Marcus Moore
Forum Replies Created
-
I think in exclusively audio oriented applications, you’re right.
But I think FCPX’s associative model for Projects required a different philosophy.
LogicX is far separated development-wise from the FCPX team. They’re way over in Germany, far from the rest of ProApps.
-
Franz,
Until we get some better idea of specifically how many users are using competing NLE platforms, I think any judgement of the 1mil+ number is entirely lacking in a frame of reference.
Adobe’s most recent announcement of 1.8million CC subscribers from March is for ALL products; and I wouldn’t even hazard to guess what percentage of those people are Premier users versus those in graphics, audio, web, photography, graphic design, or publishing. I think HALF would be very generous.
Considering that more than a decade of Legacy FCP development lead to 2 million licences, FCPX is on track to be far more successful than is predecessor.
-
I don’t think either of those things are out of the realm of possibility with Roles-based organization.
A Role group CAN be several lanes high, if you just have one DIALOGUE Role for instance. In mixing that would suppose that any volume adjustment or effect you want to apply would be done so to all clips within that DIALOGUE Role. Essentially sub-mix.
However, if you need more granularity, a sub-Role for each character is easily created.
If you create enough sub-Roles, the difference between a Role “lane” and a track become pretty semantic.
-
Yeah, I didn’t specify that Roles were “segregated” in my example. In fact, I think separation could be more important than colour coding.
Here’s another image for someone who asked me how all this would work with Audio Components.
-
I agree with you completely- hence my mockup being the way it is. Besides colour, there needs to be visual separation of Role elements so they don’t “intermix” the way they do now.
The concept I keep leaning on is that Roles are like Keywords for the Project. Right now we can assign Roles, but there’s no visual container like Keyword Collections organizing them in the Project window.
I could also see great benefit to being able to collapse and expand Roles into “single lanes”- horizontal space is always at a premium in a timeline. There’s something like this is LogicX.
-
Here’s an image I mocked up a while ago of a current version of a Project, with a version that has colour-coded Role organization.
-
That’s weird. I just purchased X2Pro for a specific job and didn’t hear boo from the audio guys. You should try sending your XML to the developer.
-
Logic X integration is bad because FCPXML isn’t well supported in Logic yet.
-
Right now there’s a flexibility to the way the timeline works; I’m not concerned about how to pull apart the middle of a complex edit. Elements move where they need to so that I can work on the primary focus of my story without audio or video track conflicts getting in my way.
Roles provides and organization element which isn’t dependant to a strict horizontally stacked order. Yes you have to assign Roles (those which FCPX doesn’t auto-assign, which is most), but that up-front work pays off in not having to manage those elements all the way thru the edit.
Roles provide the same benefit in the Project that Keyword and Smart collections provide in the Event Browser.
My big request is for Roles tagging to be used to visually organize audio and video elements in the timeline, and for mixing purposes. When they do that, I don’t see any advantages to the track system, and all the benefit the fluidity of the FCPX timeline provides.
-
As Charlie says below, tracks aren’t possible to integrate with the other two principal paradigms of FCPX; connected clips and the magnetic timeline. Its an entirely different philosophy of clip management.
And I’d question your second statement- there’s no indication that FCPX isn’t selling. It may not be selling to all markets in equal measure, but Apple’s released statement of 1million+ installs isn’t “bad” by any measure, and is in fact much faster adoption than Legacy FCP. So I don’t see how Apple isn’t motivated to continue to develop it as they have been.
