[Franz Bieberkopf]

Oliver,

Demo of relevant feature from Premiere Pro / AME (Speech Analysis) (this demo uses a reference script that aids the indexing process … also it shows “clicking on words” to jump that point in the clip):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyM4NtrpY3U

Franz.

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.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Pam Picard] “… wondering if I learn another program?”

Pam,

It’s great that you’ve found something that suits your needs, and the answer to your question will be different depending on your intentions.

My experience seems to indicate that the future is one where editors will increasingly be moving between different NLEs depending on many factors. For that reason, I’d recommend becoming familiar with some other options: Adobe Premiere Pro, Avid Media Composer, Lightworks, seem to be common.

Franz.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Walter Soyka] “Open up Text Edit, hit Cmd+T to open the fonts panel, and try to put that floating window behind the document window.”

Walter,

Ah, got it.

I guess I think of the fonts panel as part of a clear hierarchy (Documents vs. Tools). It sort of explains itself, and it’s reinforced by behaviour (like Fonts hiding if TextEdit isn’t active – it’s a secondary kind of window).

There is no such explanation that means anything to a user in Premiere.

Franz.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

Walter,

[Walter Soyka] “If you were to select the main window and it popped to the fore, then it could completely cover the floating panels, making them invisible and inaccessible via mouse. Wouldn’t losing the window entirely like that be more confusing than seeing that the floating window is obscuring some part of the main window and having to move it out of the way to access what’s underneath?”

Ideally, you can cascade windows if you so desire – thus choosing them as needed. Additionally, some software has keyboard shortcuts to bring windows forward, including the ability to cycle focus – also desirable. There is no rationale in Premiere for why one window must remain “in the back” – this is most evident if the panes that it holds, for example, have been reduced to something trivial – like the audio meters (why must they be “in the back” all the time?) – and then arbitrary switched out (now, suddenly they can change layer priority).

[Walter Soyka] “Apple apps like TextEdit, Pages and Keynote have floating windows that can never be layered behind the main document”

I don’t know the other software, but TextEdit is not like this (not on mountain lion and earlier, anyway). Or I don’t know what you’re talking about.

[Walter Soyka] “This seems to be a bit of cross-platform UI oddness. A master window seems unnatural on a Mac, but is required for an application on Windows.”

I think that’s part of it – but it also seems to be suite-related (part of the way other software in the suite works). In Photoshop, for example, the “master window” has UI elements that clearly mark it as something other than just another window – there’s a functional difference being reflected visually. But even there – Photoshop doesn’t quit if I close the “main” window. In Premiere, this simply isn’t true, and if it should be true, such “special status” should be tied to the project pane, for example.

Franz.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Walter Soyka] “I’m not sure what version you were referring to above, but unless I misunderstand, I think it’s been fixed.”

Walter,

I just checked on an install of CC 2014.

I think what may have changed is that the “master” window is now clearly labelled (with the project file path on a Mac) – thus even if all you have in that “master” window is the audio meters (for example), it’s still clear that it’s the “master”.

A better implementation would be to have the “Project” pane always take on the “master” roll – but now that I think of it, why do we even need a “master” window?

Also, while any given floating window now comes to the fore if you select it, this is not true for the “master” window – it remains in the back, forever obscured and never to be brought into view (unless you close or move windows). Again, this can be confusing if you’ve left something in it that you want brought forward (especially if you’ve forgotten that it’s the arbitrary “master window” and acts differently than all other windows).

Franz.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Walter Soyka] “You can undock panels, and there are quite a few panels/windows that you can open and close with a keystroke.”

Walter,

I prefer the flexibility that Adobe allows in their approach to layout and panels (or panes) in workspaces. However, there are problems which demonstrate this functionality hasn’t really been thought through.

If panes are separated into separate windows then there are some oddities. (All of this from experience in Premiere, and an older version.)

For one thing, it seems to keep one window as a “master window” of sorts. Closing other windows simply closes those panels or panes. If you happen to close the “Master Window” you end up quitting Premiere Pro – this is true, even if by some shuffling, all you have in the “master window” is the timecode display (for example). There is no indication of which window is the “master” at any given time.

But it’s also impossible to bring windows and panes forward from underneath one another – so if you have some tools in one window, they might be forever relegated to be “behind” another window (and therefor unusable) as you can’t shift the layering at all.

So undockable windows is a nice idea; it seems nobody has thought about all its implications.

Franz.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Charlie Austin] “… how would you define the difference between “browser based” and “sequence based” editing?”

Charlie,

I’ve discussed it before but never composed the longer post that I’ve mused about. Some clarity here:

https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/44788 (Nov 2012)
https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/52771 (May 2013)

(Note: I originally made the distinction between “sequence-based” and “clip-based”, but I think “clip-based” is a poor choice of words and “browser-based” is better.)

Franz.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[alban egger] “For docs there is no tool that can help organizing vast amounts of data as smart as FCPX does.”

Alban,

I’ll just comment on this particular trope since it is oft repeated here in variations.

I can’t speak to the browser-based editing workflows that FCP X key-wording seems designed for, but I will say that there are many ways of organizing vast amounts of data, and for sequence-based editing workflows (doc or otherwise) I don’t see any advantages in X – I certainly wouldn’t call it the “smartest” tool.

Franz.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Kevin Monahan] “We are testing projects in house with tens of thousands of clips.”

Kevin,

Thanks for the response.

Are you doing similar tests with hundreds or thousands of sequences in a single project?

Franz.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Kevin Monahan] “If you run into customers that are needing advice for larger scale productions and pipelines …”

Kevin,

Personally I just haven’t read or heard much about how robust the software is on a large project – by which I mean thousands of clips, hundreds of sequences, over many months.

Franz.