Carsten Orlt
Forum Replies Created
-
Point taken 🙂
Nevertheless the example doesn’t work for current NLE’s because the change is not big enough.
I still could edit on Avid after 10 years not using it and working for at least the last 2 years on FCP X. It was like riding a clunky old bike 🙂 I didn’t like it but it got me from A to B.
Happy editing
Carsten -
[Craig Seeman] “I can’t help but see that as inefficient given the number of reports they’re dealing with. I personally can’t remember the dates I’ve submitted issues.”
Why should they if you can’t?
With all due respect I think we collectively overestimate our own importance just because we can send something ‘directly’ to the source.
As you have rightly said they must look at a huge amount of feedback on a daily bases. I really don’t envy the guys and girls who have to through this 🙂Adding a case number would only add to the workload and would create a lot of numbers for very little gain and I would assume the majority of bug reports are user mistakes (yep done that myself) and the rest is well minded but nevertheless very personal feature request who do not serve the ‘greater good’
My philosophy is that I give as little feedback as possible, try to only submit bugs if I can reproduce them 100%, and spent my time working out how I can avoid the normal pitfalls any software has, hoping they will iron out more and more stuff over time.
Happy editing
Carsten -
Now this is a thread that really brings back the debate header of this forum 🙂
I disagree though that it confirms the ‘why FCPX doesn’t work’. It would do so if Final cut X’s timeline would flow from right to left. This would be a fundamental messing with your brain scenario that would take years to master. Unless of course your native language wrights from right to left (which throws up the interesting question if people who’s native language is written right to left have problems in the beginning working with any NLE?)
When editing moved to the computer all what was there before had tracks. This was a physical given and not by choice. Physical machines can only have tracks (at least to my knowledge) So when translating this to a computer it was the reference to work from. The computer of course made it way more flexible to work with those tracks. But it still had the problems of tracks. Track assigning, Synch between tracks. Keeping video and audio that belongs to each other together. You as the user had to deal with them to not mess up the result. Of course you learned to deal with them and it looked like they were no problems anymore. But finding a way to deal with the problem doesn’t change the fact that it is a problem and requires work. If it wouldn’t be a problem NLE’s wouldn’t have invented sync indicators, auto track assigning etc. These were all inventions that tried to minimise the effect of the problem. But the problem remains. You can of course stop there and say you’re happy with the status quo. This would be the end of the debate 🙂
Now I think that Apple thought let’s look at these problems (and the rest of how you work with an NLE) and say ‘let’s see if we can come up with a model that avoids the above mentioned issues. The result is the magnetic timeline (bad name I think but that’s what it is)
Here now the debate. By creating a model that avoids track assignment, sync issues and video/audio pairing problems did they create bigger problems somewhere else? The answer to that lies with the user. For me definitely not. Quite the opposite. I actually gained a lot of possibilities that I didn’t have before. To be able to freely edit within a secondary to make music fit or edit soundbites without affecting the rest or loosing sync somewhere down the line are huge advantages in creative freedom. Of course you can get the same end result with a track based system, after all I edited just fine before, but now I do not have to think about a lot of stuff when I simply want to shorten a soundbite. I work only in the section I want to and don’t worry about anything 20 min down the line which I had to do before.
That audio is now sample based is one of the biggest advantages. And the clever way of clip containers where audio following video frames to stay in sync but be able to adjust audio still on a sample base at edit points or when applying keyframes for volume changes is just magical. Sync indicators rest in piece.But there is no free lunch of course. Having no tracks means no more easy visual feedback of content like where is the music and where is the fx. For me that is something I can easily live with because I do not need it when working in the section I’m in. I do not need the overview because it doesn’t inform my edit decisions. It might let me find the fx clip a fraction quicker if I want to change the volume but I loose 10x more time dealing with tracks overall e.g. when changing something at min 10 in a 50 min piece.
FCPX is not riding a bike with the steering reversed. It’s a bike where somebody modified the controls like gear change and bell to a position that they think is more economical when using it. I happen to agree 🙂
Happy editing
Carsten -
[Bill Davis] “I know it’s a well understood system that developed over time and all that – but at some point, it’s possible that following rules designed for the days when electro-magnetic multitrack head stacks ruled the industry might be limiting when nearly nobody is using mag tape anymore.
Me? I just want to get my work done fast and well and not waste so much time and energy struggling against my NLE anymore. I didn’t realize that’s what my $299 was buying me. But looking back, turns out it was precisely that. YMMV.”
Nicely said 🙂
Gotta admire everybody’s energy to keep discussing this. And if we are really really honest we all know that it doesn’t matter but for our ego’s 🙂
Happy editing
Carsten -
Oliver,
Taking to the risk to upset you but for me these examples are a weak justification for tracks. Granted we’re all different and different things apply to different people but we can’t use this to cut down any discussion at the source. I argue that I haven’t heart yet one strong ‘game changing’ argument as to why tracks are so much better. All pro arguments are basically about convenience as I haven’t heart one which says ‘you can’t get the same result for your story because you don’t have tracks’. And the convenience is more about finishing work rather than actual editing. And benefits for editing far outweigh benefits for fx work in my judgment of a Non-Linear-EDITING software. And referencing to other discussion threats here: Yes I think Final Cut X is by far the best editing software right now.
In response to your points:
The video example can easily be solved by compounding and applying a global parameter there.
For Audio actually the same applies though I understand if you need to adjust a level of an element you have to step back in and do not hear it together with your final fx. So you might have to press command-left or right bracket to switch between compound content and compound clip a few times to get it right.BUT I regard both these examples as only maybe 2% of the work I do when editing. Why would I sacrifice a little inconvenience for such small amount of my task when I loose all the tremendous benefits while doing 98% of the work constructing a story from individual elements just because I stick to tracks. This is the reason why I don’t understand the tracks argument.
If you would tell me that all you do all day long is to apply global parameters to entire timelines I would gladly admit that tracks are the best system for you. But do you? And yes maybe there are many ways to edit but somehow I’m not convinced that I represent the minority of picture editors who spent more time editing than with fx on a show.
And calling on Motion at the end of your post to further your argument is not correct because Motion has Layers not tracks. These Layers can have a length compared to Photoshop where they represent a single frame. But in Motion you can’t edit in a Layer horizontally so its not a track 🙂
Logic is the only software which has tracks and I can’t really argue about the benefit of tracks in music/sound post as I’m not doing it full time. I guess in audio mixing you want to combine certain audio tracks into different mix combinations and a track base system makes that easier now. But thinking of roles you can envision a scenario where you wouldn’t have to have tracks even in a DAW.Happy editing
Carsten -
He asked – I answered normally – then he replies in a very ironic tone – then I reply the same while still making a valid (not necessary in this case) argument – now you call me passive aggressive.
Hmm. As I said before I guess I will never understand 🙂
Happy editing
Carsten -
[Andrew Kimery] “One situation it’s not well suited for is large, shared-storage,…..”
Both are technical reasons. The first one I’m not sure as I haven’t tried it but seen stories were people use it happily with multiple users. Can you be more specific what FCP X can’t do in these environments?
If my only reason to choose an given NLE is because I want a Windows box then I’m not making decisions because of best workflow but because of money. I rather pick the best workflow. We’re not talking here about something set in from of you and you get the job if you use this piece of equipment, but what you choose if you were the boss 🙂
Happy editing
Carsten -
[Andrew Kimery] “Wild guess here, but in your opinion, is X the best NLE regardless of the situation?”
I don’t about that but it is the only one I need to edit everything. I rather become an expert on one advanced (and hopefully further advancing) NLE than an average user on many NLE’s (because I can’t remember them all after a while).
Happy editing
Carsten -
[Oliver Peters] “There are plenty of things that X is not well-suited for, just as there are things that tracks are not well-suited for.”
Ok walk the talk and tell me what exactly it is not suited for and why??
PS:
[Oliver Peters] “Tossing in the argument that tracks are somehow old and no longer valid and that those people are “clinging to the past” is exactly the sort of unproductive thing said here, that most FCP X-enthusiasts deny ever saying”Never denied it. But tracks are old and rather than using the word ‘valid’ I would use the word ‘necessary’. Maybe the ‘clinging to the past’ was a bit provocative but nothing better than a little provocation to wake up the church 🙂
Happy editing
Carsten -
[David Roth Weiss] ” And, until the majority embraces your belief system, should probably learn to expect and respect opinions that are different from your own.”
Don’t worry I do not come over tomorrow and take away your tracks.
I just don’t get why so many think tracks are better. The only thing I can see is so your timeline looks pretty 🙂 This is not ironic but I actually mean it.
I probably will never understand why even though I edited 20 years with tracks…Happy editing
Carsten