Andy Neil
Forum Replies Created
-
This is one of those things where I think the designers considered all they could do with 64 bit processing (clip skimming, filmstrips in the timeline, big thumbnails and filmstrips in the browser, dynamic database searches, background transcoding) and didn’t consider the hardware limitations of current computers with large scale projects.
I too think it would be faster with list mode, and I also wonder just how fast ANY NLE would be searching for 3 clips amongst 16,000, but there does seem to be a fundamental issue with the priority given to the display of clips over the management of the database.
I would like to see the ability to turn off some of these “enhancements” when working on larger projects to keep it snappy.
I also think his suggestion is completely reasonable to have search looking through all the events if nothing is selected. Then you don’t have the problems of caching and building thumbnails for all those events.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[Alan Lacey] “Any tips about converting this to progressive before the edit?”
I always waited to convert to progressive when creating the QT used for the DVD. That way, the original material was still interlaced in case I needed it later for broadcast or something like that. In Compressor, you can create a progressive QT that looks pretty good from interlaced footage and then build the DVD from that.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Option left or right arrow shoves you forward/back one field at a time.”
Nice tip. Where’d you find that?
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[Alan Lacey]“if you can view individual fields in FCPX surely by selecting a suitable section of a clip and jogging through the fields you could check wether the field sequence is correct couldn’t you?”
You’re not viewing individual fields, you’re able to view either one (probably the dominant field), or both at the same time. I think only Avid is able to view either/or fields. I don’t know how well you can judge it by looking at both. Perhaps you can. Personally, if I know that a DVD will be viewed on both computers and set-top players, I try to make it a progressive DVD.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
You can usually quit a background task by clicking the background task monitor (the round icon in the middle beside the timecode display). That will open a HUD with all the current background processes which you can pause or cancel outright.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[walter biscardi]“As Shane said, that used to be the case, but now AMA is truly just about there for all formats. Just a few still need to be converted but for the most part you can just edit away using AMA.”
Is it no longer buggy? When I last used AMA (or tried to) in a post house, it tended to crash the machine. But it was an earlier iteration of it. Just wondering what still needs to be converted as oppposed to native editing and how stable it is overall.
Also, you still have to conform your edit to an Avid codec at the end, right?
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[Chris Harlan] “I love the K/L, K/J key combos, for instance, and have never quite understood why FCP didn’t incorporate that into its JKL setup.”
Are you refering to slo-mo forward and reverse? Because those same combos work in FCP.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[David Lawrence] “You mean the part called “editing”?”
Please. If that were called ‘editing’, then I wouldn’t have to clean up 70 percent of the sequences I get handed on a weekly basis. 🙂
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[Jaimie Franklin]“This seems to be arguing for arguments sake. FCS has a ton more flexibility and that is the only point that remains”
You’re just being dismissive. And you’re ignoring my point. You see FCP as some completely open system that allows you to work however you want and FCPX as a completely closed system that forces you into a particular workflow.
I’m saying that BOTH programs force you to work within the rules they are designed around. You proved my point when you said,
[Jaimie Franklin]“One of the functions I enjoy is duping a sequence spend the 5 seconds deleting unwanted tracks, binning the sequence with the appropriate tag.”
because you’re describing a workflow you’ve been forced to adopt in FCP to cover the need of exporting individual stems. Of course you are forgetting to calculate all the cumulative time you spent placing SFX and music and other audio elements on dedicated tracks and rearranging them during your edit so that it only took “5 seconds” at the end of your edit to delete unwanted tracks.
I get that you prefer to work in FCP7. Personally, I like FCP7 a lot. I always have. And it’s certainly true that FCPX has shortcomings. But it’s not a closed system. I don’t see how it can even be considered that since Apple is promising multicam editing next year. I just don’t agree with venerating FCP for the sake of tearing down FCPX.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-