[Craig Seeman]

It’s been a while since I’ve used MPEGStreamclip but I believe Quality does nothing more than change the bit rate.

I wouldn’t recommend using MEPGStreamclip because it’s using Apple’s old H.264 codec which was not very good.

It’s better to use an x264 encoder (Handbrake) or Apple’s AVFoundation improved H.264 codec (nearly as good as x264) found in the current version of Compressor.

It’s not clear why you’re targeting a file size. Under what professional circumstances are you faced with that limit? BTW this would be the antithesis of using “Quality” as a target.

Once you target your bit rate you’d want to use CABAC Entropy and High Profile for better quality at a given bit rate but that depends on the ability to play back the file. Key frame rate can have an impact but that depends on the source content and intent of the file.

[Craig Seeman]

I like being able to see the handles (not always needed though) but I much prefer a two up that works when using the keyboard.

[Craig Seeman]

Tangerine shot on iPhone 5S
https://nofilmschool.com/2015/07/tangerine-sundance-iphone-5s-sean-baker-radium-cheung-interview
IMDB tech specs
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3824458/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec
Nominations and Awards
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3824458/awards?ref_=tt_awd

Of course there are limitation shooting on an iPhone but if a job can live within those limitations…
Keep in mind not everyone wants to live within those limitations.

[Craig Seeman]

The problem is an someone very experienced with other NLEs has no way to find synonyms.

One should be able to search Match Frame and find Reveal in Browser.
One might search Bin and find Keyword Collection and Smart Collection.

Of course none of the above are exactly the same. It’s not only new language but new features. But one should be able to use old familiar language to learn the new language.

Experienced editors jumping into FCPX can become frustrated because Apple does not include a Babel Fish.

Apple has this (FCPX for FCP7 users) but this isn’t found in the iBook Store and should really be integrated into the FCPX User Guide so one can search terms and find links to the pages with the synonymous functions.
https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/docs/Final_Cut_Pro_X_for_Final_Cut_Pro_7_Editors.pdf

[Craig Seeman]

Judging its utility is separate from finding the function itself. If one wants to find “Match Frame” in FCPX one must somehow discover that it is “Reveal in Browser.”

The frame and clip it matches to could be improved and the lack of “Reverse Match” (Reveal in StoryLine?) are certainly subject to debate but that’s outside the scope of the language which is the subject of this thread.

[Craig Seeman]

[Don Walker] ” the Match Frame function as I remember from my linear/AVID/FCP7 days doesn’t really exist in FCPX.
“

It’s Reveal in Browser. Shift-F

Perhaps your comment makes my point.
Granted it’s not quite the same thing but there’s no easy way for someone to find near equivalent functions for many functions in FCPX.

[Craig Seeman]

[Oliver Peters] “I just wonder what others think about this and FCPX’s positioning versus “establish” concepts, terms, analogies, and metaphors.”

The biggest challenge is the lack of translation in the User Guide. Imagine an editor coming from any other NLE trying to search for “Match Frame.” It just isn’t there and they have absolutely no easy way to know what the equivalent feature is in FCPX. Such editor might leave in frustration with the mistaken believe that such function doesn’t exist.

[Craig Seeman]

I think viewers may learn a bit about what features and workflows are paramount to certain editors. It’s not one NLE is “better” than another but that those who need specific features or workflows may find a better reason to be multi NLE proficient. Making it adversarial invites more pointed critiques in the comparisons otherwise it would simply, “why I love my NLE” with no mention of “why mine, not yours.”

[Craig Seeman]

Is there going to be a protest by DaVinci Resolve editors?

[Craig Seeman]

[John Michaels] “I’m sure disabling this (setting it to full frame active picture) would get rid of the bars, but again, aren’t they supposed to be there for 486 material?”

I think you should get rid of the bars especially if that’s what they want. As to the 6 lines, HD to SD conversion can involve going to 720×480 source and one would need to add the lines (4 on top, 2 bottom as you mention) to get a 486 standard for broadcast. Those lines wouldn’t be visible due to TV overscan.That wouldn’t be VBI though. It its not for broadcast it can be left at 720×480 (DVD for example).

This is why I wonder what the intent is. Might there be a next stage where someone will add pull down frames and interlace? If it’s for DVD use 720×480 would be fine. In fact one might do 720×480 anamorphic for SD 16×9 to keep the aspect ratio.

VBI would be 720×512. This is how I would deliver SD broadcast spots back in the day to DGFastchannel for distribution.