Forum Replies Created

Page 85 of 2910
  • Jeremy Garchow

    May 20, 2018 at 3:38 pm in reply to: Towards a better NLE

    [Simon Ubsdell] “There has to be a better model and I don’t think any NLE has yet come close to addressing the issue.
    “

    I would argue that FCPX does something to move the ideas forward. Look at your “One Smart Collection to Rule Them All”.

    And then if you are talking about clips as containers, FCPX has that too. Every clip is a container. It’s not much use, but the framework is there. And then there’s compound clips that could be containers and groups.

    And remember, as Walter Soyka always says, all of these containers and elements need to expose the underlying data model, and that information needs to be able to be described in an interchange format (XML and so forth) with the idea that those elements would be able to be translated to other video programs in a way that made sense to that program’s data model. If the needle moves too far, FCPX would truly be it’s own island. Isn’t that what it already is accused of, even if it’s false? If FCPX’s data model suddenly looks like nothing else, then it will be stuck by itself with all these great ideas and innovations with no where to go. Or am I not thinking about this clearly?

  • Jeremy Garchow

    May 20, 2018 at 2:25 am in reply to: Towards a better NLE

    [Brett Sherman] “I wish you could actually read markers without having to double click them in FCP X.”

    The are legible in the index of a marker is in a timeline, and hitting control-y in the browser (turning on skimmer info) allows you to read the marker without opening list view.

    Again, not perfect, but pretty good.

  • I would suggest, again, ReelSmart Motion Blur.

  • It should still sync as one second of audio is one second of audio despite video frame rate.

  • Jeremy Garchow

    May 19, 2018 at 2:33 am in reply to: Towards a better NLE

    [Simon Ubsdell] “This new video by Alan Bell A.C.E. advances the case for some intriguing innovations:”

    Visual grouping and markup metadata. Per user visual overlays. All interesting ideas.

    From a practical standpoint, it seems like it would be really hard to implement visual markup and keep track of it, let alone have it look good, make sense, and actually help or add to the editing process. As soon as you bounce to another view, or change the size of text or thumbs or shuffle clips around, all of a sudden the software has to keep track of where the clips were in space, where it’s visual metadata is and is pointed to, and also reach out to any cloud based programs or PDFs or other documents to make sure the attachments are updated and in sync, and then all of that info would need to get described in a database for interchange.

    I do think that his points pertain to the limits of a bin structure. I never really liked bins as they are too hierarchical. Clips in bins can be described and sorted in one place. If you need the clip to be in multiple bins, you have to physically duplicate the clip, and then any relationship to the first location is broken. FCPX does have ways to skirt this limitation. No, they aren’t visual, but FCPX tags and collections certainly allow a very quick grouping and drill down of visual assets based on metadata, as well as maintaining a bird’s eye (and very visual) view of all assets. This is something that bins rarely offer.

    Per user metadata is interesting. I could see that being implemented fairly easily as long as the host app supports multiple users (of course we all know, FCPX does not).

  • Did you ever try trashing FCPX and redownloading and reimporting?

  • This is just for testing purposes. Drag one of the mts files in a library and see if it plays back without flicker.

  • Turn on optical flow.

    If that isn’t smooth enough, consider adding motion blur with a plugin like Revision FX’s ReelSmart Motion Blur.

  • I retime footage in almost every project, not following the 1/2 frame rate rule. With technology like Optocal flow, it certainly helps, but the success of optical flow is wholly dependent on your footage. Sometimes, on fine detailed fast moving footage, optical flow simply can’t track and interpolate all the detail. I also use the Timewarp feature ofnAfter Effects to slow down footage, of optical flow isn’t working. Compressor also has more fine tuned control as well.

    Long story short, yes, I use non-halved frame rate retimed footage a lot.

  • This is footage that you imported in to FCPX, and it transcodes it?

    What if you just import the original footage without a transcode?

Page 85 of 2910

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy