Michael Pierro
Forum Replies Created
-
Is it just me, or is it strange that you can solo tracks, but have almost no control over what goes on them…
Unless I’ve got something wrong…
-
[Brian Mulligan] “If FCPX had BITC”
Wait, wait, wait… It doesn’t have BITC? Really? That can’t be right! It’s not included as one of the filters?
-
[Chris Kenny] ” While it sort of looks like it does at first glance, FCP X doesn’t have conventional tracks (stacked linear containers for clips that run the full length of the sequence) besides the primary storyline. This is a pretty significant difference.”
To me it looks like it has tracks in the exact same way FCP7 and most other NLEs do. The only fundamental difference seems to be that you have much less control over them. The programs decides where to put things for you. If the paradigm shift is towards less control then I’d personally much rather stay with the “old” one…
-
Yes Please!
-
Yeah, but working in a company that does a lot of broadcast and has for years, I’ve had to open up older projects, from FCP 6 or 5. Being able to do that is critical. I may not use that feature everyday, but being able to do that has been essential. The fact that I wouldn’t be able to now is a huge deal breaker.
Obviously if I had FCPx I would start new projects on it, but that doesn’t alleviate the need for legacy compatibility. Say whatever you want about the lack there of, but frankly it seems pretty obvious to me, as I’m sure to a lot of people here, the people who created FCPx MUST HAVE INTENTIONALLY left out the functions that would make this app useful to any pro user. The things that are missing are just too blatantly obvious to just leave out…
-
That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. In the end, regardless of whatever is going on inside the editor’s head, the clips in a timeline always relate to eachother by at timecode. Clip A starts at x and ends at y clip B starts at y and ends at z. That is not that hard to get your head around. If they wanted to implement that, I can’t imagine it being particularity hard.
-
Though i haven’t had a chance to actually play with it yet, from everything I’ve seen my knee-jerk reaction is “no”. The new UI just doesn’t seem nuanced enough to edit quickly and stay organized.
-The idea of a trackless magnetic timeline seems great for a click-and-drag editor, but it is definitely too limiting for what i often need multiple tracks for. The show I’m in the middle of editing now has a ton of layered video and is requiring about 20 audio tracks and 10 video tracks to keep things organized. I feel like it would actually be nearly impossible to cut with FCP-X and keep things organized.
-The idea of keeping audio glued to video and having to go an extra step to separate the two seems like a huge headache. I like to be able to zoom out of my sequences and see everything laid out plain and simple. As it is in FCP7 you can do that, unless you are incessantly nesting clips, nothing is ever hidden and everything is given an equal visual weight. With this new UI, the audio married to your main clips is shrunken down and it is impossible to see exactly what is going on until you expand it out. This is something to get used to at least, but I really don’t think it’s an improvement for someone who is used to having greater control.
-Compound clips seems just like a revamped version of nesting, which I’ve always hated using unless I really needed to.
-The idea of Auditions bothers me in a similar way. (Though i could definitely see myself using this feature a fair bit). I just don’t like not being able to see everything that’s on my timeline. I could see myself adding a bunch of auditions to shots and forgetting about them. I guess that’s not a huge deal, but it would bother me knowing the sequence isn’t clean…
Maybe my “no” is a little harsh. If it had all the functions that are imperative to a broadcast workflow, sure, yeah I could see myself using it, but I can say for sure as it is now, I would much rather stick to a track based NLE that lets me control what I see on the sequence…
But again, as I said before, I haven’t actually used it yet, so hey, I may end up loving it… we’ll see I guess.
-
Your current workflow seems a little over-complicated. Rexporting the synced audio is an unnecessary step, and i’m sure very time consuming.
You can just link the synced clips in FCP 6 by hitting command-L.
That said, not having used X, I can’t say if it would be any better or worse for you, though if you are thinking of getting an outside post facility to do any work (ie sound mix or colour correct) you’d be totally screwed with the current capabilities of FCP-X