Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Hmm.
Maybe I’m taking this the wrong way, but if you have something to say to me or about me, just say it. I’m a grown up.”
Oh, heavens, no. Just a joke. And I certainly meant no offense. Your well-reasoned arguments in support of X have been welcome conversation even where I disagree with you.
I’m assuming your “haters” line was meant somewhat in fun. Every time I hear some one use the word “haters” as a dismissive accusatory I think of this guy. Of course, after watching it he doesn’t say haters at all, so I’m not sure why I have such a strong association. Still, I thought it was funny to watch it and substitute in my head FCP X whenever he says “Brittany.”
Again, no offense meant; I was just riffing on your use of H8Rs.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Now what, haters!?
“Careful there Jeremy, or you’re going to end up as the “Leave Britney Alone” guy of the FCP X forum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHmvkRoEowc
Oh, and by the way, it is spelled H8tr.
-
[Bill Davis] “I don’t remember anyone on stage at the unveiling. (and I had a good seat) saying this is an “upgrade to” or even a “replacement” for FCP-7.”
Seriously?! This is beyond specious, Bill.
[Bill Davis] “The name is trivial. The change was not. It’s a fundamental thing that we’re responsible for changing in our brains. And it’s not Apple’s job to coddle us through the change by wasting time and effort on a useless IP search for a different name when they already own a perfectly good one.”
Really?! This is what you are going with?
[Bill Davis] “The game has changed – and so has what the brand “Final Cut Pro” stands for. It used to stand for a big program a lot like AVID and Premier. Now it stands for a completely alternative way to approach the tasks of manipulating digital motion and still content.”
The game has changed? Yeah, more than a decade ago, when cheep NLEs of all varieties began to appear. Magnetic frippery and an iPhoto-like database do not a new revolution make.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “No, but for the deliverable, then channel 9 on your timeline is now 16 on your tape. I don’t work that way. If there’s a problem and the dupe house calls and says, channel 16 is screwed, now I have to know that 16 is now 9. “
No, you just have to look at your channel output. But also, that’s what slates are for, and what standards are for. Studios and Networks, with no exception I know of, try to standardize deliverables across the board.
I really do not see an issue here.
-
[Bill Davis] “Isn’t this the crux of the whole thing, Herb?”
Sigh. Dale, you keep calling me Herb. No offense to Herb, who is a fine fellow in his own right, and a far better Herb than I could ever be.
[Bill Davis] “You’re bound and determined to see it in light of X being a “replacement” for Legacy.
“Well, since Apple offered it as one, that only seems reasonable. Don’t you think?
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “And without having to totally reshuffle your timeline when changes come or specs change.”
Jeremy, I’m not trying to be a contrarian, I just do not understand what you mean. Why do I have to totally reshuffle my timeline? All I have to do is reassign the channel out for any give track and it is done. If I have SFX on 7&8 but my client suddenly wants them on 15&16 all I have to do is a one simple click for each tack to reroute them. How is that somehow more difficult?
Maybe I just get what you are trying to say. I never have to “totally reshuffle” my timeline, even when delivery specs change. Am I misunderstanding you?
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “[Chris Harlan] “You just reassign the channel out. 2 becomes 5, 5 becomes 7, 3 becomes 9. All simple clicks.”
So are roles. That’s my point.
“Ah, sorry. I thought you were making the point the Roles was superior to tracks. I agree that Roles do almost as much as tracks do, without–of course–the visual organization.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Unless there’s something on your destination track. If the destination track is empty, then yes.
For instance, if you have an 8 channel deliverable and the specs change, you can’t simply switch two tracks without reshuffling the deck.”
Sure you can. You just add a track. And then delete the one you are moving from. But further, for deliverables, you don’t even need to do that. You just reassign the channel out. 2 becomes 5, 5 becomes 7, 3 becomes 9. All simple clicks.
[Jeremy Garchow] “In X, all this doesn’t matter as Roles can sort it out, layer order be damned. It does need a target system so the “Dialogue” Role for instance, can go to the corresponding Channel1 of the QT.
“I’m thinking that you don’t export a lot of audio stems. It really is far simpler in FCS than you seem to think it is.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Correct me if I’m wrong, but you can’t layer tracks as they are fixed. You can only move the contents of the track to another track. You can simply flip flop a1 with a10, or v1 with v5.”
I guess you are right technically, but you can use the “t” key to select everything on a single track, and the shift drag to another track, which is, in relation to media, effectively the same thing.
-
[Oliver Peters] “FCP Classic evolved into a great freeform Swiss Army Knife that fit many diverse workflows, from simple projects to features to large integrated facilities. Plus the software suite concept made it a great media hub around which you could structure your complete operation. FCP X simply isn’t that kind of an application. I doubt it will ever be that.
“Ultimately, that is my problem with the whole venture; its not that FCP X is a total failure, but rather that it does a very poor job of replacing FCS. In fact, “poor job” is kind. It just doesn’t replace it. FCP X is a tool that I will probably own once edl/xml export issues are worked out, but it is just too inflexible to replace FCS.