[Douglas K. dempsey]

Might have read your post too quickly, but it sounds like you moved the position of jpeg BEFORE setting new keyframe. E.g, set 2nd keyframe later on timeline, without touching position, so THAT keyframe represents the end point of a “hold position” duration. Then move cursor to new position, set another keyframe, THEN change position. If you did all that, then I too would like to know what is causing the drift.

Doug D

[Douglas K. dempsey]

Oh no! I took to heart your argument for compounds.

Furthermore, Apple encourages you to use compounds in their Help docs, noting that compounds create no space or speed hits.

Of course, I initially began creating new Projects as though they were tabbed Sequences in Legacy. Then I noticed in the Project Folder that every single project seems to create new Render folders, e.g. they are not sharing renders a la Legacy.

So I started doing exactly what you describe, compounding an edit and labeling it RoughCut v3 and so on.

This part seems to work okay; I may just have to avoid the media management.

Doug D

[Douglas K. dempsey]

I agree that “Final Cut Studio” is probably an internal Apple phrase for the suite of stuff they make, and perhaps are developing, to work with FCPX. Selling the pieces a la carte will likely remain the model. One of the reasons for bundling in legacy was a way to justify the $999 price. With the new apps going for the price of plug-ins, what is the point of selling an expensive bundle and scaring off the hard-won “editing for everyone else” market?

Doug D

[Douglas K. dempsey]

Well, agreed. That was my point, my workflow is to string all “scenes” or reels in a timeline as the entire movie, and THAT is what I save as a Project in the Project Library. If I want to save a version with the scenes shuffled around, I create a new project, paste in everything, do my shuffle, and THAT becomes another version of the movie, in my Project Library. THAT is what I thought the Project Library was good for, and am just asking if I am warping FCPX workflow to my older FCP7 preconceptions. Agree about zones concept.

Doug D

[Douglas K. dempsey]

Understood. So, between your short form and collaborative environment demands, any given compound clip you keep in Event Library is finished, and expands to be re-editable on a timeline, with ALL the pieces you need for the particular piece. No nesting.

But I guess I WOULD fall into the trap of nesting compounds, because I would: Edit any given sequence, consisting of camera audio, VO audio, SFX, music, secondary storyline clips for layering effects, titles etc…and then collapse ALL of that into a compound clip, store it in Events as “Scene 22 v3.”

THEN I would do that with lots of other scenes/sequences. Then I would need to lay out ALL those compound clips on the timeline, scenes 1 thru 22, in order to see the whole movie. And begin inserting MORE stuff into the timeline, like title cards between scenes for instance, maybe some more audio bridges between scenes. Whatever.

At that point, if I collapse the entire movie into a compound, e.g. “Entire movie v1.0” — haven’t I just committed the “no-no” of nesting a bunch of compounds within one mega-compound?

Whereas, kept as discreet Project in the Project Library, there are no compounds-within-compounds, only end-to-end compounds.

Doug D

[Douglas K. dempsey]

National Library Week coming in April. Let’s say something nice on behalf of libraries everywhere! 🙂

Doug D

[Douglas K. dempsey]

But haven’t we read on this forum in the past, that nested compound within compound clips become a problem at some point? I seem to recall someone using that workflow who hit a wall of non-performance, and the fix was that he had to spread things out sideways into Projects, not layer compounds within compounds?

Doug D

[Douglas K. dempsey]

Bill, you have answered some of my convoluted questions to Oliver.

Doug D

[Douglas K. dempsey]

Oliver, I read your blog and your various articles on workflows, on cameras, and take to heart much of your advice and experience.

I work on long-term docu projects which take years, and I sometimes miss an entire generation of technology as it whips by. I am one of those experienced FCP Legacy editors who has been dabbling in FCPX.

So this question is truly interesting to me. The whole Sequence vs Project nomenclature really threw a lot of us.

I would submit that the Project Library is useful for storage of “ordered Events.”

In my world of long form, a sequence can be cut, compressed to a compound clip and kept as a rough edit, or as alternative versions of a sequence, in the Event Library as you suggest.

But then when it comes time to look at the big picture, I can string together shots and compound clips in a Project timeline, and call the whole thing “Part 1, rough edit v4” and store it in the Library.

I can still work on any given short sequence via the Event/Compound clip method you suggest, but I can also see a rough edit of my entire movie by having the right clips and compounds in a saved Project.

Does this make any sense, or am I really just abusing what should be a streamlined, database approach to editing?

Doug D

[Douglas K. dempsey]

Avid seems wrong for my high school students. Most are interested at the consumer and prosumer level; they are indeed arts students and film/video (including some film history) is just one class among photography, drawing, printmaking etc.

Hard to argue with Premiere for reasons you state: very familiar for those exposed to FCP Legacy, and plays nice with the whole suite, which these students encounter in other classes as well.

But I must confess, I have watched 9th graders pretty quickly understand the idea of FCPX and start using it on a basic level immediately.

Doug D