[Aindreas Gallagher]

[Walter Soyka] ”
In a single-cam edit, there is no common time linking the A-roll and the B-roll. They both get separated from their own real times, chopped into pieces, laid onto the timeline, and related to each other. Clip connections make sense, because there’s nothing else tying them together.

In a multi-cam edit, you are not chopping the media’s real time into pieces. There is a common, continuous real time that connects all the media. B-roll happens in the same real time that A-roll happens in. In FCPX’s language, it’s all primary storyline, whether the shot is conceptually A-roll or B-roll. FCPX may not be built for unedited time.
“

I’d also like to add; that is kind of a – head nodding a few times re-reading the passage – brilliant point.

Apple may have cut beyond the fat, through the bone and into the marrow of time based editing with what they’ve done to absolute time.
I wonder a little if Lawrence’s post on time, as perceived by FCPX, might not be met by horrified glances between the software engineers at apple.
That it could quite simply be a serious intellectual error on their part.

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Aindreas Gallagher]

agreed. that sounds rather unusual to me. If the thing is being file slotted directly into TX like that – It just seems surprising to have not even a basic slate for the tx/iscii code, title or duration, just to have files plonking into the schedule with no real eyeball monitor or duration QC… what if the event duration is off? or it was supposed to have a living hold? it doesn’t really sound very broadcast. the schedule is God no?
and last I checked, broadcast engineers were still putting food on the table. K2’s do tend to need handholding.

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Aindreas Gallagher]

I just listened to the podcast interview. great stuff. “this is too important to what I do, we need to get this fixed.”

Amen to that.

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Aindreas Gallagher]

[Walter Soyka] ” ridicule him for being totally inscrutable, if you’re so inclined.”

Hey – hey now.

Inscrutable is the new black you know.

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Aindreas Gallagher]

[Eric Susch] “They’re desperate.”

I really wish they were but, you know, they could buy Poland, Mexico and Belgium outright at this point. Turn them into staff waterparks.

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Aindreas Gallagher]

Andy, you are so, so mean.

I just read it in my head with his voice. It works.. horribly well.

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Aindreas Gallagher]

that picture is hilarious.

quote from the first vid – “final Cut Pro eliminates the frustrations of older track based editing systems”

Well, you see that’s it really. Hands up who told Apple they were frustrated by older track based editing systems.

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Aindreas Gallagher]

what he said.

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Aindreas Gallagher]

ah cheers lads – like I say, I figure I had to lay off the ranting as the conversation was generally getting more coherent..

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Aindreas Gallagher]

that’s what I meant to say.

Everyone else started making intelligent points, so I thought I’d crack out the big words dictionary for Andy – but walter has it there: is pre-determined methodology – (even one that covers many use cases) burned right into the timeline itself, an issue for the art and craft of editing?

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics