Robin S. kurz
Forum Replies Created
-
[Oliver Peters] “There are a lot of edits where both the music and the clips have equal weight.”
Just had that a couple of weeks ago, too, yes. A music video with a long intro and outro. In which case I actually had intro and outro in the primary, but during the musical section I had the music in the primary. Which admittedly made for an unusual edit “feel”, but worked great overall. Was able to do things faster, that would have also been and even huger pain elsewhere imho.
Which is not to say that one can’t do differently, just I personally found that to be the most efficient and flexible. I personally think it would have been an exponentially greater task doing it the other way around, given the amount of revisions I had to deal with, knowing no matter what I did to the music section *nothing* would go out of sync, as well as everywhere else. Best of both worlds, it was brilliant. In fact I got a taste of the opposite after I overwrote the video to the timeline and moved the music, as you described… and a last few, unexpected changes came in. What a difference.
Just sayin’. In the end: to each his own.
– RK
-
[Herb Sevush] “Really. So if you have, let’s say,…”
Really. You describe a couple of said rare exceptions (that I too have had) that, as I’ve already said, can easily be remedied with the handles, keyframes or any one of the other various options you have in X. No biggie. No different as with any other NLE. But either way those certainly aren’t situations that one encounters constantly, though something tells me you’re going to say that they of course are. Probably even daily, of course. 😀
And if you’re actually constantly detaching the audio, then no, you certainly should not be using X. But rather something else that actually makes sense in the context of that workflow. Which you appear to have found. So I really have to wonder why you’re even here in this forum, other than to sing the praises of other/your NLE and continuously proclaim how insufficient and useless FCP X is. At least I have yet to see anything from you. In which case I think if anyone actually cared to hear it, they’d probably be in the respective other forum(s), no? (purely rhetorical question btw)
Oh, and btw: if ”… underneath it you have his thoughts as narration constructed out of 4 different audio bites” as you describe, then those would be completely autonomous and not affected by any VIDEO (or audio) transitions that I applied to the slomos. Are you sure you know how X works? Because I don’t see how that scenario is in any way relevant in the context of this audio-only fade topic. As for the other scenario, see above.
– RK
-
[Steve Connor] “Like everything it would be nice to have another option to work with.”
Well, as far as that particular issue is concerned, I don’t really see how things were that much different in 7 or elsewhere. Since, IIRC, you would have to unlink the audio from a clip to be able to do that in 7 also. Which ultimately puts you pretty much in the same spot as with X, no?
I think it’s a given that audio is one of the areas that is bound to see the most changes with the next updates. Aside from the audio-only thing, I’d love for them to e.g. re-tinker the way collapsed L and J-cuts appear visually in the timeline. And of course something along the lines of a roles based mixer. I’m mostly curious and excited to see HOW they end up doing different things, since I find their unconventional (but imho that much better) approach to certain problems and their solutions very intriguing in many cases. 🙂
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
Which is not to say that I don’t think there is no need for such functionality btw. It does need it and I’m sure it will get it eventually with one of the next updates. My overall/underlying point is merely that of all things one could come up with for rejecting an entire app and considering it somehow useless overall as some have, that point sure strikes me as highly contrived. That’s all. You’re of course free to disagree. 😉
– RK
-
[Steve Connor] “if you want to add 3 frame transitions to every audio edit, other video transitions are rarely 3 frames”
Erm… but then I can’t think of when and why I would actually want my video and audio transitions to be a different length. I’d say in extremely rare instances, in which case I can use the handles.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Richard Herd] “But!! there is no OMF out of X and so there is no good way (I can figure) to get an X timeline into Audition.”
I take it you’ve never heard of X2Pro then?
[Richard Herd] “Why anyone is NOT using Audition boggles the mind.”
Hmmm… maybe because they have Logic Pro X (FCPXML import), ProTools or even worst case Soundtrack Pro? All of which can do most if not all the things Audition can (from what I can recall) and then some. I used Audition a while back and found it to be frustratingly convoluted and just an overall visual mess. Yet another classic “dazzle with a 10 page long feature list with complete disregard for usability and stability”-approach from Adobe IMHO.
So, for me, my mind boggles at the thought that someone would actually WANT to use Audition. Horses for courses.
[James Ewart] “The Adobe website has (or had anyway) nice tutorials for those moving across from Apple. Who can imagine Apple ever doing that?”
So I guess you missed books like “Final Cut Pro for Avid Editors” that Apple had made? Even with three revisions. Not to mention the huge aforementioned “Switch to Mac” campaign.
[Herb Sevush] “they will engage with you to buy a Mac computer, but they won’t engage to explain how their software works.”
Aside from the book above and a loooong list of others just like it on an equally long list of Apple apps, never mind that many splash screens of Apple apps link to a plethora of tutorial videos and their site also has endless information. Not to forget that most people get their tips and tricks from places like YouTube anyway, completely regardless of which company or software we’re talking about.
Apple also works very closely with companies such as Ripple btw. So just because they don’t splash their name all over every last thing they’re actively involved with in some way or another, doesn’t mean they’re not “engaging”. There’s a big difference between simply assuming and actually knowing.
But yeah, I too discard entire software packages simply based upon single, small hiccups they may have (I have no idea what is so horrible about the audio-only cross fade solution described, nor how it differs from any other NLE in the end, other than maybe visually), regardless of whether they offer me a boatload of other advantages and features that far overshadow said hiccup(s). Makes sense. Especially since I have so many other 100% flawless NLEs to choose from otherwise, right? 😀
[Steve Connor] “Big downsides are that you can’t use it if you have existing transitions”
Erm… you realize of course, that every transition already has an audio transition in it? So why exactly would you want or need it to begin with?? 😉
[Oliver Peters] ” I will frequently connect music to a gap and then edit all clips as connected clips. I do this because I don’t want a clip’s approximate length to arbitrarily shift later clips out of position – especially is they need to hit on a certain point in the music.”
Which is why, if the music is your *primary* focus, you would clearly put that into the *primary* storyline and simply edit the video as connected clips. Something I do all the time, since that makes the most logical sense in that case. No needless gaps or “anchors” required. That’s kind of the whole concept i.e. point behind the storyline paradigm, no?
[Oliver Peters] “I work this way until I’m happy with the arrangement. Then I overwrite to the primary storyline for further refinement.”
Another superfluous step imho. If you’re (understandably) looking for the magnetic functions for your refinements, simply make everything a *secondary* storyline. But yes, I’ll sometimes do it, too, just for visual harmony. 🙂 Just technically speaking I don’t consider it to be a necessity.
[Richard Herd] “[Howard Duy Vu] “as a toggle”
Exactly! A preference to turn or off.”
I’d say a simple modifier key when dragging would suffice. 😉
– RK
-
Or, the partly less, partly more messy version: drag it out well beyond the actual length needed, make a compound of it (⌥G) and truncate as needed. Only then you’ll need a new compound for each version.
But the vast majority of FCP titles have a checkbox for disabling the builds as described above. The exceptions are few and far between, so you most likely won’t need more than that anyway.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
Have to be more careful when using the “>” apparently… 🙂
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Bret Williams] “Yet another one of the reasons X is more professional than legacy.”
Only that the exact same was also possible in FCP < X also. - RK ____________________________________________________ Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
-
[Walter Soyka] “Gruber seems to equate losing the “functional high ground” with losing market share”
Nowhere does he mention anything about marketshare, nor is it even vaguely about that. Complete misinterpretation imho. Nor do I know what design has to do with this or how it is relevant.
They’re talking about the, as the title itself says, the FUNCTIONAL advantages that they’ve been so well known for.
[John Gruber] “It’s not that Apple has lost the “it just works” crown to a competitor, but rather that they’ve seeded a perception that Apple’s stuff doesn’t work, either.”
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
