Re: After a year has perception of FCPX changed?

[Liam Hall] "[Craig Seeman] "When you say the timeline isn't conducive for complex editing and Event and Projects is ill conceived that shows a lack of understanding.

Maybe you have a definition of "complex" you assume is common. You should define and substantiate your position.

There's nothing at all ill conceived about Events and Projects. Whatever shortcoming you don't mention, it's easy to prove its greater flexibility as I have done.

I responded with explanations. You've made generalizations."

Sorry Craig, I've only got time for sweeping generalisations. I'll try and write something detailed when I can - maybe start a new thread with it."

I think I can help here, because this is my worry also with FCPX. I think the term "simple" should be replaced with "standard" i.e. an edit based on a linear storyline. You know? Where intercutting and montage advance a storyline that progesses from point A to point B.

Non-Linear structure that is cut for interplay of image and sound which does not rely on a traditional 3-act structure seems a bit more difficult in FCPX to my mind. I could be wrong here. Still these kind of videos often develope organically as the edit progresses. You have a general idea of what the finished product should look and sound, but it often changes as during the process.

Now I may be wrong here, but FCPX seems more aimed towards a pre-planned (storyboarded if you will) editing style. You need to determine primary storyline at the get go. Now this works well (and is somewhat essential) for traditional linear narrative -- which is what most for hire work will involve.

However, I am curious to hear from FCPX editors how they deal with a more freeform type of work. I am sure the capability must be there, I just don't know how it would be done in a magnetic timeline with a primary storyline structure. Anybody out there cut anything like I mentioned above in FCPX? How did you do it?