Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
Ah, Brother Bill; you have shown me the light!
-
[Andrew Richards] “1) Isn’t this a perfect use case for compound clips? You cluster your audio into a nest and it acts as a unit, but you can explode it to make fine adjustments at will.
2) You can either pin the audio to the first or second clip, at the head or tail (normal vs backtimed clip connections). Or you can make a compound clip out of the clips with transition and pin to that.
3-5) This where metadata shines. Your track assignments in a fixed track timeline are immutable. With roles assigned as metadata for each audio clip, you get to assign output based on role and not have to put any effort into maneuvering your clips into different tracks to meet an output requirement. At least that’s how Apple stated it would work in their FAQ. Further, you can quickly select and disable audio channels by searching the timeline using the same metadata.
6) Tag Temp VO accordingly and it can be located and disabled very easily. Aligning finished VO doesn’t require a free track (since there aren’t tracks), only that you can easily locate the temp VO chunk by chunk to lay in the finished VO.
7) Can’t generalize an answer for this one. I know one of the recent videos touched on overlapping audio though. I guess it depends on the situation.
“You are missing the big picture. It is not that you can’t do a bunch of these things individually. It is that you have to coordinate them all together. As you are building your piece you need to see the structure, not hide it away. The timeline is a map. I can go through and point out a number of things I disagree with you about in your list above–compound clips being more useful on a sfx cluster than a lasso and cut and paste, for instance–but the bottom line is that the magnetic timeline routinely destroys visual/spatial relationships that are very, very useful. I like metadata. I do many searches. I would like those searches to be easier and more powerful, but none of that is anywhere as useful to me as being able to see a visual schematic of the piece I’m working on.
And none of what you are suggesting is easier. When I import sfx to the timeline I put them on an sfx track. I’ve placed something where I want it, and I’ve defined it. I’ve given myself a visual representation. I don’t need to do anything else. All done.
-
I’m sorry. How can this be confusing to you? Apple has publicly stated the manner in which they plan to eventually support audio track-like export and it does not include reinstating tracks, so needs I was talking about above won’t change.
-
[Andrew Richards] “Facts I do not dispute and facts that are off topic. Here I’m exploring whether or not the magnetic timeline can be used effectively for complex edits. I’m well aware of FCPX’s other documented shortcomings.
“Whoa! You’re about as controlling, there, as the FCP X timeline, aren’t ya? I think if you actually paddle back a bit, you’ll see that I was making a direct response to one of your statements, so if anyone is “off-topic” its you.
But hey, let’s pretend that “off topic” isn’t French for “shut up,” and I’ll show you why it is exactly on topic for what you want to talk about. I’m thinking you just can’t see it because you are, as you say, more of an engineer.
You want a normal everyday timeline that is too complicated for FCP X? Look at audio tracks, and how they are clustered. My default track set up goes like this:
1-4: DIA / SOT
5/6: VO
7-10: SFX
11-16: MU
This allows me to not only deliver the wide variety of stems that my clients require, but to visually organize the many, many audio cues. For instance, 1) I often create a single sfx out of multiple sfx in a cluster that spans all four tracks–say part of a gunshot, thunder, a whoosh, and a bit of timpani. 2) There are often overlapping sfx around or near a transition that are actually related to the separate pieces of video on either side, but need to exist only in the no man’s land of the transition. 3) Depending on delivery requirements, some SFX–which I relegate to tracks 9 & 10–need to be reclassified as music. 4) Sometimes a portion of the SOT elements–say track three from a four track input– needs to be reclassified as sfx, but remain available to be delivered on a SOT track, 5) On some projects, entire layers of audio sfx–say a particular whoosh for all wind wipes–needs to be turned on and off so that an alternate audio track of, say, swishes can be heard, 6) Temp VO needs to easily spotable on track 5, with free track 6 to allow precise placement of new VO. 7) Overlapping dialog can have a very complicated relationship that can easily be mapped in time, but not in relationship.
There is so much more, but you get the idea. This is average complexity for a :30 episodic, involving 14-16 audio tracks, and 10–40 clusters of non-SOT events. It is very easy to manage visually on a traditional time line. Even if/when they get stem export happening, “average” would still be a nasty thing to try and manage with FCP X. God forbid it would ever actually get complex.
-
[Andrew Richards] ” Likewise it is only fair that the accusations of FCPX’s timeline being “unusable” be substantiated. “
But they have been over and over again.
For me personally:
1) I can’t create deliverables by making individual audio stems, nor can I make other required combinations like M&E tracks. Nor can I build multi-track Quicktime audio files with isolated audio tracks.
2) I can’t view picture on an external broadcast monitor other than in preview.
3) I cannot interoperate with any other video or audio program, other than a one-sided 3rd party OMF export.
These aren’t opinions. These are facts. Other people have other facts to add to this. You know what many of them are because they DO get detailed. I have a number of other things I dislike about X, from its lack of window modularity and its dogmatic approach to editing to its candy-like interface and its dumbed-down tool-set. Those are opinions. And while it might seem obvious to me that having all slip and roll tools separated from each other by single keystrokes makes for faster editing once you know what you are doing, I acknowledge that that is an opinion, and will generally preface a statement like that with “I find” and/or for me. The above numbered items ARE facts.
-
You know, you say all this Andy, but the claim is constantly being made that X represents a revolution in editing, and is much, much faster. I think it is fair for people to ask for that to be substantiated.
-
It does have that OS 8 vibe, don’t it?!
-
Hey Greg.
Here’s my story. I’m a promo producer/editor working in Los Angeles, mainly in domestic/foreign television. I work for Studios, Networks, Cable Channels, both large and boutique entertainment advertising firms, or for shows, themselves. I most often work on my own equipment, but frequently work on workstations provided for me. I’ve worked professionally on six different NLE’s, and have played with many others.
For what it is worth, here is my advice:
1) Look around you and see what your environment is, and where you want to be.
I am interdependent with many, many people. My very first concern is where they will all be in just a few years. So ask yourself, who do you need to be working with? Who is going to hire you to sit for a day at their keyboard while they are at their cousin’s wedding? Who are you going to hire to help you out when you end up with 60 hours of worth of work in a three day slot? What Post houses are you going to work with? What will you delivery requirements be? Then, talk with them and decide where you need your muscle memory to be.
For me, the answer is Avid. Not so much because it puts Premiere to shame, but because the consensus of people around me is that that is the answer. I like Premiere, own it, and will use it from time to time. Some Boutique design houses here in LA may even move to it because of its relationship to AE, but the general feeling here is that the gains made by FCP over the last six or seven years, especially in the boutique advertising world, will revert to Media Composer, which has improved a great deal since 2.8, when many people here slid into the FCP world.
If I were an island, I would continue with FCP7 as my main NLE, but I need to begin transfer muscle memory now. I figure FCS 3 has two to three serious years left here. On my system, I will begin cutting more and more with Media Composer even though I might prefer FCP 7. I will also continue to watch X to see if evolves into something I can use in my work flow. I will play with every NLE that comes along. But I need my fingers to know one thing particularly well, and Hollywood has pretty much decided that that should be Avid.
-
Really? May I suggest that you need to develop your interpretive skills just a bit?
-
Ah! Well, more the gentleman for acknowledging it!
I’m waiting on client notes right now. That’s my excuse.