Robin S. kurz
Forum Replies Created
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “One of the most talked about features of FCP X is that fact that you can throw anything at a timeline without worrying about tracks and patching and the rest of the hassle that comes with “conventional” NLEs.”
That pretty much sums it up, yes.
[Simon Ubsdell] “I wonder how many editors overlook the fact that this option is also there in Premiere.”
Er, no, it definitely isn’t.
[Simon Ubsdell] “Grab any clip from the browser and drag it to the upper centre of the Program Monitor, at which point the Overlay option becomes available, which will automatically ensure that the added material, both video and audio, does not overwrite anything in the timeline. “
It doesn’t even have a shortcut (gee, wonder why?). That is also no different than simply dragging a clip to the timeline and positioning it above any other clip. So why even go to the same amount of tedious mousing around for the exact same result?
Also, how do you e.g. get your overlay on your V2 if there is already a clip there in the V2, so inbetween two clips? Drag and drop? Hell no. Not without prep work. Shortcut? Nope. None exists. Dragging it to the overlay option? Ah, sorry. Another no-go. It’s patch’n’drag’n’fiddle all the way, no matter what.
So… how exactly does that compare? No “worrying about tracks and patching”? Really? You’re sure about that? I certainly am not.
Would also love to know how the “same thing as connecting”-grouping thing in PPro is made visible in the timeline? How do I know what and if I’ve grouped something just by looking at it? Oh, I don’t. And how do I achieve the ever so simple task of MOVING say for example a “connected” audio effect by itself after the fact? I mean without going through some ungrouping-unlinking-regrouping-relinking-removing etc. etc. etc. etc. dance first and last? Right, I can’t.
Again. How does it compare? Somehow I’m just not seeing it.
You completely disregard the fact that by the virtue of Roles, the “track” a clips audio lands on/in is not decided by “nearest convenient slot and ever higher track number” as well. Meaning that even if I stack 10 clips on top of each other, their audio will ALWAYS land in the respective lane associated to the audio role. Would love to see you do that in PPro “just as in FCP”. No “automatically ensure” of anything there. Any way of doing anything even vaguely similar just with a single key (or otherwise) in PPro? Erm… no. Have six clips stacked anywhere, then you better like having at least six audio tracks, too, four of which could easily be completely empty and otherwise useless space hogs. But I guess that’s “a feature”? ????
And what if you’ve predetermined 1&2 for dialog, 3&4 for music and 5&6 for effects in Premiere? Well gee, then I hope for the sake of your organization you never have a V7 or higher with your method. And, as in most cases, what if you never even have anything more than a V1 and maybe V2 and still need he same organization? Then saddle up enjoy your patch-dance! ???? Because bingo, your audio is going all over the place and that’s the exact moment (one of many) where your entire comparison falls apart completely.
How about you always want all foreign language audio isolated, say on 7&8 and another language on 9&10 etc. etc. as you edit? I mean without once having to think about it or having to go back to clean matters up at the end? Not possible, period. OR be sure to saddle up once again and have those patching shortcuts memorized and never ever forget to use them.
How about switching the order of e.g. dialog and effects audio? Dialog on 5&6 and effects on 1&2 without changing a single video track, all in one simple click? Now there’s some “Fun in editing!” with PPro. ????
Ever hear someone say something to the effect of “Final Cut Pro X moves all the technical mumbo-jumbo out of the way and simply LETS YOU EDIT and immerse in the creative process without the constant technical considerations as brain baggage along the way”? Well, I sure have. Often. And that would be one of those (many) things that they’re referring to. ????
“Unique” doesn’t even begin to describe it for me, no. Nor can something like that ever be “oversold”. Clearly there are many left that still haven’t gotten it nor even begin to appreciate it for what it is: an absolutely brilliant and very unique concept and a massive time-saver, plain and simple.
[Simon Ubsdell] “Conceptually there is no difference between this and hitting the Q key in FCP X.”
Actually: zero comparison. Neither functionally and most certainly not conceptually. Complete apples and oranges. Mere visual similarities, which is all there is, are irrelevant. I’d have to be willfully obtuse or have never once worked with X to even consider such a comparison and I suspect could only be manufactured by someone who doesn’t actually even edit for a living beyond maybe a YouTube vlog? But even then…
[Simon Ubsdell] “Of course, the auto-connection is a very useful default if you are placing titles that go with a specific picture or sound effects that sync to a specific frame. But I don’t think anyone can argue that these represent anything like a majority of the edits you are performing when you use the Q function.”
Wow. Then I can only guess that you edit very very different things from me and pretty much 100% of every other professional editor I know. No narrative, no commercial, no image? At least I have yet to ever see anyone place something like a title or sound effect (or even a simple cutaway) into their timeline completely at random without any relevant relation to the underlying picture/story whatsoever as opposed to the other way around. Still waiting for that title/effect that fits perfectly no matter where it is!
That for me being the most bizarre notion yet.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Scott Witthaus] “Snap competitor?”
Erm… more like VIVOOM?
No one can tell me they’re not shaking in their boots right now.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Tolbert Pitman] “For example Helvetica regular for the first name and Helvetica Bold for the last name. These need to change so I would like to build a file that can be updated inside FCPX.”
Even with AE there is no way of forcing that e.g. the first word in a single text box is style X and the next word style Y without in fact creating a separate text box for each. The same goes for ANY app that uses text, therefore Motion is no exception. But yes, whether you’re in Motion or FCP, you can format even every letter differently if you like by simply selecting them and formatting as you like. But if you want to force a certain formatting for individual words, lines etc., no matter the app, there’s absolutely no way of getting around working with multiple text boxes accordingly.
And if you do, Motion, as of the most recent version, is the only app of them all that can actually automatically maintain the correct alignment/relation of them to each other, thanks to the “Align” behavior. Something you might want to look into, if the whole thing is a must-have.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Simon Ubsdell] “… so I NEVER AGAIN have to LOSE ACCESS to my projects as a result of their UNSPEAKABLE DEMANDS.”
Must be bummer to be living in an area with just ONE electricity supplier and no options!
But yeah, I know what you mean. Which, ironically, is why I simply installed both a wind turbine AND solar panels right from the get go. Now I have endless power, permanent access to all my work and no monthly costs. To top it all off, someone comes by every few months and updates everything for $0!
I know, right? Makes ya feel pretty damn stupid for having ever gone with that electricity supplier company in the first place and makes you wonder why in the world anyone ever would, huh?
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Tony West] “… and yet YOU are trying to defend the comment…”
But it’s such a so very important and incredibly relevant point, Tony! ????
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
And here I thought we were finally past the childish, polemic “OMG, they killed FCP! The bastards!“-phase.
???? *sigh*
My bad. -
[Oliver Peters] “There STILL is NO viable path built inside of FCPX to transfer a sequence directly from FCP7 to FCPX.”
Yeah. The four people left that still need it actually having to pay one fourth/tenth of a single month’s CC sub?! I mean… the gall of Apple to not deliver on something now we already haven’t needed since 2013, right?
Never mind that we’re still arguing a tired, irrelevant, five+ year old topic, it’s all about principle! ☝????
???? ????
-
Sure, Simon. Whatever. Never mind that you are the one suddenly making this “an FCP X specific” thing right out of left field. But feel free to point the finger at others (me) in an attempt to project the underlying disingenuousness, we can take it. I mean, how could anyone be so completely stupid-fanboy, seeing that this is a post in the FCP forum? Totally crazy, right? ???? Had I commented on the Avid shortcuts it still, somehow, somewhere, would of course been turned into some kind of FCP X fanboy thing yadda yadda yadda, because that’s the spiel here… I get it. ????????
I merely answered to the FCP X example of your “problem”, not the others, since I don’t know the others off the top of my head, nor will I speak to their “worseness” bla bla bla. Turning that into some sort “Ooooh, the FCP guys are going all defensive crazy again!” thing is just plain…
… oh never mind. Do continue. It’s important. ????????
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Simon Ubsdell] “only FCP X editors who thought it was a specific criticism of FCP X”
Just a crazy-wacky guess here, but maybe… just maybe… it was because you called out a specific FCP X shortcut? I know… it’s a stretch… ????
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Walter Soyka] “As an After Effects user, Premiere’s default shortcuts mess me up big-time every couple weeks.”
Interesting. Because the epitome of two-fold stupid imho is that FCP X uses “A” for the default selection tool, but Motion on the other hand uses ⇧S which is probably the most obscure shortcut possible for probably the most important tool. What is on “A” in Motion? Believe it or not the “Record Keyframes” function… You wanna talk “messing you up”? Try that one.
Of all the things that they haven’t unified across the two (such as certain keyframe behavior, which I thought was completely superfluous), that somehow is still one of those things that haven’t made the cut… for the worse.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!