Robin S. kurz
Forum Replies Created
-
[Michael Hancock] “In FCPX you load the original stringout, toggle to it, find the clip you want and copy it, the toggle back and paste it.”
Wow. That describes THE most counterproductive, hobbling, inefficient workflow I can think of in the context of X, yes. Whether “pancaked” or not.
[Michael Hancock] “Ironically, FCPX is least friendly to this method.”
Er, yeah. And why? Because: it makes absolutely no sense i.e. that would be by far the least efficient approach. So… absolutely no irony anywhere to be seen actually. Just common sense and unneeded. If you know the software and aren’t just simply bogged down but old habits of yesteryear.
[Michael Hancock] “you can add markers like Andrew does to subdivide sections so it’s easy to find what you’re looking for, or to even add notes that are searchable.”
I have no idea why I would want to do that, when I can get any and everything I’m looking for in a single click. Done. No marking, no skimming, no switching, not anything of such a convoluted nature. Be it I use Favorites, Keywords, Smart Keywords or any of the other endless filtering options X offers me.
And mind you, I’m not saying that the whole classic “string-out” method as described is a bad or useless approach per se (I’ll actually do it occasionally do it for e.g. interviews, to whittle them down to what it is I want/need said). I am — and I’d venture to say every other X user here arguing similarly are — merely saying it may be GREAT for any number of other NLEs and by all means, if it works for you and even improves something, go for it! But if that’s what someone’s doing in X, then they just plain haven’t understood the software and could be much more efficient using various other methods. With that, they’re just using X as if it were their old NLE, whichever that may have been. And they need to actually learn the software and their options and allow for at least a bit of rethinking, after which they’ll realize that this isn’t an efficient approach in comparison to what other options you’re given. Cuz sorry, but… five timelines??! ????????♂️ Ouch.
[Michael Hancock] “Have you tried Simon’s method?”
Yeah. I.e. something that only differed in some minor points. For well over 10 years prior to X. Which is why I can say from personal experience, that it’s a convoluted, messy habit I couldn’t have been happier to drop asap. Everything described can be done and done better long before you ever even create a timeline. In X.
– RK
-
[Oliver Peters] “Only if you choose to view the world from a very limited perspective.”
????… sure, Oliver. Talk about a arbitrary straw man. As if that had anything to do with anything. Just ignore the quote to cloak the actual context of what I meant as well as the capriciousness of your “argument”.
“That’s a really grown up way to have a discussion.”…
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[David Mathis] “and VR capabilities.”
Pretty easy call, seeing that it has been everything but explicitly announced. But also something I’m personally not the least bit interested in, nor do I get the fascination. Goes in the same box as “amazing 3D” for me. We’ll see.
AR on the other hand…
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Oliver Peters] “Another variation to the theme:”
Interesting choice to point to, considering…
“I have many, many bins, and many, many sequences where things are organized before I even start to “edit.” It makes the edit project fairly complex, but at the same time it’s where I start to find the story, and themes, and ideas: through the organization of the media itself.”
I’d say pretty much proving everyone else’s point, yes. ???????? And is in complete contradiction to the article at hand.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Tony West] “How would you find that clip, since you never bothered to organize anything in the bin or browser.”
Exactly.
Talk about a imho near-sighted “instant gratification” approach. But I guess if you never ever have to consider anyone else’s input (as in sitting over your shoulder asking questions and/or for shot XYZ) or have to share projects with anyone else, you’re sitting’ pretty and can do whatever you want. Of course if you do, I’d say you’re screwed. Unfortunately, many of us do have a lot of other input and collaboration to consider.
And sorry to say, but even if the article wasn’t meant to be about editing software but STYLE, it clearly should make the case for this only being a viable approach to be considered with certain software, but most definitely not all.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Oliver Peters] “Except that is breaks down when you need to make and retain direct comparisons.”
Certainly not the way I use them.
[Oliver Peters] “By sticking with the browser and being dependent on rejects/favorites, you are forced to reject/hide good alternate takes if you only want to see the “hero” take for each. If not, you always end up looking through all of the good options when you only want one.”
Then you’re simply using them wrong if you ask me. You can filter by favorites only and you can even tag individual favorites beyond that to whittle matters down even further. I don’t see how that doesn’t do exactly what it is you describe without a single clip hitting the timeline. If you do it right that is.
[Oliver Peters] “OTOH, if you use stringouts, you can save a version with all the good takes, dupe the sequence, and then cut down the sequence to just one good option of each.”
And, for me, that’s exactly where e.g. AUDITIONS come into play, if needed. But then I can for example see every Scene 2 line X, Y or Z in one fell swoop if I do my homework. Again, without a single clip hitting the timeline. And with one click I can call up any and all of said lines or takes for whomever wants to see them as well.
[Oliver Peters] “One issue with browser organization and FCPX’s ability to play through the visible clips is that you always see them in the sorting order of the browser. Clip 1, then 2, then 3, and so on.”
Again, there are easy ways around that, if you know how and that’s what you need. There are various methods of filtering by any given criteria. By NAME is just one of MANY. No flipping through endless “selects” timelines etc. needed. Certainly no “pancaking”.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[greg janza] “but I also have learned over the years that the process of creating a compelling story takes time.”
If you want to argue “only a SLOW edit is a GOOD edit”… that’s your prerogative. But I certainly beg to differ. Speed says absolutely nothing about quality. I’d generally consider that a straw man, if anything. But then, I’ve never seen your edits. The may well blow me away. ????
– RK
-
[greg janza] “I make stringouts of all of my material to start and then use those stringouts to do all searches. It’s a very efficient system overall and it eliminates the need to organize or tag material.”
Ironically, others would say the exact opposite. That organization (i.e favorites, rejects etc.) and tags eliminate the need for (imho complete outdated and comparatively highly inefficient) string outs.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
Ever hear of “relative privation”? Look it up.
[andy patterson] “How well does Motion handle the bleed and slug area for printing?”
Wow. Rarely seen anyone try THAT hard. ????
Yeah, Motion is needed for making custom titles, effects, generators and transitions for FCP one way or another. Be it directly or “under the hood”, without even needing to own Motion. Saving you $600 a year in the process by comparison. Somehow that’s a horrible disadvantage and limitation (not) that I can live with very very easily. Go figure.
And you’ll probably de horrified to hear, that even for PPro et al you need an SDK to make Plugins! ???? Motion essentially being FCP’s SDK… without the SDK. But what would you know. Why not tell us how to make effects, generators and transitions for PPro. Oh… right. Oops.
????
-
[Noah Kadner] “As code signing did not exist the last time FCP7 was updated”
Yeah, I know. I just found it amusing. ????
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!