine. And both of ours are likely different than somebody doing a documentary.

There is no “right way” in this.

But that said, there IS a danger, in my opinion, of mistaking the fact that you haven’t explored how a system in X (whether it’s keywording or, for example, the asset auto-renaming module tucked away in the info tab) that MIGHT prove a superb solution for a better X workflow in specific situations – but won’t – merely because somebody hasn’t had the occasion or curiosity to actually examine what it’s potential is.

Again, nobody’s saying any editor has to use the tools a particular way. That’s up to the editor. But I also know I’ve learned techniques in my second year as an X editor that I thought were no better than the way I did things in year one – only to discover that I was very wrong and there were actually better and faster ways to do things if I studied them.

Nobody’s going to make you use X a way you don’t want.

But there’s a reason so many people talk about the power of keywording and keyword collections. it may totally not be something that resonates for you and that’s fine.

But the organizational power is still there and well worth talking about. That’s all.

My 2 cents, anyway.

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.

[Steve Connor]

[Bill Davis] “But that said, there IS a danger, in my opinion, of mistaking the fact that you haven’t explored how a system in X (whether it’s keywording or, for example, the asset auto-renaming module tucked away in the info tab) that MIGHT prove a superb solution for a better X workflow in specific situations – but won’t – merely because somebody hasn’t had the occasion or curiosity to actually examine what it’s potential is.
“

Neither of us mentioned the fact we HADN’T explored it. I certainly HAVE but I’ve found for a lot of projects it’s simply quicker to jump straight in.

I’m not saying you SHOULDN’T use or explore it, I’ve used it on long form projects and a feature I cut with X, but for me the irony is that I don’t NEED to use it all the time because the other tools speed things up so much.