James Ewart
Forum Replies Created
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “In between the checkmark/lightbulb and the reply button.”
the q button does not always work for me and the Bret system also only works intermittently
I have now seen the quote button for the first time so will use that.
Thanks
-
“[Robin S. Kurz] “If your audio is not to be edited with the picture, then why is it in the multicam to begin with and not simply connected in the project? If I change anything to the edit, the audio—that I’m assuming is and needs to be synced to the picture, which is why it’s in the multicam?—is edited accordingly. How could that be considered bothersome?””
[Oliver Peters] “1) the fact that audio gets cut with every edit (you have to detach/connect if you want one clean track of audio)”
My experience of Multicam editing of music is that one tends to use just one audio source most of the time. (The mixed good audio just cut pictures with audio from other camera sources maybe used for supplementary ambience from time to time).
What I do NOT want is for invisible audio edits to be applied to my master audio every time I cut picture (camera angles). It can cause lots of pops and problems especially when using audio filters.
Especially as I have carefully selected the enable video only option.
It’s a bit odd I think.
-
[Oliver Peters] “What you have to remember is that PProCC’s interface (and MC) is highly customizable, which FCP X isn’t. Smoke, too, is cluttered, but with less user customization. “
Yes I accept that but they are all messy in my view by comparison. FCPX is a “better” designed interface for my money. Radically different. Less tech looking. whether for Multicam or single cam. And I hated it for a year.
Less distraction. Of course this all depends on what you are doing and as you said on another thread maybe a better offline tool than online tool
Great for me. Maybe not for you.
-
[Bret Williams] “People do realize that the reply field is at the bottom of the thread?”
No where is the quote button?
-
[Steve Connor] “A “reply with quote” button would merge these steps into a single button press.”
Bret’s system of selecting text and hitting q seems to work. Saves one step.
-
[Herb Sevush] “In this thread I’m asking for someone to show me how X can help me improve my efficiency in cutting multicam. In return I will endeavor to explain how other systems might improve your multicam work. Let’s keep it simple and open to all possibilities.”
Sorry if this is not a technical reply. It’s not going to prove anything quantifiably.
For my own benefit I have been watching some PP tutorials on the Adobe website. My impression of PP is that it is such a complicated looking interface – not quite as muddled as MC and probably a bit more cluttered than FCP7.
What I found hard to adjust to with FCPX was the simplicity of the streamlined interface. I have now realised it is what I like most about it now. Everything is there if you need it but less “in yer face”
I find it easier to concentrate on the edit, the story, the rhythm. Does that make me more efficient? Who can say. It’s just a nicer place to go to work. It’s about feel. Apologies if this sounds superficial and I know it’s not specific to Multicam but I wonder if that’s what it all boils down to – maybe it is not something you can enumerate.
-
Sorry. I was replying to Scott’s suggestions of the Multicam ripple tutorial and adding a bit extra about the Snapshot workflow from earlier. Sorry if I’ve derailed things.
-
https://www.rippletraining.com/categories/apple-pro-apps-tutorials/final-cut…
$30 bucks.
Thanks I have all their tutorials.
It makes sense that when you double click on any Multicam project it’s the same as opening the Multicam source clip in the browser.
I have been back and looked again and the final lesson deals with this “How Multicam clips relate” but their recommended workflow for having completely different versions is to duplicate the master clip which would mean cutting from scratch.
They do not mention “Duplicate as Snapshot” even though that command was integrated into the version of FCPX they are using in my tutorial. But my tests seem to work and preserve the previous versions even when changes are made in the Angle Editor once I have duplicated a project as a snapshot but I wonder if there might be some flaws to this workflow.
I wonder if PP is simpler than this or handles it differently?
-
Someone should test it for me. 🙂
Yes “Duplicate as Snapshot” keeps it immune from any changes you make to the original project in the angle editor.
Which makes me think with Multicam one should always use the snapshot command probably.
I had no idea it worked like that thanks.
-
You can change audio angles in the inspector simply by unchecking the channels you don’t want and the the ones you do want.
That does not get rid of the fact that FCPX edits audio on every cut in a Multicam project/sequence (I am increasing bored with having to translate terms for the benefit of apple).
It should not put invisible audio edits in the audio track that has been selected if you select video only for cuts.
Massive flaw.