[Andy Neil]

[Fabrizio D'Agnano] “Is there any way to change these setting to something more like the previous versions before going through workarounds?”

Nope, that’s the new way of doing things. You’re not prompted regarding your cards because you have a camera format that requires the clips to be rewrapped as a QT. So that’s why you need to assign a place for media in the Library inspector.

As for the naming convention, this was a fix to an issue many people had with FCPX renaming camera files which makes charting their course through the workflow more difficult. Now a camera file keeps it’s original name throughout the process, but FCPX still organizes those clips by folders which it time/date stamps.

You can rename the clips in the browser very easily, and if you find it necessary, you can quickly rename them in the finder with a naming app (I like Name Changer).

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos

[Andy Neil]

Sort of, except I wouldn’t go so far as to say a destructive edit is only destructive if you can’t hit undo. My reasoning behind this is that undos are linear (except in your Nuke example). So while a mistake quickly discovered can be undo’d with little hassle, one not notice for hours or longer it can be more work to undo since you must undo all the elements prior.

I like your idea of per clip undos although I confess it might be a nightmare to get used to or implement in something other than node based programs.

In Photoshop, I treat that definition the same. If you flatten two layers and undo it immediately, then no harm, no foul but it was a destructive edit just the same because you leave no original media in place. Just like that Avid audio mixdown, or completely overwriting a clip in X. But, if you Merge several layers to a new layer, leaving the original layers and turning them off, then I don’t consider that destructive since I have easy access to the original layers.

Make sense? At least to me it does.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos

[Andy Neil]

My feathers remain unruffled. I think the best way I can put this is that I feel your definition is too broad and my argument is for a more specific definition. I agree that destructive doesn’t mean bad per se, but it should refer to irrevocable or at least immune to a quickly changed mind.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos

[Andy Neil]

[Walter Soyka] “As long as you remember the way everything was, you can restore it, right?”

If you want to argue semantics then fine. I’m not saying you can’t do a destructive edit in FCPX, I’m saying your example is poor. I don’t have to remember anything about the previous position of your clips to restore them since in both cases the resulting video is the same. If at any time you want to delete that connected clip, all I have to do is roll those clips back together and check a singular edit point, the cut at which would likely be easily seen. It would the most minor of issues. The point is, I have full access to the original clips in the original cut and they can be restored with a minimum of hassle.

If, in your edit, you’d completely overwritten an entire clip, then that would be destructive because i’d have to manually go back through the clips in the browser and try to remember exactly what was there (as opposed to still having them there). Now, for this to be truly destructive, you’d need to overwrite audio as well as video. If the original audio is left in the timeline (which it typically is with Overwrite to Primary functions, then restoring the original edit is simply a matter of matchframing and replacing. To me, the issue at stake in a destructive edit versus a non-destructive one is the connection to original media.

Just like in the audio mixdown in avid. If you overwrite the original tracks with the mixdown, you have no way of getting those original tracks back because there is no longer a connection in the timeline for them.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos

[Andy Neil]

I’m probably going to regret posting to this thread because the last argument over what was destructive or not was really annoying (and off point to the topic). But since this IS the topic, here’s my thought on the matter.

First of all, I could easily return the clips in your example back to their original configuration without undo. Although, for the record, I consider the ability to undo an action as part of a way to determine when an action ISN’T destructive.

All you have to do is use the trim tool to roll the edges of the clips in the primary back underneath the connected clip and then reposition the connection point for the connected clip so it’s back over it’s original. Does it take several steps? Sure, but it’s still non-destructive in my mind. More importantly, you don’t lose the connection between clip and master at any point. Additionally, if you place a marker on either of the primary clips before overwriting with the connected clip, you’ll find they are still there when you roll the clip back with the trim tool. Completely non-destructive.

Now, contrast that with the Audio Mixdown in Avid. Here you set in/out and active tracks and then Avid makes brand new media with no relationship to the original clips, even combining multiple clips from different sources. The result is something that can’t be matched back to the original masters, has no relationship to anything other than itself and therefore is a truly destructive edit.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos

[Andy Neil]

I think dual boot is your best/only option. I have Mountain Lion and FCPX10.0.9 on one partition and fully updated on the other and it works well.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos

[Andy Neil]

Also, you can use the shortcuts to select the edges. ( [ = lt edge, ] = rt edge, and \= both edges ). Playhead needs to be on the cut so use the up/down arrows to place it. Then the period and comma keys will nudge the clip left and right one frame. Holding SHIFT increases that to 10 fr at a time.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos

[Andy Neil]

[David Cooke] “Wow, a totally different mindset, I think. So far, my 1st 2 “easy projects”, which would have taken about 2.5 hours in FCP 7, I spent about 12 hours in FCOP X.”

it certainly takes some time to get used to, but if it helps, I edit much faster in X nowadays than I ever did in FCP7, so there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos

[Andy Neil]

Not sure the question you’re asking, but if you downloaded Motion templates, then you need to put them in the Movies folder inside a folder called Motion Templates, broken up by category: Effects, Transitions, Generators, Titles. It’s possible that these templates have already been broken up into categories like this for you.

You don’t need Motion 5 to run templates inside FCPX, but the templates need to be in the correct location in order to be used there.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos

[Andy Neil]

And how long does it take to do that if you’ve never opened the app before? I’m sure you’ve played around with Automator and can do this sort of thing quickly, but not everybody has.

I didn’t say it was complicated or difficult, once you know how to use Automator. I’m just saying that if all you want to do is rename Finder files, downloading a free app that’s intuitive to use is less trouble that trying to figure out how automator works.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos