Shane Ross
Forum Replies Created
-
Well, there are many many new editors out there who don’t know the basics to 3-point editing, so this might speak to them about making decisions BEFORE they put the clip into the timeline. But that, again, is a practice that predates this magnetic timeline, so for him to say it’s something new was one of those BS statements I was talking about.
Later on his points are good, but the opening of the article is just poop.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Bill Davis] “Yes, but your PROGRAM doesn’t honor and preserve that decision across any possible future changes you might make. X does. “
I’m sorry, what? What does that mean?
[Bill Davis] ”
NOBODY is saying there aren’t valid arguments for tracks. (Nobody is coming to take your tracks from your cold dead hands ???? – Really. NOBODY. You will ALWAYS have the option of tracks.”No, they aren’t. I didn’t say they were. I said his opening arguments were pure BS
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
“In a track-based editing program you’re constantly asking yourself “where in time does this clip go?” At 30 seconds in? 45 seconds? And so on.”
Who does that? I’ve never done it like that. You cut it in when you need it. I need a cutaway here becuase they are describing X…or I need one here to bridge a jump, or I need to cut to a reaction because someone said something that the other person reacted to. Who edits like this?
“The primary question is one of story relationships. Here are a couple examples.
“This audio queue should happen when that boat comes around the corner.”
“First I want to see the wide, then the medium, then the tight.”Yup…which is what we do, even when you have tracks.
‘But traditional track-based timelines asked us to think in a way that wasn’t focused on story, but rather on a set of technical specifications. “This audio cue needs to happen at 45 seconds and 12 frames in, which happens to visually correspond to what is going on with 5 tracks up the timeline and out of my view.””
(bold is their emphasis, not mine)
WRONG. I never ever in all of my years of editing EVER did that. I put music where I felt it needed to go in the story….right after a moment occurred, or to lead up to a moment. When it felt right. I have never, nor have I ever heard of other editors describing it like the above line. if someone did treat it like that, they might be more technical that story based editors. Sorry, that’s a BS statement.
I won’t quote and refute the whole article, but those opening statements are just complete BS. And editing isn’t ONLY creative, never has been. Editing is also technical, and tracks exist for a reason. And when you work on shows with multiple editors there is a reason for why things are set up the way they are. When you send audio to the audio mixer, things DO need to be separate (which is why ROLES was such a big step for FCX to implement…that made this trackless editing more viable to many people).
“The magnetic timeline saves an enormous amount of time. There are several reasons for this, not the least of which is that FCP X encourages you to quickly organize your footage before editing. Place some keywords, mark important spots in the browser, and make notes on clips. All those things make your editing more precise.”
THis is true of ANY AND ALL NLEs. This isn’t limited to FCP-X. Good god, no. If you want to find anything in ANY software, you need to name things and label things and add comments that are searchable. This is important in pretty much all editing situations, and is doable in all NLEs.
“The magnetic timeline saves an enormous amount of time. There are several reasons for this, not the least of which is that FCP X encourages you to quickly organize your footage before editing. Place some keywords, mark important spots in the browser, and make notes on clips. All those things make your editing more precise.
There is a lot right about the the timeline, like no collisions and keeping storylines connected, I’ll give him that. And I know that the magnetic timeline is AMAZING for many MANY people. I get that, I’m not knocking that. It’s useful, it’s great, I know that. But the article is full of wrong and misleading statements. And there are many valid arguments for tracks…but just because someone doesn’t like them or see the point to them doesn’t mean they are useless, or a hinderance.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
You don’t need to run ANY virtual software. Just partition your drive, or install another system drive and install the older system on that. nothing else is needed.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Well, what I was cutting was a documentary with about 300 or so hours of footage, and while the shot footage was converted to proxies, none of the stock footage as. We also had it accessing about 300GB of music and SFX, which is a LOT of media.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
I worked (took over) a feature length doc cut on Premiere. The project file got up to 260MB. Main issue was it took 10 min to load and settle down for me to start editing.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
That camera shoots an XAVC format that might be tricky to bring in. XAVC-S I know is tricky on earlier versions, and you needed to buy a third party plugin for it as Sony no longer give a hoot about doing it. BUT…with Avid 8.9 it now has a built in AMA plugin for it…
SO transcode all your footage to DNxHR SQ, get an iMac or MacPro (whatever you can afford) and a 64TB RAID from OWC or G-TECH.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Greg Burke] “h.264 MPEG 4 AVC is the codes”
Yeah, that is why it’s stuttering. It takes A LOT to decode that on the fly. COnvert that to DNxHR or Cineform and you’ll see a marked difference. And yes the file sizes will increase
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
What is the codec of the 4K footage? Camera native? Something like AVC-S or AVCHD…MP4? Or did you convert it to DNxHD or Cineform? Many camera native formats are highly compressed and very difficult to edit without converting, or having a very high end machine
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Scott Thomas] “Wasn’t Avid’s reaction to FCP, to buy Pinnacle to kill their hardware IO for FCP?”
Not sure that’s what happened. I know that Apple was very secretive with it’s development kit, wouldn’t release it before they released FCP…but after. And by the time the card makers caught up, a new version of FCP came out and they needed to start all over again. This happened with Matrox and the RT Mac. But then Avid bought Pinnacle and didn’t do ANY advancement on any front, really not sure whey they even did that.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def