Re: Editing scenario

[Jules bowman] "Jeremy, that wasn't what Andy was saying at all. He was saying he uses the out to hold his place in the clip so he can scrub forward from that point and that isn't there anymore. Apparently that usability is not something deemed necessary by apple."

I know exactly what Andy and everyone else is saying. I know that when you set a range and browse another clip in X, when you return, that range is gone. I also know that in 7, the in, the out, or both stick to the clip until you set another point, or clear in/out in the browser. It's very simple.

Here's the deal, you can't tell me that I can't hold on to a range in FCPX. I can. I can hold on to multiple ranges per clip. I've said this from the beginning, does is it work or look like fcp7? No, it does not. If you read Andy's earlier thread about "Apple engineers, and their utter stupidity" or whatever missive was written that day about Apple
single handedly smashing professional editing in to the wall (again), you will see where I was coming from. It looks and operates differently than fcp7 and yes, it requires a few more keystrokes and forethought. Big. Deal. If you hit the right buttons (actually it's just one more button), the actual intent of holding on to a range is there. Is it not?

There are more pressing things to get fixed on FCPX that it actually can not do at all.

I take this stuff very seriously. We are looking to switch to a new workflow, but we aren't going to be the type to buy every single NLE variant out there on ever OS and make a decision. We simply don't have the time or money so we aren't in a massive rush to switch.

CS6 is a very powerful set of tools, but there are certain things that are holding us, our shop, from using it.

Media management/conform and reconnect is one of those. We have a few users, and I am busy enough working my own projects than needing to try and fix everyone else's.

So while FCPX is missing a few buttons and functions here and there, other NLEs are missing some very crucial functionality when it comes to workflow as it pertains to our business. That doesn't mean that NLE won't work for everyone, or even most people. It just doesn't work for us.

Retaining in and out points, or really as FCPX employs it, retaining a range, is absolutely possible in FCPX, isn't it? Is it named a little something different? Does it look a little different than you're used to? Absolutely. No argument there, but the functionality does exist whether you choose to believe it or not.

So, while I might have a different view of the sky, mate, I see that it's blue. Is X's method better? That's your decision. As I said to David, the jury is still out on "better". There's much more that needs fixing than holding on to a range.

Copy/paste attributes is one of those.

Multichannel audio editing is another.

Range based Project export another (without goofy workarounds, but even then it's possible).

The there a huge list of nice to haves. I am not sitting around lamenting on why FCPX looks completely different from any NLE I've used, or why premiere can't conform out of native very easily. I am in the midst of making a pretty big decision. It will effect purchasing, it will effect "training", it will effect our workflow and archive. None of this is to be taken lightly.

In/out/favorite is small potatoes. I'm glad it's even possible and when you sit down and actually learn to use it, you might see it's really not all that bad.