Charlie Austin
Forum Replies Created
-
[Gary Huff] “But here’s the thing, it totally comes across as a “you just don’t get it” statement. I have done an entire project in FCPX, and had both good times and bad. But, at the end of the day, it was simply refreshing for me to return to Premiere for then next project.
Fair enough, but I really didn’t mean it in the seemingly condescending way that statement has been made at times. I was just describing a sort of “aha!” moment that seems pretty common when you use… really any new software.
[Gary Huff] I feel like I know FCPX pretty well, and I absolutely do not hate it. But it’s a little too “pretty” in a way that takes up screen real-estate (not that Premiere couldn’t use some UI overhaul itself), and ultimately it’s just a different way of doing things…nothing of which I felt saved me time or headache.
I agree with you to some extent regarding the “prettiness”, though in my workflow I find it pretty functional and it does save me time and headache. I also think the UI offers some interesting possibilities for added features. There’s a lot of empty space. 😉 The speed at which X is evolving/improving is part of it’s appeal for me…
[Gary Huff] [Charlie Austin] ” I’m curious what you felt was fighting you.”
Replacing clips in the timeline. My project was a music video and so it’s the constantly evolving piece. I found that the clips would go out of sync with the music if you tried to replace or trim anything (say you wanted to shorten one clip and extend another to keep everything else surrounding it in time with the music, but just wanted to trim up a particular section to make it work better. FCPX would constantly move things around on you and when you selected the mode to add the gaps, then you’d have to remove the gaps, sometimes which left just the littlest black space in the video…totally annoying).”
The X timeline definitely needs some better ways to stop things from moving if you don’t want them to. The tilde key is a huge improvement, but it falls short in some fairly significant situations. Match frame replace also needs to return. I know that Apple is aware of this stuff though, and I know they’re serious about improving it, so it’s perhaps not as frustrating to me. It’s not a show stopper in my workflow, but even so, I think they’ll fix this stuff.
As Steve and Craig point out, X has a different workflow than 7 or Pr. Again, I don’t think it’s meant in a “you don’t have the keys to the castle” way. 🙂 If an editor moves from 7 or Pr to Media Composer without having used it before, they would have the same problem, if you can call it that. Ever watched an editor who’s learned to cut on 7 or Pr use MC composer for the first time? It’s hilarious. :evilgrin:
Ultimately, one NLE isn’t “better” than the other except to the individual staring at the empty timeline feeling wondering how they’re gonna fill it up. Personally I like staring at an empty X timeline. It’s pretty. 🙂
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Marcus Moore] “But just like everyone else I’d like to see an expanded TC display. Probably as a HUD you can keep wherever you like.”
Dumb question, but have you sent feedback to Apple requesting this? I think in many cases they prioritize added features based on the number of requests they get. Unless the requests are to bring back fixed tracks. 🙂
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Gary Huff] “The problem is that the “revolution” in editing is primarily the magnetic timeline…which doesn’t exactly engender warm fuzzies…plenty of people touting workarounds to get around that magnetic timeline. In my own experience, I found it worked for me about 40-50% of the time, with the rest of the time it fought me in what I wanted to do.
I agree about the “warm fuzzies”, and I also agree that magnetism, in it’s current state, sometimes requires workarounds. I’m curious what you felt was fighting you. For me, the ability to group for visual and editorial organization, bus roles for mixing, and the ability to temporarily “lock” Roles would solve 99% of the issues I have. Even now though, as far as the actual mechanics of cutting, It really is a revolution for me. I jump back and forth between various NLE’s, mostly 7 and X, but I have been in and out of Pr and MC recently as well. I feel like you do about X when I’m in the others. I’m fighting the rigidity of the timelines. Unlike some, I’m pretty confidant that Apple will improve the areas I noted above.
[Gary Huff] Everything else in FCPX is basically a “faster horse”, save for the database functionality which has already existed before (FCP Server) and has dubious benefit for someone like myself who tends to work on a one project basis and then archives it off into cold storage.”
Makes sense. For me, the database functionality of X is a huge benefit. Yes, all NLE’s use metadata, some more than others, but the implementation in X saves me enormous amounts of time. Especially on jobs with boatloads of sources to slog through. I get that not everyone works the same way, and what works for me won’t work for someone else.
Ultimately it really does come down to preference. At this point, IMO, the only major things lacking (there are plenty of little things, but no show stoppers -for me- really) in X are the TL improvements noted above, and better collaborative workflow options. The ability for multiple editors to simultaneously work with the same events/projects would be great for large organizations, and I’m confidant Apple is on this. As far as simply sharing or handing sequences and/or events back and forth like we’ve all done in FCP 7, X is pretty much there after the last update. Duplicate, give copy to other editor, they open it and go. Actually I only mention this because I just figured out an easy way to do it for our workflow 🙂
It was easier to go from MC to FCP back in the day, and it’s easier to move from 7 to Pr now. They look, and work, pretty much the same. MC is a stretch for people who’ve only worked on FCP, but at least it looks familiar. Ya know, what with tracks and all. 😉 I really believe that using X requires an editor to get over a sort of “hump” before it feels right. That’s pretty much true of learning any new software though right? And I think that many folks, particularly those who are busy, don’t get there. Whether due to time constraints, or just feeling like it’s not worth it. That’s not a “you just don’t get it” statement, I had to push myself to get over it. For me, it was worth it. For others, maybe not. All I can tell you is that I spend more time cursing at the screen in other NLE’s now because of all the stuff I now take for granted that they can’t do. YMMV. 🙂
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[dan crouch] “Thanks for the post Charlie,
I have now found the settings and will try a few things.I’ve just set the timeline to most common aspect ratio and I’ve resized jpeg in photoshop.
I have to export it it Vimeo each time to see if it works!”cool… As I said, in addition to the Project (sequence) settings, you can also change each clips’ Spatial conform setting in the inspector. It could be a combination of project aspect ratio, and each clips setting. Just fiddle around, that’s how I figure this sort of thing out.. lol I hope you’re messing with a copy of your original. 😉 Hope it works!.
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[dan crouch] “Thanks for the post,
I still can’t seem to find the sequence settings. I can see the ratio’s in the inspector of the
clips but not the sequence settings.There is a jpeg, 3600 x 2400, some TV stuff at 768 x 576 and film stuff at 1024 x 576.
Here is a linl to the problem.I think the jpeg photo at the top is too big, but it all looks fine on the timeline.
Thanks again in advance for any help.”
If you have the project (sequence) open in the timeline and select “Project Properties” from the “File” menu. it will switch to library view, open the inspector and you should see the wrench icon in the lower right of the inspector window.
it does seem like the project size is too big. Another thing to maybe try, is to click on each clip in the timeline, open the inspector “video” tab, scroll down to “Spatial Conform”, and see what that is set on for each clip. Try changing that setting and see what happens. I wish I could say “do this..” but I can’t. Just some suggestions…
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[dan crouch] “I have just tried it aka a master file, and then upload but it’s the same problem.
Can you please tell me how to adjust sequence settings? I think that is the problem.V new to Fcp x.”
The sequence (fcpx project) settings can be found by selecting the sequence in the project library, and opening the inspector. At the lower left corner of the inspector window you’ll see a little wrench button. clicking that opens the timeline/project settings pane. As with everything, I’d duplicate the sequence and make changes to the duplicate just in case. Hope this helps…
Also… does the Master File you exported look OK?
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Greg Andonian] “[Charlie Austin] if you prefer X and your “sticking points” are collaboration and/or better audio capabilities, I think waiting a bit longer, assuming you can, might be worth it. Just based on my own speculation… Not any actual facts or anything.
I say go with Premiere. It has what you need, RIGHT NOW, so there won’t be any more uncertainty. And you’ll be dealing with a company that really cares about what’s going on and will communicate with you, instead of one that lives on a high mountain behind closed iron doors.”
If Pr is a better fit for someone, absolutely. But if you like X, switching to something else RIGHT NOW because you think Apple is just sitting still is, to me, not a great reason. That’s all. Also, I’m pretty sure Apple does care what’s going on, and even though we don’t hear about it, I bet they do communicate with people. I know I’ve gotten follow up responses to feedback forms I’ve submitted. Just because they’re not trolling around on user forums doesn’t mean they’re not doing anything IMHO. Now, whether or not they should troll around on forums is another subject altogether…
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Angelo Lorenzo] “I’m a PC guy, my Mac hardware is pretty aged otherwise I’d give the demo a try. My last post isn’t meant to be belligerent so much as, on the surface, I don’t see anything enticing for the way I work.”
Didn’t see it as belligerent, just suggesting checking out. 🙂
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Angelo Lorenzo] “Now I haven’t used FCPX, but from all accounts…”
You should try it.
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Chris Harlan] “[Charlie Austin] “Apple already skated to the puck, but that puck is in a scary neighborhood for some folks right now.
”Or at least a neighborhood without proper streets, and no way of telling which lane the cars are actually in.”
LOL… Yeah, that too. For now. 🙂
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~