Andrew Richards
Forum Replies Created
-
I can’t read that and not hear Richard Dreyfuss’ voice speaking it in my head.
Best,
Andy -
Be careful. That word is the third rail in these parts.
Best,
Andy -
[Herb Sevush] “Which works fine when building consumer oriented devices, but does not work fine when building specialized commercial software. “
According to Chris, they would have followed that philosophy for the entire lifespan of FCP as well though.
Best,
Andy -
[Chris Harlan] “Whoa! You’re about as controlling, there, as the FCP X timeline, aren’t ya? I think if you actually paddle back a bit, you’ll see that I was making a direct response to one of your statements, so if anyone is “off-topic” its you. “
Our subthread got rather removed from the context of a specific criticism of the magnetic timeline that Aindreas linked to. I was focused on that example, which was 90% video track complexity. Almost no audio complexity, and it didn’t appear to be more than a two channel mixdown. I’m sorry if my reply to your post had a crass tone, my mind was still in the weeds of that one example. I apologize.
[Chris Harlan] “For instance, 1) I often create a single sfx out of multiple sfx in a cluster that spans all four tracks–say part of a gunshot, thunder, a whoosh, and a bit of timpani. 2) There are often overlapping sfx around or near a transition that are actually related to the separate pieces of video on either side, but need to exist only in the no man’s land of the transition. 3) Depending on delivery requirements, some SFX–which I relegate to tracks 9 & 10–need to be reclassified as music. 4) Sometimes a portion of the SOT elements–say track three from a four track input– needs to be reclassified as sfx, but remain available to be delivered on a SOT track, 5) On some projects, entire layers of audio sfx–say a particular whoosh for all wind wipes–needs to be turned on and off so that an alternate audio track of, say, swishes can be heard, 6) Temp VO needs to easily spotable on track 5, with free track 6 to allow precise placement of new VO. 7) Overlapping dialog can have a very complicated relationship that can easily be mapped in time, but not in relationship.”
This is perfect. Exactly the kind of specifics I want to explore in detail. Point by point:
1) Isn’t this a perfect use case for compound clips? You cluster your audio into a nest and it acts as a unit, but you can explode it to make fine adjustments at will.
2) You can either pin the audio to the first or second clip, at the head or tail (normal vs backtimed clip connections). Or you can make a compound clip out of the clips with transition and pin to that.
3-5) This where metadata shines. Your track assignments in a fixed track timeline are immutable. With roles assigned as metadata for each audio clip, you get to assign output based on role and not have to put any effort into maneuvering your clips into different tracks to meet an output requirement. At least that’s how Apple stated it would work in their FAQ. Further, you can quickly select and disable audio channels by searching the timeline using the same metadata.
6) Tag Temp VO accordingly and it can be located and disabled very easily. Aligning finished VO doesn’t require a free track (since there aren’t tracks), only that you can easily locate the temp VO chunk by chunk to lay in the finished VO.
7) Can’t generalize an answer for this one. I know one of the recent videos touched on overlapping audio though. I guess it depends on the situation.Maybe you don’t like the looks of those techniques, but they’ll get the job done and might even prove speedy in the hands of an experienced user.
[Chris Harlan] “This is average complexity for a :30 episodic, involving 14-16 audio tracks, and 10–40 clusters of non-SOT events. It is very easy to manage visually on a traditional time line. Even if/when they get stem export happening, “average” would still be a nasty thing to try and manage with FCP X.”
And I disagree. It might be foriegn, but nasty? Maybe this engineer’s opinion is of little value, but to my mind metadata as a means of assigning output channels is a lot more flexible than fixed track assignments and sacrifices little in terms of usability. I like compound clips and the idea of using them to umbrella effects and organize a timeline. I don’t see a huge downside to using clip connections as a way of aligning supporting clips. The abstract nature of the new paradigm appeals to me.
But Apple does need to follow through and hook it all up to the rest of the pipeline or it is all moot.
Best,
Andy -
The Dvorak analogy is perfectly apt, and I missed that prior post. I think your distillation to cost/benefit is exactly right as well. I see FCPX as a step forward from my habits using FCP. Many others see it as too different to be worth it, regardless of its other capabilities or features (missing or otherwise). Where I see potential, others will see liability.
However, in the case of Keyword Collections in particular, I still don’t see how they are exclusive of any of the good ol’ fashioned bin behavior. You can still create one with a keystroke like you could with a bin, still drag clips into it like a bin, still look at the contents in a list like the bins in legacy FCP. If Keyword Collections and Smart Collections were called Bins and Smart Bins, would that make it easier to swallow? A rose by any other name?
Best,
Andy -
[Geoff Dills] “A huge problem with X is it’s NOT intuitive to anyone who has ever edited on any other piece of editing software. “
Except one. It ships on every Mac and now if the user wants something better, they aren’t faced with having to learn something completely different.
Best,
Andy -
Did you get a volume license? Apple offers two methods, but I would use this one:
Use Apple Remote Desktop, NetInstall, or NetRestore.
On your administrator Mac system, enter one of the redemption codes provided. You can then copy the application to all the target systems using Apple Remote Desktop. Or you can use the System Image Utility included in OS X Lion Server to create a NetInstall or NetRestore image.
Only the Mac system on which the application was originally downloaded will be notified of software updates. To deploy the update across all target systems, download the software update from the Mac App Store on the original system, then copy the new version of the application to all the target systems.
You can also create a system containing all the application software and use system imaging software to distribute it across all your Mac systems. Software updates for OS X Lion will be provided through Software Update on those systems. Updates for Apple software are available only through the Mac App Store on the original system. Updated applications must be distributed separately or through a new system image.
If you are making an image, it sounds like you can push it out, but updates will not flow to the imaged clients. You’d need to either push updates via ARD or via new images.
Best,
Andy -
To wit:
[Steve Jobs] “You can’t just ask customers what they want and then try to give that to them. By the time you get it built, they’ll want something new.”
Best,
Andy -
[David Roth Weiss] “You are only referencing it. You’re copying an alias, not the media itself.”
So aside from not using traditional jargon, what is the problem with Keyword Collections?
Best,
Andy -
[Chris Harlan] “These aren’t opinions. These are facts.”
Facts I do not dispute and facts that are off topic. Here I’m exploring whether or not the magnetic timeline can be used effectively for complex edits. I’m well aware of FCPX’s other documented shortcomings.
Best,
Andy