Creative COW SIGN IN :: SPONSORS :: ADVERTISING :: ABOUT US :: CONTACT US :: FAQ
Creative COW's LinkedIn GroupCreative COW's Facebook PageCreative COW on TwitterCreative COW's Google+ PageCreative COW on YouTube
APPLE FINAL CUT PRO:HomeFCP ForumFCP XFCPX TechniquesFCP TutorialsFC ServerBasics ForumPodcastFAQ

Re: After a year has perception of FCPX changed?

COW Forums : Apple FCPX or Not: The Debate

VIEW ALL   •   ADD A NEW POST   •   PRINT
Share on Facebook
Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread


Bill DavisRe: After a year has perception of FCPX changed?
by on May 28, 2012 at 9:18:02 pm

[Liam Hall] "The timeline isn't designed with complex editing in mind."

Well, a Steenbeck wasn't actually designed with "complex editing in mind" but that didn't stop legions of editors from cutting very complex projects on it. So i guess I'm just clueless about what you mean by "complex." Probably just me.



[Liam Hall] "The file structure and media management aren't designed with a busy editor or facility in mind."

Now this just baffles me. How is elevating a relational database to near parity with the editing interface an example of "aren't designed with the busy editor or facility in mind?" It seems me that X in time is likely to outstrip most current editorial platforms in media management simply because they designed the database and editorial functions to function totally in tandem. But we must just see this very differently as well.

[Liam Hall] "And the trackless timeline, with its roles/stems, connected clips and storylines... ...well, that's all simply mindless..."

To me, it's almost completely "mindful." It appears to me that massive amounts of careful though and consideration went into the construction of the X interface. Primary evidence of that is that it would have been MASSIVELY easier just to do "tweaked" versions of the same workflow approaches that every other software package had done before.

The changes in X might not resonate for you - and that's all well and good - but to apply a word like mindless is to argue that they are NOT changes - just accidents. And like it or not, the change in X is far from "accidental" - the definitional opposite of "mindless" no?



[Liam Hall] "Among other things, I find "Events" and "Projects" ill-conceived, and whilst I know there are workarounds, I'm not convinced FCPX is designed with editing in mind."

Interesting. Can't recall who it was and whether or not it was here, but I was reading something yesterday from someone who was commenting about how he didn't like Events or Projects at first either - but as his work and database got more complex, he appeared to reconsider that initial opinion. IIRC, in the face of increasing workflow complexity - those concepts started to make a whole lot more sense than that did to him when he viewed every "project" as it was in Legacy editors - separate, discrete, "cut off" constructs rather than entries in a "stream" of accessible projects - one of the foundational thinking changes I think that X has made. After all, if you're still working "one project at a time" - then the entire Event Library makes little sense. OTOH, if you see your work as a series of discrete events - shoots, sound recordings, photo creations, downloads, whatever, that are all brought together into an initial key wording, coloring, and perfecting space (the event browser) - and you'd like access to all of not only that projects assets but ALL your projects assets to be accessible, then the Event idea starts to make huge amounts of sense.


[Liam Hall] "I'm sure FCPX looked good on Randy's powerpoint presentation though."

Well, you had me seriously engaged up to this.

This is just, IMO, undeserved snarkiness. It implies that X is some kind of empty"all sizzle and no steak" tool and implies that everyone here who've spent the past year exploring it are all just clueless fools - and that our year of discussion is based on us being too dense to understand how clever Mr. Ubillos snuck one over on us rubes.

The other view, of course, is that the guy responsible for empowering more professional editors than any other single software designer on the planet, just felt that there might be better long-term ways to assemble media in the modern era - and that those might be worth codifying into a new type of editing tool.

Perhaps you are correct, and all of us who find editing in X to be faster, more flexible, and more interesting than we felt editing was after our years editing in Legacy are just delusional.

But I suppose I'm content in my delusions. And far too polite to publicly say anything your comment above about whoever wrote the current version of Premier or AVID or Vegas - since those folks are all likely worlds smarter about NLE design than I am.

Thanks for expounding on your views, anyway. I personally see them as being largely based on "feelings" rather than "facts" so I remain far from convinced the the arguments - but I certainly appreciate your taking the time to try to explain your point of view.

Thanks.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Posts IndexRead Thread
Reply   Like  
-2
Share on Facebook


Current Message Thread:




LOGIN TO REPLY



FORUMSTUTORIALSFEATURESVIDEOSPODCASTSEVENTSSERVICESNEWSLETTERNEWSBLOGS

Creative COW LinkedIn Group Creative COW Facebook Page Creative COW on Twitter
© 2014 CreativeCOW.net All rights are reserved. - Privacy Policy

[Top]