[Charlie Austin]

[Andy Field] “”Despite the FCPX Fans? LOL”

There isn’t a nit that isn’t picked on this forum….a refreshing change from that reading the snark free discussion here this week about PP7.”

Sorry if I misread your tone. Also, When has there been a snark free discussion of anything here? 🙂

————————————————————-

~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Andy Field] “and despite the FCP X fans, the FCP 7 veterans desperately want the look and feel of the old program with the speed and efficiency that PP CS7 offers.”

Despite the FCPX fans? lol I think it’s true that some fcp 7 veterans desperately want the look and feel of the old program. And some of us want something new. Lots of choices for editors now.

————————————————————-

~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Walter Soyka] “This is about the only place on the COW where software is discussed broadly and comparatively; the other forums tend to be more narrowly focused on the issues of actually using specific pieces of software.”

Good point. And I think folks who were hoping for a replacement for 7’s traditional timeline have a reason to be excited this week.

————————————————————-

~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Brent Cook] “I’m not anti-PP at all (in fact I plan on learning it) but I come here to read about FCPX.”

I agree, and I *own* PP. I think there are a lot of folks on this forum who seem to really need a familiar replacement for FCP “classic”. Now that PP sort of does most of the things classic did, – some better, some at least close – There is a lot of excitement. Once it dies down, maybe all the joy will move over to the PP forums where it belongs. Or not. 🙂

————————————————————-

~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[David Eaks] “Would you say Backups would be “good enough” on its own, or if you could only have one would it be Pro Versioner hands down?”

Hey David. I think Backup would be fine on it’s own. I like both apps, It’s not like I don’t trust one or the other, I had owned Pro Versioner for a while and just wanted to try backups. Can’t be too careful right? lol

————————————————————-

~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[David Eaks] “Pro Versioner looks good”

Pro versioner works well, I use both it an Back Ups, which is really nice. Doesn’t hurt to have 2 backups just in case.

https://npassociatesllc.com/backupsforfcp/

————————————————————-

~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Richard Cardonna] “In the vimeo video Mooney (is he related to the cow) implies thay they have copied from fcp.
knowing how apples recent court behavior, this could happen.”

I’m pretty sure Apple don’t care that Adobe is copying features from software they EOL’d 2 years ago…

————————————————————-

~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[David Powell] “Thanks charlie. It sound like you’re speaking of a clip by clip basis. I’m basically taking a long 3-4 hour multi cam sequence (project) and extracting what I dont like, leaving the selects there. You seem to be describing the process the other way around, but the problem is, I really have to make my selections based on what I’m cutting out more than what I’m leaving. So I guess the short answer is there is no persistent i/o in a project. Kinda baffling why the whole range selection was created. I’ve been using X for 6 months straight now, and I’ve seen no upside to it thus far.

Do you know offhand if there is a “mark to markers” command like in 7? That would essentially function as i/o’s for me in a project.”

Gotcha… I/O’s will stick, as long as you don’t click on a clip or in the empty space in the timeline, if that’s what you mean. So you can set an I and then use JKL or arrow or skim or drag in the TC bar and it’ll stick forever… or until you click a clip or empty TL space. 🙂 It took me a while to get used to them not sticking until I cleared them as in FCP “classic”…

As to Mark to Markers, not that I know of, but you can set markers, and then use the timeline index to go to them and set I/O’s which is similar I guess. I just tried it actually and it was kinda nice. just use the up/down arrows to move through the index, hit i/o as needed, delete, arrow to the next chunk. Fun. 🙂

————————————————————-

~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[David Powell] ” have yet to understand the advantage of Range vs I/O marks, but I’m opened minded and ready to be enlightened. When I have a long event laid out on the timeline, I like to go through it pick chunks to cut, and cut it down. Now after I’ve made my initial selection, I want to continue scrolling to find an appropriate outpoint, but as soon as I click anywhere, my selection is gone. This is a real pita when repeated over and over again.

Is there a way to make the selection persist? Any theories as to the benefits of the way this works vs i/o points that I am missing?
“

Are you trying to do this in a project (which is what X calls a sequence), or in the event browser. It sounds like you’re cutting a clip into a project (timeline) and cutting it up in there. If this is the case, you can do it, just don’t click in the actual timeline after setting an In point. If you want to scroll, drag the palyhead in the timecode strip at the top of the window or… use the skimmer. But, there’s an easier way if what you’re trying to do is just cut down longer clips before you edit….

In the Event browser filmstrip I/O’s are persistent. Event range behavior is really way too much to go into here, but to do what it sounds like you want… highlight your clip, play or skim through it and set your first I/O. Hit the F key. Continue through your clip to the end. I/O -F etc. Then Select the clip in the event browser, in the menu right above the beginning of the filmstrip select “Favorites” . Click the disclosure triangle next to the clip and you’ll see all the favorites you just made. You can either just use that view as your “selects” bin, or, creat a new project (timeline) , select all the favorites from the clip you just broke down, and press Q or D (or W or E) and presto!, a select sequence.

That was a simplistic, probably incomplete description. You can rename favorites, and this process becomes really powerful using Keywords. Keyword Collections, Favorites and Keywords, etc etc. That’s where range selection kicks ass. In the timeline ranges pretty much work like normal I/O points, just be careful where you click. 😉

————————————————————-

~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Julian Bowman] “It’s not the same. You highlight the clips (in itself taking longer than the f6 key I had bound) and then you do a cut and the highlight is removed, or remains to the left of the cut… so you need to highlight them all again to do the next cut. I often just go through and strike a handful of cuts, or sometimes across the length of a song on the beat.

Anyway, it is just a limitation of the design philosophy, and one that obviously not all editors using it will come across because not all editors edit in that manner. I do at times, therefore I would like to at least lock everything below the primary.
“

Got it, makes sense… The ability to maybe lock by Role would be nice. I think it would solve your issue… as well as the problem created when a chunk of cut music, which you don’t want to move as it’s cut relative to other music, is connected to a clip you’re moving. You can work around it with the ~ key, but if there are, say, FX connected to that clip that you “do” want to move with it, you either need to move the MX connection snorkel to another clip (if you can) or pop the clip out of the primary and drag everything old skool style.

So… I’m off to send feedback to Apple to suggest Role Locking. 🙂

————————————————————-

~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~