Christian Schumacher
Forum Replies Created
-
[Bill Davis] “I’m doing end of year cleaning in the studio, and I just came across a big box of about 2 dozen AppleTalk boxes and maybe 150 feet of attendant cable.”
Are you sure this is an annual ritual you’re performing there?
[Bill Davis] “It seems SO old fashioned when compared to my MacBook Pro that does nearly everything the MacPro does, but without all the attached crap.”
But when its built-in battery dies out and it goes to replacement service at Apple…
What’s gonna be left in the Studio? 🙂 -
https://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/11/stale-mac-pro-lineup-has-pro-users-concerned.ars
The natives are getting restless…Apple have already thrown a lot in the trash bin.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] ” “Editing: Sex and Violence””
Being FCP X future-wise I’d say this is a good name, indeed.
Look at these possibilities, with an iPad and its motion-sensitivity;-a plugin for lonely editors to have sex with it
-a plugin for tough editors to practice some boxingWOW!
-
[Daniel Frome] “C’mon ’twas a joke. No wonder they us avid people are a little slow :p”
I need to further clarify that “Reveal File” works only when selecting one clip at a time. And also the MXF folder retains the tape names not the clip names, despite the fact that when “revealing” effects and file-based clips you get their names in there. So you’re quite right, Avid people must be slow, the reason why it took us a while to ramp up to 64b, I guess.
-
[Daniel Frome] ” I would gladly welcome them to search the schmorgasboard of my Avid Mediafiles/MXF folder! hah…good luck finding it! ;P”
You don’t need luck here, ‘cos there’s an ancient right-click command called “Reveal File” in which takes you to an open Finder window with your three files selected for your convenience (V1+A1+A2). You can see a print screen here that the MXF files retains some of the clip name, so it isn’t such a “mess” like was said nor you need luck to find them neither.
Just clarifying, not punching anyone for that matter. Occasionally, truth hurts a bit, nonetheless
-
Forget earthly made-up standards, Apple will only answer to a higher calling.
Watch those pieces quickly or they’ll vanish before your eyes:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD74iHFd-jE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TczeRzQ8DZ0
If someone bashes me for this…Please, let humor grow inside of you.
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
I believe Jeremy’s experience on searching in FCP legacy’s “Browser” is limited to a fat project with a massive bunch of clips in it. And I don’t think he is into long-form, as well.
A fast searching result is achieved when applied to specific Bins (and Projects) which should be organized beforehand. So, when working in the big ones that’s a necessary step to deal with. You have to know the best practices that go along with the tool you are working on. And I strongly believe the same applies to X as well, but in different scenarios, of course.
One more thing to consider is searching at a Sequence level when the “search command” is much faster and becomes a powerful tool to select a determined set of clips at once. When you combine searching in Browser along with searching in a Sequence, which can then hold those previous Bin results, you have both clean and organized interactions within your Projects. And there’s labels, markers, custom columns fields to add even more functionality to the tool.
I’m not saying FCP X Collections or its metadata capability are useless, mind you. But I think this came up after a fellow user argued if legacy’s searching functions even existed!!! So we had to chime in to point out that FCP 7 (when you know what you’re doing) can be capable of organizing big projects, hence its widespread use in professional and complex scenarios. But that doesn’t mean it was a simple or a perfect workflow BTW.
I believe FCP X is successful when allows a light user to achieve the same organizing results on its own simple way, and that’s a good thing to consider. But one has to equally consider the mileage that FCP 7 went through to handle those complex Projects that it did “in the past”. And it was far from buggy and useless, c’mon I think those adjectives fit in better with the new iteration of FCP, so watch out the language used at our beloved legacy software. It is prudent to wait until FCP X matures, until then use your helmets and take the heat.
-
In big projects I don’t get beach-balls, I get that tiny spinning reel.I understand they are quite different, no?
But I would have to check on that, since in those projects the editors always break them up in sections in order to avoid this kind of problems.The caveat with “Compound Clips” is that they increasingly bloat your project file further in time, as you create them. Not good. If you’re using it, you should know it. But it will get better, huh?
As I said, I can sift that resulting bin, like the “reel” column and get only the ones I want to see in order, This at the browser level selecting “used media” then I drag them to a sequence with “Show Duplicates” selected and voilá. Workarounds aren’t exclusive to FCP X 😉
I give you that X is more promising in that regard, but it’s not there yet-such a persistent adverb in here.
-
Actually, you can search not only for markers, but clips and timecode also.
When you search for clips at the sequence level, it simply selects them for you.
This works with transitions too and it is a very handy feature.Here’s link for a short description of how it works.
https://www.larryjordan.biz/finding-clips-in-final-cut-pro/
-
Perhaps this question would fit in better at the “FCP X Bug Techniques” Forum?
Sorry, I couldn’t help being immature.