Simon Ubsdell
6
COW Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
Fair enough.
I was getting the impression that you thought that it was impossible to improve on the rigid layouts we’ve had for the last 5+ years.
My mistake, sorry.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
As a thought experiment, suppose Apple did introduce more flexible UI layout options.
Would you consider that to be a mistake on their part?
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Michael Paul] “I can not simply remove the end or the beginning of a middle clip of those 5 clips. I will need to use the blade, cut the end of that clip and then select the 2 clips that are next to it no the left and move those to close the gap. “
That’s exactly what secondary storylines are there for.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
One very significant factor that doesn’t seem to have been mentioned yet is the FCP X/Motion ecosystem which has had a truly revolutionary impact on the market.
I suspect Apple thought not much further than giving FCP X editors a way of building fancy lower thirds, but what it has meant in practice is a genuine transformation.
Because anything you build in Motion can be used directly inside FCP X with control over the majority of parameters, most FCP X editors are now building their own sophisticated graphics packages in a way that they simply haven’t done before and in ways that are just not as easily achieved with any other system.
That has led to many of them becoming “plug-in developers”, creating and sharing and selling a huge variety of utilities and templates and effects and transitions and more, without having to learn how to write a single line of code. The result is that there must be far more on offer in terms of these types of “plug-ins” for FCP X than for any other NLE.
I often finding myself choosing to use FCP X for this feature alone – the ease of building a custom effect for a particular project is a compelling case to go for FCP X over another NLE.
Just one of the many ways in which FCP X has encouraged editors to “think different”.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Robin S. Kurz] “But isn’t that what he’s asking? ;-)”
Since he doesn’t even know the basics of how it works, talking about the details of how it works is probably not the best way of convincing him at this point 😉
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
I have been an outspoken critic of FCP X since its launch, and at the same time I have been using it continuously since day one – sounds contradictory, I know, but here’s my take.
Any editor who isn’t using FCP X at least in some way is seriously missing out.
There are things about Media Composer and Premiere that please me and things that displease me but overall I am fairly indifferent about them, whereas there are things about FCP X that I loathe with a deep abiding passion and things that I absolutely love. That’s the big difference.
I won’t go into the details of what I love and loathe here – do check out the links that others have given you and especially read what Oliver Peters has to say.
Don’t be swayed by the fact that Walter Murch is not using it – he’s missing out too. There are some really clever, talented experienced editors using FCP X (people like Oliver, Charlie Austin, Tom Carter, Ronny Courtens) and they have devised extremely impressive workflows that make the most of FCP X’s many unique strengths.
The very things that you are now looking at and seeing as weaknesses are the things in which the real power of FCP X actually lies. Secondary storylines, for example, which seem to make no sense to you, offer truly unique possibilities – once you have used a secondary storyline for cutting music, for instance, you will want every other NLE to have the same capability.
Could Apple do better? Of course they could. FCP X is far from perfect (and some things will just never be good enough in my view) but the things it does well, it does so well that nothing else comes close for the sheer fun and speed of it. And the key word there is “fun” – you’ll find a lot of FCP X editors describing it this way and for a very good reason. And if an NLE can be fun, that has to be a good thing!
So learn it – properly and in depth – and use it for the things it does well, even if that means that it only forms a part of your overall workflow, as Doug has described elsewhere in this thread. A lot of editors are doing just that – it’s a great toolbox of useful features and you’d be crazy not to add it to your arsenal.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
Walter has already answered this, but I’d just like to concur with him that this is all very simple indeed to do in something like Fusion – maybe even simpler than in Ae?
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Walter Soyka] “Also worth mentioning (and certainly something you know), Motion shows you processing in the timeline context”
Yes, indeed. I was forgetting that 😉
Actually I used to use the Motion Timeline far more extensively for this, which is obviously the method that the original developers had in mind, but over time I have come to use the Layers pane instead and only access the Timeline for finessing timings rather than “compositing”, which I think is a more efficient way of working with the Motion model.
I should take another look a Mistika, I know, but I was among the early adopters of Jaleo and quickly gave up on it on account of its many design quirks – which you would either love or hate.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Walter Soyka] “In my mind, for nodes, the flow graph sets the structure of the comp. Time is expressed and can be manipulated, but it is entirely independent of the the structure. For layers, the timeline sets the structure of the comp in the X dimension and varies over time in the Y direction. They are linked.”
A very insightful formulation. (Though I think you’ve got your X and Y mixed up?)
In many ways though it encapsulates the limitations of layer-based systems.
Because the “structure” of the comp can only be expressed by the way that layers are superimposed/stacked in the Y direction, there are limits to how complex you can make the compositing. Or rather complex compositing makes for a great deal of redundancy in that you need to duplicate layers unnecessarily rather than simply piping one instance wherever it is needed.
The other point is that although the layered timeline is showing you something about the structure of the comp, it’s a fairly incomplete picture. You’re only really seeing the layer order (and a few other things), rather than the processes that are being applied. To see those processes you have to step through each layer and examine what’s happening.
With nodes, of course, you can see the entirety of the structure, including many of the key processes, at one time which is a huge bonus. (Obviously, there’s still a great deal you’re not seeing without stepping through each node, but it’s a lot more feedback than tracks give you.)
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Walter Soyka] “In fact, I think looking at a layer-based system, the idea that a track-matted layer has to be adjacent to its matte leads to a disorganization that you can very easily overcome with a free-form flow graph. Matte management is the bane of layered compositors.”
This is indeed one of the real weaknesses of Ae from a compositing point of view, making for a really clunky workflow. It works, but it certainly doesn’t work elegantly.
Of course, as you know, this is not something that is a problem in Motion, where you can apply a matte from anywhere without the need for the layer (or group) to be adjacent. So this is not in fact a limitation of track-based systems, just a quirk of Ae’s ancient architecture.
But yes, the real beauty of node-based systems is the power and flexibility in terms of being able to patch anything anywhere very quickly and simply which is the key to complex compositing.
One of the often overlooked features of node-based compositors that Ae lacks (and Motion too) is the option to use Effect Masks, i.e. the ability to use any bitmap or shape to mask the effect of any process (using RGB, alpha, hue, saturation, luminance, auxiliary channels, etc.). The lack of this very powerful and flexible feature in Ae again makes for some really clunky workarounds that mostly don’t achieve the same result as an effect mask would.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki