-
Why no “Send To Motion”?
-
[Walter Soyka] “I think I am missing something. What do you see Send to Motion doing that it would require this?”
It’s not that Motion requires this. It’s that there’s something underlying that both Motion and Logic Pro X will be using that’s not fully developed yet. At this point the only reason I can see send to Motion isn’t in FCPX, is that something else is holding it back. The only other Pro App (currently) that would use this feature is one that hasn’t been upgraded recently.
-
[Walter Soyka] “I would have guessed that the problem is that Apple has to reinvent their entire interchange infrastructure (having deprecated EMXML and the Quicktime-based .MOTN renderer), and that Send to Motion was a low priority, given the otherwise-awesome FCPX/M5 interchange via rigging/publishing.”
This.
FCPXML is a moving target, as is the entirety of Axel or whatever the internal format of fcpx itself is called.
It seems to get better and more capable with every release, but it is still under development.
The Motion and fcpx interfaces are unified now more than ever.
You can open effects in motion directly from fcpx as they seem to share a common language.
Fcpx and motion project formats don’t seem to be jiving quite yet.
-
[Craig Seeman] “It’s not that Motion requires this. It’s that there’s something underlying that both Motion and Logic Pro X will be using that’s not fully developed yet. At this point the only reason I can see send to Motion isn’t in FCPX, is that something else is holding it back. The only other Pro App (currently) that would use this feature is one that hasn’t been upgraded recently.”
Maybe — but I don’t actually think these are the same feature at all.
The ways I’d want to use a compositor and a DAW in conjunction with an NLE are totally different. Sending an entire FCPX project (timeline) to Motion would be messy, and sending individual clips to Logic Pro X would be messy.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “sending individual clips to Logic Pro X would be messy.”
But this was done with FCP legacy and SoundTrack Pro.
Again, I suspect Apple’s ambitions to push round tripping is holding this up. They may have something more in mind. We won’t know for sure until either Send To or Logic Pro X or both happen.
The alternative is that it’s a very low priority but given what appears to be interest in this on various forums, I’d have to think the interest is high.
Given that FCPXML is already being used to send things “to and fro” I’d have to believe they’re looking to do a bit more than that.
-
I think you may be right Craig.
All that Send To Motion requires is that FCP X generate a Motion project file referencing media in the Event/Project database. Alternatively you could export FCPXML to Motion which would convert that into a Motion project. Once you’ve done your work in Motion you would then send back to FCPX, much like you do with generators now, except the generator file would be “published” to the Event and Project (like a compound clip) rather than the Generators Browser.
What would be really useful is having an Event Library and Browser in Motion.
-
Given that there is a copy of Motion (sans UI) built into Final Cut Pro X, I think not having “Send to Motion” is akin to X not having the same implementation of Multicam as FCP7 on launch:
They’re not yet able to do it right, so they want to wait.
I hope they’re working on a true collaborative version of ‘Send to Motion’ – not just where an editor runs both apps at the same time on the same computer, but when someone else can use Motion (or Compressor, Aperture, Logic, Photoshop, After Effects…) to manipulate timeline content on another Mac (or iOS device) while the editor sticks to editing. One of the many steps to making this possible is by going trackless – so that one collaborator moving content from one layer to another doesn’t spoil someone else’s work.
Note that means the NLE’s role as ‘Grand Central Terminal’ of post-production means that it should work with apps from other companies. Apple doesn’t mind if you use After Effects to work in Final Cut Pro X compound clips – as long as AE is running on a Mac.
The current definition of post-production collaboration – sharing media plus a chain of apps locking content while it is being worked on – seems a bit old-fashioned in 2012.
I wonder which ‘A’ will be the first to implement 21st century collaboration?
@alex4d
-
[Alex Gollner] “I wonder which ‘A’ will be the first to implement 21st century collaboration?”
‘A’ll of them?
😉
-
[Alex Gollner] “Given that there is a copy of Motion (sans UI) built into Final Cut Pro X, I think not having “Send to Motion” is akin to X not having the same implementation of Multicam as FCP7 on launch: They’re not yet able to do it right, so they want to wait.”
Could be — I’m just surprised to see this feature prioritized so low (especially with the lower hurdle of the common renderer).
[Alex Gollner] “The current definition of post-production collaboration – sharing media plus a chain of apps locking content while it is being worked on – seems a bit old-fashioned in 2012.”
Yes, it does seem old-fashioned.
But the inter-dependency problems for collaboration are real: some things (compositing, spot audio repair/restoration/cleaning) can be worked on at the media/clip level, so integration into the NLE is relatively easy, as the underlying assets can be easily swapped. Other things need to work on the sequence level (grading, mixing), so integration back to the NLE is vastly more complex, as they’re not swaps but conforms/reconforms, and changing the editorial may affect the other work previously done.
There are also two kinds of collaboration: self-collaboration (where one individual wears all the hats and really only works one way at a time), and actual group collaboration, where multiple parties can be be doing vastly different work simultaneously. Managing the synchronization conflicts that may arise is non-trivial.
Bill has often noted here that Apple has historically been about individual empowerment; if this is the case, does it color the kinds of collaboration features we see?
I’m very curious to see the logistics of how round-tripping ultimately works.
I think either Logic Pro X will have to have (or at least support) a magnetic timeline. While I have argued here how the magnetic timeline is a fine model for video editorial, I’m having a hard time imaging how it would work in a DAW.
What happens when you want to add a sound effect or something in Logic? How do you connect it? Don’t you basically need a large subset of FCPX editorial functionality built into Logic to make this work?
If this is the case, is there an advantage to making audio editorial separate? Why not merge it into FCPX itself, so you can mix in editorial context?
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Craig Seeman] “It’s not that Motion requires this. It’s that there’s something underlying that both Motion and Logic Pro X will be using that’s not fully developed yet. At this point the only reason I can see send to Motion isn’t in FCPX, is that something else is holding it back. The only other Pro App (currently) that would use this feature is one that hasn’t been upgraded recently.”
I do love the optimism in this forum.
It’s pretty rare that the absence of a relatively simple, yet awesome feature in an application is used as evidence of the secret on-going development of a more complicated, more awesome feature.
I’m not saying you’re wrong — just noting that this is not the sort of generosity shown the other A’s around these parts.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “What happens when you want to add a sound effect or something in Logic?”
I just don’t see how any of this makes sense. Apple pointedly positions FCP X as “Editing, sound and color – Together in one app”. I just don’t see them making an FCP X/Logic X integration. “Send to” like in STP, maybe. After all, there is no “live” tie-in between Aperture and FCP X, is there?
It’s different with Motion, because it has always been positioned as a companion app for editors. Logic has never been tied to the video side. If anything, I would see Apple move Logic further away from what an editor needs and even more towards the needs of musicians. IOW, less of a ProTools wannabe as far as audio post is concerned.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up