Gerrit Van dyke
Forum Replies Created
-
Fair enough point. The condescension is not necessary though.
Kapiche?
-
Dave, I can check the weather, get instant directions, edit photos, watch movies, play high graphic video games on my phone. If a $1000 piece of software can’t make a simple upgrade after all of the technological advances over the past ten years, then they have no excuse. I’ll admit, yeah it is a cheaper piece of software than the flame. But is that an excuse for such an obvious flaw? Heck, even Motion allows multiple clips on one layer (not that Motion is very good either).
So your business advice is to spend $250,000 on a suite instead of complaining to a company because of an easy fix? Many software complaints have been solved with online petitions. 15 years ago, spending $50,00 on an edit suite was considered cheaping out, but today the times have changed considerably.
Call me old fashioned, but I think that when a program has a flaw, it should be fixed. If you bought a hyundai and it broke down the first day, would you accept the dealer telling you “too bad, you should have bought a BMW.” Obviously we know to accept the shortcomings of products when they have a lower price tag, but it doesn’t excuse them from keeping obvious flaws in the product.
So my solution? I guess to complain to the folks at Adobe. Will it go anywhere? Probably not, but it’s all I can do. Trying to get a company to spend an extra quarter million on an additional suite for me to be a bit quicker would probably be a waste of time.
-
Sorry Dave but you’re absolutely wrong! Of course there is no real good solution that I know of, but Adobe has really dropped the ball for many years on this.
Using the excuse “After effects is a compositor, not a NLE” is an excuse that was really only acceptable 10 years ago. Today, the technology is quite simple for Adobe to add to the software. Why don’t they do it?
Of course people will never use After Effects as an editor. But why limit the program so it is impossible to assemble a lengthy composition? If I want to assemble a two minute intro, with each slide interacting with each other consisting of multiple layers, I know it’s going to be a huge pain to shift every thing if the timing changes. Saying to a client in session “sorry, this will take a while to make that minor change because this is a compositor not a NLE” isn’t a valid excuse.
It’s issues with software like this that make us look bad in front of clients. BS excuses will not change that.
-
Amazing that four years later and there still hasn’t been an improvement. I’ve been using FCP professionally for ten years and let me tell you, when you have to round trip to Motion and back for a simple super it looks very unprofessional. The truth is, for a video that need 40-50 plain text supers, roundtripping to another program is a huge waste of time. And Boris Title3D stinks too, but does the job in a pinch.
I appreciate the bundled software that comes with FCP Studio, but I must say it is becoming just as much of a negative as it is a positive. It’s become an excuse for the NLE to ignore it’s obvious shortcomings.
-
Thanks David, but I’m well aware of that.
What I’m asking is to disable creating extra tabs – so when you open a sequence it replaces the tab instead of adding another.
I know you can close them one by one by hitting control-w (or right clicking and closing) but when switching through many sequences it is a nuisance to have to right click and close each tab individually when you didn’t even need final cut to add a tab in the first place.
It’s strange to me that this is not customizable. Even better would be to limit to ten tabs at once, and as the eleventh tab is opened, the first (far left tab) closes.
With 50 sequences in a project, I’d be right clicking and closing sequences hundreds of times everyday. It’s an extra and unnecessary step. I still don’t understand why FInal Cut allows you to create so many tabs at once, as they become useless after ten (unless you stretch your sequence over two monitors I guess).