[Herb Sevush]

[Josh Cook] ” It seems like a crazy obvious opportunity to serve a rather large population who want this. Is there something I don’t know?”

You don’t know how hard it would be. If it were easy, it would have happened, because you are correct, there is a market for FCP8. While PPro is close, since it was modeled on FCP from Premiere’s first “pro” iteration, it is not nearly the same.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Yes, it’s a different way to work.”

After hearing about FCPX multicam after it came out I was very impressed, to the point where I started considering X for my own work for the first time. I had assumed it was the best multicam feature on the market. After working with Ppro for a while I have been pleasantly surprised to see that it matches up, feature wise, to what X has to offer. There are some bugs – most notably the unwanted cuts in audio 1 I referred too earlier in this thread – but I am pleased to find that it matches up to X on a feature for feature basis. Not superior, merely equivalent. The rest of my preference is based on Ppro’s ability to match my previous workflow. I understand that with X you can always have the unseen video attached to your audio, thereby mitigating the need for sync markers, but learning a whole new workflow to simply do an old thing a different, but not superior, way holds little interest for me. YMMV.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Kevin Monahan] “I don’t use 4 point Garbage Mattes any more with the new Masking and Tracking feature. Tried that?”

Kevin –

I thought the masking feature was for limiting filters to a specific part of the image. Does it also allow you to cut a hole in an image that you can see the video from a lower track through?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Paul Neumann] ” Wondering if I’ve ever encountered this. Probably. Bet I just did that Trim to 0 thing.”

For a single “run through” edit you can also right click on the edit point and choose “join run through edits.” For fixing multiple or all run throughs, choose either the ripple edit tool or rolling edit tool and mouse click on the first clip in the group you want to fix and, keeping the button depressed, drag across multiple edit points. You should see a single white line trailing behind the selector and when you stop all the edit points you have passed over will turn red. Release the mouse, zoom into a run through edit, right click and this time all the run throughs you selected will be fixed. You can do the whole timeline this way.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Jeremy Garchow] “See, this is what I’m talking about. I cut dialogue all the time. I frankenbyte all the time. There is no way that this is not possible in X. It’s easy in either primary or connected story lines.”

First of all I never said it wasn’t possible, only that I heard it wasn’t as easy. But considering the fact that you edit in X and I never have, I will accept that it’s just as easy if you say so. That still leaves me with Ppro having sync indicators and FCPX without them, and as yet no named feature in X (multicam wise) that Ppro is lacking. And to the question are sync indicators (with slip to sync ability)important enough to chose one over the other, the answer is absolutely yes.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Jeremy Garchow] “That’s the easy one. Assuming (just assuming) you can live with out those:”

Sync indicators – never leave home without ’em.

[Jeremy Garchow] “Insert edits in to what and where?”

Sometimes it’s a matter of cutting to a different angle’s audio and I understand this is fairly analogous with audio components copy and paste. Other times I’m cutting into my dialogue track from a non synchronous source – from either a normal clip or multiclip. Creating a”frankenbite” using the modern vernacular.

We had a thread here a few months ago with you and David Lawrence going round and round about this, and even if the X way of doing it works, it doesn’t work better. So the question I have to ask is why re-train to use a new method that is, at best, equivalent to what I’m doing now?

And, as a reminder, this part of the thread was started with the claim that FCPX was “hands down” better at cutting multicam. I had always assumed this was true until I started working with Ppro. Now I’d be happy to learn why the multicam feature of X is better than Ppro from someone who can actually explain it to me.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Curious, but why?”

For me it would be lack of sync indicators plus lack of ease in making audio-only insert edits.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Devin Crane] “We use Softron’s Multi-cam logger for each live shoot to make edit and clip marks on our timeline footage for post production. After importing the clips into Multicam Logger, we export an XML which creates the MC clip when imported into FCPX with all of our notes laid out from the live shoot.”

According to Softron’s website their multicam logger works with Ppro as well, so I don’t see how that makes FCPX better.

[Devin Crane] ” Now it’s been a year or so since I’ve worked in Premiere but the Multicam User interface in FCPX seems more easily accessible takes just a short-cut to turn on or off”

In Ppro one keyboard shortcut to make an entire browser full of multiclips, another shortcut toggles the timeline multicam viewer off and on. So how much simpler is FCPX?

[Devin Crane] ” the ability to go back into the angle editor and either add a filter or change a parameter and have it apply to previously made cuts is what sold us”

Same with Ppro

[Devin Crane] ” Along with the fact that we don’t have to pay for it each month for 5 different editors, 3 of which are part time.”

The claim was FCPX was better, not that it was cheaper. And while I don’t like the subscription idea I will gladly pay it so I can edit with tracks, with sync indicators and with the ability to make basic audio-only insert edits.

So remind me again why FCPX is the “hands down winner” ?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Devin Crane] “If you’re looking for multi-cam editing FCPX hands down winner.”

Is that based on a feature for feature comparison? If so i would love to hear the details. I’m not doubting you, I’m just interested in the reasons why you made that statement.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Paul Neumann] “Turn off Multicam Audio follows Video.”

Unfortunately, no that doesn’t fix it.

If you create a multicam using the”switch audio” setting and your timeline has audio 1 targeted, then every time you switch video angles PPro will place a cut in the audio on track 1. If audio-follows-video is on, it will change the audio to the new angles’s audio, but even with audio-follows-video off, it will place a useless cut in the audio track. Even locking audio 1 will not prevent this behavior. The only thing that works is leaving audio 1 un-targeted and targeting a higher track. This is a known bug by Adobe and hopefully they have fixed it in this newest release.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf