David Lawrence
2
COW Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
[Chris Tompkins] “Your not alone, I see this with the drop shadow effect too.
It was a problem with CS5.5 as well.”Yes, I’ve seen this with drop shadow effects as well, but in those cases, they weren’t a big enough deal to matter. In this case the gamma of the entire shot is wrong.
Adobe folks, any thoughts, advice?
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Jon Barrie] “Are you using a Cuda Card? Try to turn that off and work in Software only mode. The setting with CUDA puts the export into linear color space, which lifts the Gamma, turning it off takes you out of the color space change.”
Jon, thanks for the reply.
No, I’m still using my late 2008 unibody Macbook Pro so no CUDA. Software only Mercury Engine. Also, the gamma lift only presents itself on this one opacity effect. Gamma on the rest of the video is fine. Any other suggestions?
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
Great post Jeremy, thank you. I can really understand what you like about working in FCPX. Makes sense. After 10.0.6 is released and I upgrade to a new system, I’ll try FCPX again in the ways you describe.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Walter Soyka] “I suppose it’s worth noting that Avid has had adjustment layers for years (you can add effects to filler and it works as an adjustment layer), and FCPX has a clever hack for adjustment layers via a blank title template.”
Good point. My main gripe with filler on the Avid used to be that it’s like gaps in FCPX. You have to use it to fill empty space. But Avid editors always talked about its utility and now I understand why.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Jeremy Garchow] “Until you hit a totally rediculous collision error. Back to nipping and tucking until it allows you to move where you want. “
True, it’s a pain but I rarely run into this.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Again, I bow. I simply don’t see it this way at all. “
vive la différence!
[Jeremy Garchow] “The problem was that the position tool wouldn’t leave a gap when dragging a gap. Now it does.”
Yes. That was the bug (awesome QA testing). Glad it’s fixed.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Your example would look completely different if you used 10.0.5. “
I never bothered installing 10.0.5 because by then, I had replaced my internal HD for a larger one and built a very streamline system (only FCP7, none of the other studio 3 applications, and Adobe Production Premium) Maybe I’ll put the old drive in the dock and give it a try. I’d be curious to see how it works now.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Jeremy Garchow] “How could you attach to a cut when there are only frames to attach to. A cut isn’t an entity, it’s simply a frame from a different clip, or from a different point in time on the same clip.”
A cut is an infinitely thin slice of time between frames 😉
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Jeremy Garchow] “To me, this is no different than needing to arrange tracks to make too for new material, or protect fcp7 from throwing a clip collision warning, or simply dealing with the nature of tracks.
You still have to edit with FCPX. You still have to make sure things are in the proper place.
With its non destructive timeline that might mean pulling a connected clip back in to the right stacking order.
It’s not that big of a deal to me.
In 7, you’d make room for this edit before you moved the clips, or perhaps you’d select all clips to the right and move the clips a little, then trim some things out of the way, or make more room by putting a clip or two in a different track, and essentially nip/tuck/nip/tuck your way in to ensure everything is exactly selected/deselected as needed as FCP7 can’t deal with this edit on its own. It sometime won’t even let you make a move like this if there’s “objects” that it finds in the way.”
Here’s what I see is the big difference:
In FCP7, I plan and make all of those arrangements myself before I make the edit. Everything is always under my control and the results of my actions are always what I expect, because I’m the one making them.
In FCPX, the software automatically reflows in ways I can never predict. In doing so, it changes my edits without asking me. Then after the fact, I have to go back and fix whatever changes it decided to make. I don’t like that. It feels like a backwards way of working. I want full control over everthing.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Have you tried this move with the bug fixed?”
I remember trying 10.0.4 specifically to see if they had fixed the bug and I think I posted something here when I found that they did. But other than that, I didn’t test to see how the connected clips behaved. I was just happy someone at Apple was paying attention.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[tony west] “Yes, for me it would have to be 64 vs 64
A 32 bit program just was not going to work for me once I had a choice of 64
It was just a matter of which 64 program”
Agreed, there’s no going back once you get used to it.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Jeremy Garchow] “I am starting to feel like a troll. I’m not trying to be, I apologize. “
No need to apologize. We’re clearly not explaining well.
[Jeremy Garchow] “So, let me ask another way.
If your project has no broll, its only “A-Roll” FCPX is somehow not setup to edit it?”
You mean cutting in the primary only? Sure you can do that. Or if you work like Charlie Austin, you can just cut with connected clips. But I don’t think that’s what the FCPX designers intended.
I think of any connected footage as B footage. Content doesn’t matter. If it’s connected, it’s B because it’s a child of the A parent.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Jeremy Garchow] “I’ll ask again, how is FCPX an a/b convention?”
Here’s how I see it:
Primary = A
Anything connected to Primary = BLike Walter said, the A/B model is conceptual, rather than purely literal. I don’t know of anyone saying FCPX is exclusively for A/B editing. Rather, the argument we’re making is that the A/B editing model is what FCPX’s design is optimized for.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl