Erik Lundberg
Forum Replies Created
-
Me neither. On the other hand I’m not a software developer. But I’d say it should be the logical steps forward for apple to free the software as much as possible from locked down workflows. Which is the basic problem right now. And I’m sure they’re on to some of these constraints. Hopefully all. Or at least a lot of them. Not being able to roundtrip to even Motion seemes downright silly. That one is so obvious it must surely be fixed. In the wake of that fix I’d hope some of the other interoperability issues is taken care of as well.
But being able to chose at any time in any given project (or not chose) between tru trackless or enable more storylines with the exact same behaviour as the primary would be a feature worth waiting for. Just don’t hold it off too long…
Erik Lundberg
Technical Director, Media Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
-
[David Lawrence] “One big problem I have with FCPX is the constraint of a single “primary” storyline. If we could have any number of user created storylines, that maintain a fixed relationship to time in the window space, then many of my problems in FCPX go away. I think the idea of user-definable virtual tracks that are media-type agnostic would be very powerful and interesting.”
I don’t just think this would be interesting. I think it would really make FCPX into the game changer apple would like it to be. What FCPX really needs is this sort of freedom from constraints, and should be the main focal point of apple for the near future(with ‘near’ being the key word). This includes OMF and the whole opening up to external editors (INCLUDING MOTION, mind you, apple!!!), freedom of using (or not using) tracks (or tracklike storylines), opening up to standard pro video interfaces/equipment e.t.c.
Erik Lundberg
Technical Director, Media Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
-
Ooohh. It has colour wheels…
Erik Lundberg
Technical Director, Media Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
-
Sounds like you have a slug roadkill laying about in the timeline.
Erik Lundberg
Technical Director, Media Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
-
Wooo… Nice.
Hm. If this is where things are heading…
I would love even more sorting abilities in the timeline. And then some. For a complex project, searching for “media in a bin” might be tedious and much easier with keywording/metadata powers, but to operate clips in unison in a complex timeline based solely on criterias I chose. That will be awesome. If they go full circle with it.
As posted elswehere, being able to adjust stacking orders by Roles would be really good. And most other sorting/filtering abilities that can be user controlled. Please Apple, the ones of you who would want to listen, more of that. And then some.
And. Fix the broken stuff.
Erik Lundberg
Technical Director, Media Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
-
Not that I know of. This would be an excellent problem to solve via a Roles-submixer. Quite high on my wish list.
Erik Lundberg
Technical Director, Media Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
-
We’ll all have to learn to not just distinguish between ‘source’ and ‘canvas’, but between ‘project’ and ‘project’. Sneaky, this word game.
Erik Lundberg
Technical Director, Media Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
-
Because we can^H^H^H care?
I so wish they could’ve kept in line here, and showed us they knew how to do this naming thing right. I can see the trouble in translating the old term ‘Project’ into anything at all in FCPX. BUT THEN WHY USE IT? Why not just call it ‘timeline’ or ‘sequence’ or something similarily archaic that would have made sense?
Whining? Absolutely? I could learn to wrangle my terminology backwards? Yup! All our editors/producers could too? Absolutely! If we in the end chose to incorporate FCPX into real work, will we? You bet!
But we shouldn’t have to.
Erik Lundberg
Technical Director, Media Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
-
This is what ticks me off. REALLY. And it goes on and on. And there is no real reason why, other than Apple invented so much shiny new brilliant ways to do stuff, they completely lost the basics. Because the Motion integration in FCPX is BRILLIANT. Except this one basic thing. Whatever they smoked, I want one too.
On the other hand, if they fix that, we’ve got best-in-show integration, in my opinion. This is jaw dropping surely (that they left it out to begin with, that is).
Erik Lundberg
Technical Director, Media Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
-
Ugh. Typing on an iPad that throws in som extra points and capitals. Ment to write REAL audio capabilities…
Erik Lundberg
Technical Director, Media Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden