[Boyd Mccollum]

Hi Jim,

I’m glad you decided to post back with your decision, it’s always nice to find out how a story ends, especially on these forums (e.g., did the problem get resolved, which solution worked, etc.)

Just a couple of quick questions/observations:

[Jimwww] “You can round-trip all you want, you just can’t any longer change your video edits. Your work-flow must accept this constraint if you are to work with FCP and want more sophisticated audio editing abilities such as normalizing and real-time tweaking, both of which are not included in FCP.”

FCP audio editing may be basic compared to STP, Logic and Pro Tools, but it can do a lot and can accommodate most workflows. What type of normalizing and real-time tweaking are you talking about? In the vast majority of workflows, audio sweetening is done after picture lock. Before picture lock, FCP allows you to adjust your volumes, do fades, apply filters, apply keyframes to your adjustments and filters, etc. I’d be curious to know how these tools are inadequate in the initial editing phases.

The idea behind waiting for picture lock to do major audio and video image sweetening is: why spend time, energy, money, resources on footage or audio that may or may not actually be in your finished product.

[Jimwww] “This integration constraint was not obvious and I felt a need to spell it out for those considering FCP.

One of the reasons that the integration constraint you mention is not obvious is that it’s arises out of a very unique workflow. As some of my other posts have suggested, I think there are quite a few legitimate workflows out there, tailored to fit a specific style of editing. After all, the beauty of NLEs, and having several high quality NLEs to choose from (Avid, FCP, Premiere, Vegas), is that you can select one that fits what you need to do.

Having said that, one should acknowledge and understand where their specific workflow fits in the continuum. There’s a difference between a constraint that an NLE has with regards to a specific workflow, and whether that constraint is actually a limitation of the NLE itself. In your case, I don’t think it’s a limitation of FCP/STP, rather you have a specific workflow and Vegas does exactly what you need it to do.

[Jimwww] “Its not about capturing and its not about learning to work within the program. In my view, this is a basic technological disconnect between sound and video, imposed by FCP, that forces a workflow that restricts spontaneous/creative changes to both sound and video.”

To a certain degree it is about learning to work within the programs. You need to adapt or change workflows to the way it works and time to get fluent with how it works. FCP is what it is, in the same way Avid, Vegas and Premiere are what they are. It’s quite possible that STP with FCP 6 might have the capabities you need. The designers/software engineers are trying to make the best products they can to give the editor all the tools they need. If the feature set of one NLE doesn’t work for an editor, but another one does, then go with that NLE.

[Jimwww] I expected “Studio” integration.

It’s a bummer that FCP didn’t meet your needs or expectations and that you spent $$ on it to find out. However, I wouldn’t draw the conclusion that it there isn’t “Studio” integration because it lacked one specific feature set that is central to how you edit.

It’s also a bummer that the marketing, buzz and, often times, the sales folks, surrounding a product (whether it’s Apple, Adobe, Avid, Sony, Panasonic, etc.) isn’t nuanced or informative enough to let you know whether that specific product will work for your specific needs.

Regards,

Boyd

[Boyd Mccollum]

if you have your footage on 4 different tracks in the timeline, you can open each clip individually into the viewer, and adjust its scale attribute down to 25%, then reposition each clip in the canvas so they don’t overlap. After you make your initial edits, go back and rescale.

[Boyd Mccollum]

It sounds as if your media is either at a smaller frame size or your sequence is at a smaller frame size then standard NTSC (which is 720×480). First, check you sequence settings – do this by selecting the sequence in your browser then typing Cmd & 0 (the number zero) or go to the Menu Bar>Sequence>Settings… In the General Tab your Frame Size should be 720 x 480 and Aspect Ratio should be NTSC.

If your sequence settings are okay, check your clip properties. You can do this in the browser by scrolling the columns over on the right side until you see the column heading Frame Size. This should also be at 720×480.

If your clip settings are okay, the other thing you can check is the scaling of each individual clip in your timeline. In the timeline, double click a clip to open it in the viewer. At the top are usually 4 tabs (Video, Audio, Filters, Motion). Click the Motion tab and under Basic Motion check the scaling of the clip. It should be at 100. If you don’t see Scale under basic motion, click on the disclosure triangle next to the name.

Also, compare the settings of one of the cllps that is too small, with the slo-mo clip you said was the correct size. This might give you some clues the problem you’re facing.

Boyd
“Go slow to go fast”

[Boyd Mccollum]

Under the situation you describe, you can’t. But there are directing techniques that you can utilize: before the shoot, talk with him about what you want, what you need and be open to his/her suggestions. If there is time, you can always review some of the footage and make adjustments as necessary. Watch what he is shooting and where his focus is as events unfold – you should be able to make subtle adjustments on the fly, for instance, tap his shoulder, get his attention and point toward what the focus should be. You can also create some hand signals for tight shots, wide shots, etc. Don’t forget to talk with him about what’s going on during what ever it is you’re shooting. Ask him if he caught a specific moment or tell him where you think his focus should be at different times. Communication is the key.

The relationship between a director and a cameraman is one of trust and communication. Over time, perhaps not with this camera person specifically, you’ll be nurturing long term relationships that will pay huge dividends in the long run. Being able to work with other creative people is perhaps one of the most important core skills that is required for success in this business.

[Boyd Mccollum]

[riccardo zito] “i.e. I have a lot of clips all originating from the same media file. I want to have the whole uncut media file in a sequence with something ( a marker? ) telling me where the I and O points of all those clips are.”

Here’s a possible solution for what you want to do:

1. In the Browser, select the sequence you are working on
2. Do a Find (Cmd+F or Edit>Find)
3. In the Find window set the following critera:
a. Search: Project: Find Results;
b. For: Used Media – check “in selected sequences”
c. Results: Replace Find Results
4. Click “Find All”

You’ll get a Find Results window with all the clips being used in your sequence, with in and out points (actually with all the information that is available for those clips, the same as you’d see in your browser window)

You can then create and open a new sequence in the Timeline. Select all the clips in the Find Results window and drag them down at the same time onto the timeline.

Another, possibly better way, depending on what you are trying to do (I imagine get an idea of what you’ve already used) is to do the Find but look for UNUSED MEDIA in the selected sequence. This will help you determine what is still available for you to use.

These are Just a couple of suggestions. Not sure what you are trying to get at, as it’s rather an unorthodox workflow to do what you are asking. Again, I’m thinking that you really want to know what media is left that you can use, and searching for unused media would be the way to go.

[Boyd Mccollum]

I think there’s a general misconception that folks who capture an entire tape don’t log and just start editing haphazardly. This may be the case among some less experienced editors, but it’s not so among more experienced editors. The term is Log & Capture, but it could just as easily be stated as Capture & Log. In addition, there are workflows where you capture directly from the camera(s) into FCP, not to mention folks shooting with the HVX-200, where they capture directly to a P2 card, and then download into FCP. The term Capture (or having captured your footage) doesn’t mean you are ready to edit, nor does the term Log & Capture (or having logged & captured) mean that you are ready to edit either; the term Ready to Edit (and all the elements that go into using that term) means you’re to ready to edit 🙂

Another misconception seems to be that once you capture an entire tape and log it, that you are somehow stuck with entire tapes/clips for the duration of the edit. Using markers, subclips and bins, the common workflow would be to do what other editors who log first and capture in small chunks do – organize footage based on the requirements of the project at hand.

OTOH:

There are media/technical issues that need to be addressed, as Walter and others have brought up, when you capture an entire tape, especially if you will be sending clips to other apps such as Shake, Motion or STP (per the original topic of this thread). An entire tape or very long clips could prove to be problematic in many many instances. Again, It may not be problematic for every project, but that is a consideration that every editor should make when addressing the workflow they will be using. As I mentioned in my earlier post, one interesting workaround that bridges the two workflows (Log & Capture/Capture & Log) would be to capture an entire tape, log using markers, make subclips, batch export subclips as self-contained QT files, then delete the original tape capture.

At the end of the day, with the way technology changes so quickly, this entire discussion will probably be moot within a couple of years. We’re all going to wake up one day (sooner than later), and be living in a tapeless environment.

[Boyd Mccollum]

If you have FCP 4.5, it is only $199.

Here’s the link to Apple’s upgrade page: https://www.apple.com/universal/crossgrade/

[Boyd Mccollum]

I hear that!

Don’t forget that you can use the search feature here to look up stuff – it’s been a lifesaver for me in a pinch. Also, the Cow has an Apple Shake forum that you can post to.

[Boyd Mccollum]

Hi Jim,

you may want to cross post this question on the Cow’s “Apple Soundtrack” forum.

[Boyd Mccollum]

[walter biscardi] “Nobody I know captures entire tapes for editing no matter what NLE they’re running.”

Hello Walter,

Capturing entire tapes is a legitimate workflow in the world of documentaries. In many documentaries, there is no way to know which footage you need or don’t need at the beginning of the logging process. In addition, the logging process is often much more in-depth than what you find in other genres of filmmaking. For instance, not only will I log the in and out points of an interview and the topics covered, I’ll often do a verbatim transcript of the entire interview. I’ll then do that for all the main interviewees. I’ll then put together a paper edit, essentially building the script for the film out of the footage that I have.

For b-roll footage, I’ll have a simple log of what I have, but as the doc takes shape, the relative importance of b-roll footage changes. Something that seemed great when you captured it and were absolutely sure would make into the film, suddenly doesn’t fit. The reverse happens as well.

As for the one long clip vs. many individual clips, I learned an interesting workaround on this from Jerry Hofmann that combines the best of both worlds. After you capture your tape, log it using markers. Turn your markers into subclips then batch export the subclips as individual QT files. Then delete the original tape capture.

I’m a huge believer in logging footage. But I’m also a huge believer in leveraging the power available to me in the NLE to make that process more efficient – and I don’t mean efficient by by-passing necessary steps. In my case, shuttling/jogging/scrubbing back and forth through my footage is much quicker within FCP than with a deck, but I’m still interacting with the footage as an editor.

Regards,

Boyd
“Go slow to go fast”