Alex Hawkins
Forum Replies Created
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I mean this with all due respect, and I know adobe can take it, but have you media managed anything, or used any sort of interchange out with Pr yet? How about relink of avchd media, or any media for that matter?
These things matter to us in a “multiuser” environment, we switch users/projects and have offsite and onsite edits happening. Fcpx makes these types of processes extremely easy to share.
When we were talking the other day about the timeline being “just the surface” of an NLE, I wasn’t kidding. I spend most of my time editing in a timeline, but these back end features, the ones that will stop you in your tracks if everything isn’t lining up, are important to me and our business. While it takes a bit of getting used to, this part of fcpx works very very well and it is things that iMovie heros have zero use for. While I agree that the timeline needs some beefier controls, the backed of fcpx is looking to be rather robust. That’s important to someone like me.
“Jeremy that was a very insightful post for me. You expressed well what it was you actually like about X. Thanks.
And to be fair, media management is not a huge thing for us so I couldn’t say that I’ve put PPro fully to the test with this. 30 minute doco style pieces is the most I’ve pressured PPro with as far as media management goes and while it hasn’t really let me down I guess you could say I haven’t really tried to drive it to the wall either, with much larger projects.
Cheers.
Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia -
[Oliver Peters] “Some of the things I like about X are the organization methods, skimming and SOME of the UI design. I also like the growing ecosystem of filters and would like to take advantage of them.”
Hey Premiere Pro isn’t too bad with these you know. It does have a completely customisable workspace. And 6 now has ‘hover scrub’. (That’s Adobe’s moniker for skimming). It’s filters are pretty good too, although I’m not sure if you mean something else here..?
Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia -
[Chris Harlan] “I don’t know. I think Jeremy does a pretty good job of explaining what he likes and dislikes about X”
Yeah Chris I agree with that but I guess I just don’t end up “getting” it.
[Chris Harlan] “FWIW, I generally find his arguments compelling and well reasoned, even when I don’t share his POV.”
No argument from me there. I certainly didn’t intend any disrespect to him at all. I guess I just see it all as too much bother.
Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia -
[David Lawrence] “This in a nutshell is why I currently consider the current magnetic timeline bad design. I want to edit, not play a game of chess with my NLE. But that’s just me.”
It isn’t just you David.
After reading Jeremy’s post above yours I just keep asking myself, why? Why do they bother? His whole post just demonstrates to me that the fundamental design is just plain wrong.
I guess they must believe the trade off is worth it. But what is the worth of it? I’m yet to really read a well articulated, reasoned post as to why X is just plain better.
Ah well, each to his own.
Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia -
Hi Jules,
Don’t forget you can set up multiple workspaces with windows maximised etc to where you want depending on what you’re doing at the time and then map them to keyboard shortcuts. So I have 1- Editing; 2- Bin Searching; 3-Effects; 4-Colour Correction; 5 -Titling; 6-Audio Mixing etc.
Works very nicely.
Cheers,
Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia -
Hi Jules,
Dennis has done an excellent job addressing your points but I would just mention that re question 11 you can copy attributes from one clip – just highlight it and ctrl/cmd-c it and then you can select multiple clips and paste attributes – opt/cmd/v on mac.
That will paste whatever effects etc you have on your first clip to all the other clips. Be aware though that it’s a cumulative all paste not a substitutionary one. i.e. if you already have an effect on any of the clips you’re pasting to it won’t get rid of that effect it will just add the others to it and you can’t select which effects you want to paste like you can in FCP7. It’s all or nuthin’.
Hope this helps/makes sense.
Cheers,
Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia -
Oliver thank you so much for this post.
This is the sort of thing I edit week in and week out. Please help me out here. What is it about X that is really so much better than PPro or Avid that makes you want to edit in it? Seriously?
Just reading your OP makes me wonder. The fact that you’re editing this piece in 7 speaks volumes. I just don’t get it.
Plus the whole terminology thing. All the way down this thread everybody speaks about timelines as ‘timelines’ not ‘projects’ because we all know that that’s what they are. Timelines. They speak about projects as ‘projects’ not ‘events’ because again, we all know that that’s what they are. Projects.
NLE’s have tracks because that’s what works best for complicated editing. Simple. Does anyone seriously disagree with this?
[Oliver Peters] “In X, it seems like the best approach is to have only a gap/placeholder on the primary storyline and then build everything as connected clips That seems the most workable, but it’s an incredibly, inefficient use of GUI space and the timeline is a complete mess.
The bottom line is how do you guys that have done this, tackle a similar project? Especially one in which each and every element in the project can be changed by the client and probably will be. Thanks.”
I don’t know how often this happens to you, but it happens to me all the time. It is my world. To the point where I feel that I don’t make videos, I just make changes.
So having read your OP several times and having only used X on one major project (yes that’s project not event) I am mightily relieved that I did not persist with it and thus have reverted to the older, faster, easier way of doing things.
Cheers,
Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia -
We’ll be staying on the Adobe Creative Suite bandwagon. We’re fairly chuffed about where it’s headed. It suits our needs and Adobe seem to be a good company to deal with. Open and communicative.
We’re also looking at the HPZ820’s. We really like our MacPros and OSX so we might even run them side by side for a while.
I’m registered for the Smoke trial so we’ll give that a burl when it’s released.
All in all, I’m a happy little vegemite at the moment.
Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia -
[Greg Andonian] “Yeah, sub-frame audio editing is nice to have- which is why Adobe added it to Premiere Pro… In 2003. ;)”
Indeed. Another one of those small, insignificant features of Premiere Pro that has stayed hidden amongst the unopened program of the Creative Suite.
Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia -
[Bill Davis] “You must be new in these parts!”
Been here for over a decade.
[Bill Davis] “that’s going to perhaps be a bit of a problem for those who just tossed this particular baby out early and never learned the value of the new approach”
See. There you go again.
[Bill Davis] “that’s going to perhaps be a bit of a problem”
Why? How?
[Bill Davis] “Here we are nearly a year later and exceptionally talented editors with fine editing brains and tons of real world expertise are still not comprehending some of the fundamental changes Apple made in this tool.”
So therefore where do you think the fault may lie . . . ?
[Bill Davis] “Are we fools who confront a bad program but are too self-conscious to admit we’ve made a terrible choice and are just maintaining “appearances” and blowing smoke up our client’s pant legs so they never find out we can’t actually do efficient pro work with this tool? Or have we just taken the time to learn the complexities and nuances of the tools – and after doing that – find that it actually works for us in ways that other software has not?
Because if any other thing is true – wouldn’t we have simply jettisoned it and gone back to the “money” software we used to use – if out of self-preservation if nothing else?”
See again, why do you always turn it around to the personal? This time in a pseudo self deprecating manner at first then in a more roundabout, subtle way, having a dig at others who haven’t “taken the time to learn the complexities and nuances of the tools”.
No one is saying you’re a fool for using it or you’re blowing smoke up your client’s pant legs. So why do YOU say it? I just don’t get that. You seem to be conducting an argument that no one else is having.
[Bill Davis] “Works for football (soccer) but fails massively for basketball – where the coach almost universally sends the player in off the bench with an instruction like “you’ve got Johnson”.
That’s my fundamental point in all of this. We’re NOT always playing the same game. So adjustments MUST be made.”
Sorry to be dumb but . . .
. . . HUH!!??
Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia