Michael Hancock
Forum Replies Created
-
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “C selects the clip under the pointer. That’s how it works. ‘C’ does not select the clip under the playhead, so if you do not want to select the clip under the pointer, don’t hit ‘c’.
“If you go to the keyboard editor, C is simply “Select clip”, which isn’t very helpful, because there is a hierarchy to what it selects. For anyone interested, this is how it works:
If your mouse is on a clip, then it selects the clip under the pointer, whether the clip is in the primary, connected, secondary storyline, audio/video, etc., – whatever is directly under the mouse gets selected.
If the mouse is not on a clip but the skimmer is active it selects the clip in the primary storyline under the skimmer. It never selects a secondary clip or connected clip – just the primary.
If the skimmer is not active and the pointer is not directly over a clip, hitting C selects the clip under the playhead, in the primary storyline.
So yes, C will select what is under the playhead (in the primary). But only if the above conditions are met.
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
If your mouse head is on another clip though, it will select that clip, and not the clip that is under your playhead. That doesn’t have anything to do with the skimmer. So you have to either move your mouse off of all the clips, or move your mouse to your playhead so that it selects the clip you want.
I’ve submitted the feature request several times for the option to “ignore mouse position” for selection, but I don’t think it will ever change.
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
I never thought about using the crop tool. I use scale and position, which default to ease in/out, and you can’t change the scale to linear. You can to the position keyframes, but it’s difficult and not worth the time.
Do you know how the crop tool does in regards to oversampled footage? If you drop a 4K clip into a 1080p timeline, scaled to fit, then do the crop animation, does it reference the 4K or does it just crop and zoom in on the scaled down 1080p clip (in effect, softening the image)?
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
[John Rofrano] “I believe it is linear by default”
FCPX is not linear, and cannot do linear scaling. It always has an ease function. With X/Y movement you can make the keyframes linear, but it’s not well done and is cumbersome.
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
I use Alex4D Smooth Move for all my pan and scan. It’s a brilliant little plugin, and it’s free.
https://blog.alex4d.com/2011/08/04/smooth-move-fpx-effect/
I assume you want the zooms/scans to already be going when you cut to them so the speed is constant? If so, just set the Curve to Linear in the Alex4D plugin.
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
Create a multicam clip.
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
[Simon Ubsdell] “When you need a specific tool, you need that specific tool and workarounds just don’t cut it.”
Exactly.
Just today, in another forum, I saw that an editor was handed a script built from sound bites, but with no timecode or clip names to reference them. Because they were cutting on Avid and had Phrasefind, what looked to be a laborious multi-hour slogfest took about 20 minutes to rough out. They couldn’t have done that in any other NLE. That was the right tool for the job.
I had a job a few years ago that was going to be 100% green screen with tons of graphics and compositing that were all going to be done in AE. I chose to cut it in Premiere. When I handed my project off to the mograph artist they literally copied and pasted my timeline from Premiere to AE, and they had my entire edit ready to go in seconds. I can’t think of any other NLE that would have been as fast and seamless going from NLE to After Effects.
The hardest part isn’t learning to use software for a job – it’s learning which software to use for a job.
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
Try trashing your preferences.
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
[Oliver Peters] ” I would say though that they don’t consider this a “fix” – merely a “change” to match what people expected to see.”
If it’s not a bug fix, I’d be very interested to hear why they built it to work the way they initially did. Perhaps if they had explained why the original wheels operated the way they did, and the benefits to their approach, they might not have had to change it at all!
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor