FORUMS: list search recent posts

It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Mark Morache
It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 11, 2011 at 10:51:10 pm

Does the magnetic timeline really make life any easier?

I think for noobies doing very basic editing, the magnetic timeline may get them up and editing more quickly. For a simple assemble with audio follow video, and perhaps some titles and music, the magnetic timeline is simple and straightforward.

Frankly, I think the basic FCP timeline is fairly straightforward as well. It takes just a bit more thought to slip clips around like you can in FCX, but it's easily done. (Drag a clip to another place in the timeline and press the option key before you release.)

Once you get beyond the basic assemble, I'm not loving all of this magnetism.

If you have worked through a project in FCX, and done more complicated editing, please chime in.

I've edited almost exclusively on FCX since it's release. I love the organization, the ability to edit all sorts of files natively, the motion effects, all the good stuff. I totally expect that Apple will keep adding functionality as it matures, that will get it back to where FCP7 was.

What I don't believe they can get around is the magnetic timeline.

I think the bottom line for me is that FCX forces us to pick one thing at a time that will be the spine of a project. I rarely find it that simple. FCP7 lets us jump around, making decisions based on one track or another. In FCP7 I don't need to decide what other clips to connect my b-roll to, it's just there. I don't need to be concerned with where the connection happens in the clip. I don't need to dive into a timeline view of a clip or break the clip apart to adjust my audio channels separately, they are there in the timeline. I don't need to worry about whether I can add a dissolve or not if they aren't on V1, I just do it. I don't need to think about whether to put my b-roll in a secondary storyline or connect it to a clip in the primary storyline, I just drop it on the track.

It's helpful to be able to think about audio and video separately. I take that back, it's not helpful, it's essential. FCP7 gives us the tools to deal with our edit decisions based on either. FCX I believe is primarily a visual editor, and audio, with it's nested and hidden nature, is secondary. It's not that I can't produce the same result, but it's not as fluid. It's not as intuitive. It's not as easy. I spend an insane amount of time trying to get my audio levels even, with overlapping and blending.

I believe that Apple can give us most all of the things we want, in time. They've already given us roles. I believe we will have multicam. We will also have XML export for audio sweetening and color correcting. We will have better trimming tools, and some sort of autosave vault.

However I don't see how they can ever get past the shortcomings of the magnetic timeline. It's the most basic thing we do, and I get it, but I don't like it.

Do I need to retrain my brain to think different? Or should I stop complaining about the limp and just get used to the crutches.

---------
FCX. She tempts me, abuses me, beats me up, makes me feel worthless, then in the end she comes around, helps me get my work done, gives me hope and I can't stop thinking about her.

Mark Morache
Avid/Xpri/FCP7/FCX
Evening Magazine,Seattle, WA
http://fcpx.wordpress.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 12:48:13 am

[Mark Morache] "Do I need to retrain my brain to think different? Or should I stop complaining about the limp and just get used to the crutches."

Some of it. As far as what goes in the primary is a decision, and it's not always visuals. I find the audio drives the piece, whether thats dialogue or a music driven piece. Depending on what you need, you can switch those around at any time, but you know all that.

I think a bit more control is needed. We need to be able to edit all four tracks (or whatever) of embedded audio at once. I don't care if it hides itself back to one clip when I'm done adjusting, I like the clean timeline, but just let me have control, without divorcing the audio from the video.

Having compounds also controllable in a "dynamic clip" would be nice too, that way I could break apart the audio, compound the audio and video, and have what I need, including multiple, video tracks if that's what I need, with different filters on each.

I do have a hunch we will see some interface upgrades with multicam, I mean how can you do a multicam switch without a sources and program monitor? Impossible. I hope they do it right. I really don't mind the dynamics of the timeline, it just needs a bit more finesse. I think the foundation is there.

Keep sending suggestions to Apple, people.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Mark Morache
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 1:07:29 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Depending on what you need, you can switch those around at any time"

Yes, but in FCP7 you didn't need to. I still find the thing awkward, and that may be because there is ONE WAY to put things in the spine that makes everything else make sense, otherwise it still feels like I'm a slave to the paradigm, rather than having it work for me. And I like using I and O to set my points on the timeline. Tell me how I can use the keyboard to set the edit points on a secondary timeline? I can't figure it out.

[Jeremy Garchow] "We need to be able to edit all four tracks (or whatever) of embedded audio at once"

I agree. I don't like all of the audio being hidden. Choosing between detaching the audio and hiding it is a choice between two evils. FCX keeps me from having a track with only one or two clips in it, and that's a good thing, but all of this double-clicking to see the hidden audio is wasting my time. Although I've said this before, I could live easier with it if expanding the audio showed me all four of my audio channels, in the context of the timeline. I hate nested clips in that you must edit them apart from the timeline, so you can't see how your timing works with the other clips that aren't part of the nest.

I think it would be very cool to be able to nest the audio, or any layered effect and open it up like an effect in Avid, with the small tracks visible in the context of the entire timeline. I'd use nested, or compound clips a whole lot more then.

[Jeremy Garchow] "I mean how can you do a multicam switch without a sources and program monitor? Impossible."

Be careful of what you call impossible. You just might encourage them to try it. I believe that this whole magnetic timeline thing was the result of a double-dog-dare between software designers.

I still maintain that Apple will need to build in many more accomodations in order to make this trackless timeline work. Secondary storyline? In what bizarro universe would we even need to think like this?

---------
FCX. She tempts me, abuses me, beats me up, makes me feel worthless, then in the end she comes around, helps me get my work done, gives me hope and I can't stop thinking about her.

Mark Morache
Avid/Xpri/FCP7/FCX
Evening Magazine,Seattle, WA
http://fcpx.wordpress.com


Return to posts index


Lance Moody
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 1:26:27 am

Hi Mark,

I agree with many of your comments.

While tackling a large first project on FCPX, I certainly felt the pain of not being able to do things as I wished, as I was used to doing them.

But as I worked I began to realize that things like choosing what is the primary storyline is really not that important a decision. I doesn't matter that much...you can switch stuff in and out of the primary and I began to see that having everything magnetic really made sense.

Looking over that first timeline, I see lots of mistakes I made at first (like creating compound clips instead of secondaries) but then began to avoid as the workflow became more and more second nature while I continued to work.

Anyway, don't know if this helps or contributes but I am looking forward to working more and more with X.

Lance



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 1:39:10 am

[Lance Moody] "Anyway, don't know if this helps or contributes but I am looking forward to working more and more with X."

Prepare to run to a bomb shelter. It can get rough around here with comments like this, although it's not as seedy as it used to be.


Return to posts index

Mark Morache
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 9:53:21 am

[Lance Moody] "choosing what is the primary storyline is really not that important a decision. I doesn't matter that much...you can switch stuff in and out of the primary"

That's partially true. I've found that dragging things in and out of the primary and flipping things around can leave residual issues, so I don't always do it without careful thinking, because it matters what you put in the primary storyline. Trimming and editing can be easier or more difficult depending on where you put things.

I'm not giving up on this. I like the good part of this too much. I'm glad you like it, but I'm still finding myself doing lots of clicking to get to my finished product. I hope they can fix that.

---------
FCX. She tempts me, abuses me, beats me up, makes me feel worthless, then in the end she comes around, helps me get my work done, gives me hope and I can't stop thinking about her.

Mark Morache
Avid/Xpri/FCP7/FCX
Evening Magazine,Seattle, WA
http://fcpx.wordpress.com


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 1:34:45 am

[Mark Morache] "And I like using I and O to set my points on the timeline. Tell me how I can use the keyboard to set the edit points on a secondary timeline? I can't figure it out."

Humor me for a second, I'm going to ask a dumb question. Besides the obvious, the three point edit that still works and not being able to set a global in and out, what capability are you missing? Just trying to get a sense.

I tell you what I miss about in and out, is that it seems pretty locked to the primary. You can use a range elsewhere, but I really think a target system would help, select an in and out on the timeline, target that clip, then whatever you want to do will happen to that targeted clip. It would help. More control.

[Mark Morache] "Although I've said this before, I could live easier with it if expanding the audio showed me all four of my audio channels, in the context of the timeline. I hate nested clips in that you must edit them apart from the timeline, so you can't see how your timing works with the other clips that aren't part of the nest.

I think it would be very cool to be able to nest the audio, or any layered effect and open it up like an effect in Avid, with the small tracks visible in the context of the entire timeline. I'd use nested, or compound clips a whole lot more then."


Yep.

[Mark Morache] "Be careful of what you call impossible. You just might encourage them to try it. I believe that this whole magnetic timeline thing was the result of a double-dog-dare between software designers."

Heh heh.

[Mark Morache] "Secondary storyline? In what bizarro universe would we even need to think like this?"

Like it or not, there's a method. Secondary storylines give you control of defining a horizontal relationship without a track. In a trackless world, you need them, just like gaps. It allows you to stick clips together that might have a chance of coming apart, but need the relationship (like a transition). It allows you to layer things as you need them with the surrounding clips too without destroying the horizontal relationship.


Return to posts index

Mark Morache
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 10:10:39 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "I tell you what I miss about in and out, is that it seems pretty locked to the primary."

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Perhaps they can give us a way to lock the primary so pressing I and O will default to the next storyline up. I don't understand why selecting the secondary storyline, won't let me use my keyboard to set the edit points.

[Jeremy Garchow] "Secondary storylines give you control of defining a horizontal relationship without a track. In a trackless world, you need them,"

Yes I understand that. I'm still not convinced that this is preferable to the legacy method of using tracks, because it's not entirely a trackless world. When we have secondary storylines or connected clips, we effectively have tracks. Does it make it better if the pop in and out instead of staying constant? Maybe not. We gain freedom when we lose the need to patch the source and destination, and the apps avoiding of clip collisions. We lose something as well. And I'm not just talking as an old editor who thinks the old way is always better. I'm just the opposite. I love new things. I love new ways of working and thinking.

Right now, swapping tracks for magnetic feels to me like it may never be more than an even trade, and even worse, it might be an irreparable loss.

---------
FCX. She tempts me, abuses me, beats me up, makes me feel worthless, then in the end she comes around, helps me get my work done, gives me hope and I can't stop thinking about her.

Mark Morache
Avid/Xpri/FCP7/FCX
Evening Magazine,Seattle, WA
http://fcpx.wordpress.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 10:32:23 am

We need an "add fixed storyline" option, I can't believe this would be difficult to do and it would do two things, it would effectively disable the magnetic timeline as secondary story lines do not default to ripple and it would also give you virtual tracks

You could then assign "roles" to these fixed storylines which would function as output patching.

"My Name is Steve and I'm an FCPX user"


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 3:08:48 pm

[Mark Morache] "That's exactly what I'm talking about. Perhaps they can give us a way to lock the primary so pressing I and O will default to the next storyline up. I don't understand why selecting the secondary storyline, won't let me use my keyboard to set the edit points. "

I just think it needs to have more control built in. You set an i and an o and it marks the whole timeline. You can then hit a key command to "target" the layer you want to edit/replace/overwrite/insert/whatever. That would keep the tracklessness, just give more control of the layers. It would also make things faster with connected clips without so much click and drag. It would allow direct editing from the browser to the timeline, bringing track like control, with no tracks.

[Mark Morache] "When we have secondary storylines or connected clips, we effectively have tracks. "

I see them as layers, not tracks. They aren't tracks, they don't operate like tracks, but they do give you visual organization like a track, but it's not persistent across the timeline, like a track. Perhaps they are mini tracks.

[Mark Morache] "And I'm not just talking as an old editor who thinks the old way is always better. I'm just the opposite. I love new things. I love new ways of working and thinking."

I hear you and I'm with you. And as much conversation that has happened about throwing all clips in a timeline and editing it down (starting with a mess, ending with a finished piece), this is exactly what is happening with FCPX. Throw it all in a pile, and develop new ways to do things, you have to first start with a mess. User feedback will be crucial to making this better.


Return to posts index

Carsten Orlt
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 1:35:59 am

[Mark Morache] " I believe that this whole magnetic timeline thing was the result of a double-dog-dare between software designers."

Couldn't disagree more! I congratulate whoever was responsible at Apple to have the guts to risk everything for what they believe in. And they sure thought very hard about this. Why do you think it took so long to release a software that has quite a few things missing?

Having tracks is something editors have to struggle with everyday because all tracks have to do everything at once. FCP legacy was already better than Avid because it already made the doing it all at once the default. But you are facing difficulties again when you wanted to only change one clips in/out on one track. What about the other tracks? I could give you plenty examples why FCPx is the logical evolution what FCP legacy already started. Plus you have to constantly assign track panels to make sure what you put in goes where you want it.
All NLE's before FCPx are basically software forms of a 2 VTR edit suite. That's why you have tracks, why you have 2 monitors for source and recorder and so forth. Surely its time to move on (specially because tape is history) (it will be by the time FCP7 stops working)

When you start with the premise to get rid of tracks you will end up with this new timeline system. Now of course this will change how things are done. But if the one overriding premise is: no tracks, than you can't put things back that effectively re-instate tracks.

So yes you can improve the workflow by adding shortcuts to do things quicker than when doing them manually one after the other (normal evolution of every software ever created) (converting connected to storyline when adding dissolve is best example) but you can't change the basic idea behind it because that would mean you're back to tracks.

So simple decision for everybody. If you want tracks: go somewhere else. If you do not like tracks (or do not need them) hang around.
I'm sure hanging around!

my 2 cents


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 3:04:15 am

[Carsten Orlt] "Having tracks is something editors have to struggle with everyday because all tracks have to do everything at once. "

I don't know what you're talking about. I've never struggled with tracks. Understanding tracks is part of my job.

[Carsten Orlt] "FCP legacy was already better than Avid because it already made the doing it all at once the default. But you are facing difficulties again when you wanted to only change one clips in/out on one track. What about the other tracks?"

Again, I've never had any difficulty. It's easy once you learn. Knowing how to do this is part of my job.

[Carsten Orlt] "So yes you can improve the workflow by adding shortcuts to do things quicker than when doing them manually one after the other (normal evolution of every software ever created) (converting connected to storyline when adding dissolve is best example) but you can't change the basic idea behind it because that would mean you're back to tracks."

I basically agree. So let me ask you the same question I asked Jeremy in another thread. If you honestly believe the trackless magnetic paradigm is the future and better than what we've worked with for the past 20+ years, how long do you think it will take to become an industry standard? Will DAW venders begin using a trackless approach to match Apple's? Will Logic X be trackless?

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index


Carsten Orlt
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 7:23:01 am

[David Lawrence] "[Carsten Orlt] "Having tracks is something editors have to struggle with everyday because all tracks have to do everything at once. "

I don't know what you're talking about. I've never struggled with tracks. Understanding tracks is part of my job."


You're right. Struggle was the wrong word and too harsh. 'To deal with' would have been the better term.

[David Lawrence] "Again, I've never had any difficulty. It's easy once you learn. Knowing how to do this is part of my job."

Fair enough. But you could use this argument as well to defend FCPx :-)

[David Lawrence] "how long do you think it will take to become an industry standard? Will DAW venders begin using a trackless approach to match Apple's? Will Logic X be trackless?"

Honestly I do not know. I do not think that necessarily it should be the standard either. It is just something that appeals to me. And I think editors can benefit from it. Of course I think this because I like it. If it doesn't work for you that's ok. Luckily there are different options. That Apple made the decision to go in a direction that doesn't work for you may be a hassle for you and I understand if people are frustrated. But I do not agree with the assumption that trackless is bad. In regard to DAW I can't answer that question because I do not know what sound editors require. I do know what I require as a picture editor to edit my audio, and I do not need tracks.

Cheers


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 5:23:16 am

"Couldn't disagree more! I congratulate whoever was responsible at Apple to have the guts to risk everything for what they believe in."

What did they risk? Certainly not money, Pro Apps is chump change at Apple. When they EOL'd FCP without warning they put my business at risk, but I don't think they cared too much about that.

"And they sure thought very hard about this. Why do you think it took so long to release a software that has quite a few things missing?"

Maybe it takes a long time to invent a 5 sided wheel. Maybe they're a bunch of incompetent drug addled coders. Maybe they're clairvoyant visionaries. Obviously neither you nor I know the answer, you're just assuming you do.


"Having tracks is something editors have to struggle with everyday"


Speak for yourself, I don't work with any editor who struggles with tracks once a year, let alone once a day.

"All NLE's before FCPx are basically software forms of a 2 VTR edit suite. That's why you have tracks, why you have 2 monitors for source and recorder"

As has been mentioned elsewhere some NLE's have only had 1 viewer long before FCPx. Most have 2 because it's better. I never saw a timeline on a CMX. There was no such thing as multiple video tracks in an on-line suite. It is as accurate to say that an NLE is an analog of a Kem flatbed with 2 monitors. Your statement has a nice ring to it but is totally without basis in fact.

"So simple decision for everybody. If you want tracks: go somewhere else."

Many are, in droves.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Carsten Orlt
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 7:46:45 am

[Herb Sevush] "What did they risk?"

To be the laughing stock of an entire industry and being hated by most editors who are using FCP :-)

[Herb Sevush] "Maybe they're a bunch of incompetent drug addled coders. Maybe they're clairvoyant visionaries. Obviously neither you nor I know the answer, you're just assuming you do."

True. I should written that it is the only explanation that makes sense to me personally. If they wouldn't be interested in the pro market anymore that wouldn't have done the things they did as eg. presenting it at NAB or saying that broadcast monitoring will come. Would have been way cheaper just to change the website and put it on the App store without another word. Or better not to have it at all. just keep iMovie and do the usual touch ups to it. But yes you're right, who knows :-)

[Herb Sevush] "Speak for yourself, I don't work with any editor who struggles with tracks once a year, let alone once a day."

As written to David: 'To deal with' would have been the better expression. Apologies.

[Herb Sevush] "Your statement has a nice ring to it but is totally without basis in fact."

Neither can you prove that it is not. Let's agree to disagree as I still think that Avid had VTR's and not flatbed in mind when they started the whole 2 monitor and track approach. Sure you have more tracks in software and other details but I always saw it like this. Again I should have made a disclaimer that this is my opinion. My bad

[Herb Sevush] "Many are, in droves."

And I honestly hope that they will find the software that best suites them. Nothing worse to work with something you hate.

Herb, all I'm trying to say is that there are other opinions to what is a good or better way to work. I struggled a lot with FCPx when I first saw it and was very nervous as to what my future NLE would be as I really liked FCP legacy. But after reading a lot and editing with it, I start to understand (or at least I think I do) why they did what they did. And I see the benefits. And specially the long term benefits. Lets see.

Cheers


Return to posts index


Herb Sevush
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 12:39:38 pm

I have no problem with you or anyone else liking X, I'm sure it will fit many editors needs. I do get a little feisty with hyperbolic claims for Apple. Sorry if I was a little harsh.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 2:52:22 pm

[Herb Sevush] "What did they risk? Certainly not money, Pro Apps is chump change at Apple. "

Are you sure about this? What sells iPhones? Arguably, iTunes and all that comes with it. What sells MacPros?

How many mac computers do you own? I am sure that Apple wouldn't want us to take our business elsewhere with all the Apple shwag we have here. FCP is the catalyst to all that. So yes, perhaps the software is a blip on the accounting ledger, but it is not cut and dry, either, and might be hard to measure.

[Herb Sevush] "When they EOL'd FCP without warning they put my business at risk, but I don't think they cared too much about that."

I have a question for you as I am very interested to hear about this. Saying Apple put your business at risk is a pretty big claim. I am just wondering how Apple put your business at risk? I can think of a few reasons, but I wanted to hear from you. Since they put FCS3 back on that market is that less of a risk? I think I remember you were a Discreet Edit guy, is that right? Apologies if I am wrong about that. If you were, was your business at risk when that went down?

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 3:33:41 pm

"Are you sure about this? What sells iPhones? Arguably, iTunes and all that comes with it. What sells MacPros?"

First of all I'm not sure about anything, least of all Apple's intentions. This is all conjecture, at least on my part. Just like Aindreas I might be willing to kill a fury little kitten to find out what really was going on at Cupertino.
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/16800

"What sells MacPros?"

FCP Studio, but Apple dosn't make that anymore. The conjecture is that MacPros are next up on the chopping block. FCPx seems aimed at the Icrowd of computers.

"I think I remember you were a Discreet Edit guy, is that right? Apologies if I am wrong about that. If you were, was your business at risk when that went down?"

Absolutely. The financial investment in edit* was much larger, the misrepresentations by Discreet management much greater - I will never use a discreet product. Ever.

"Saying Apple put your business at risk is a pretty big claim. I am just wondering how Apple put your business at risk? I can think of a few reasons, but I wanted to hear from you. Since they put FCS3 back on that market is that less of a risk?"

After the debacle with Discreet I chose FCP in large part out of the desire for stability. I am often prone to what my X wife once described as the "esoteric imperative." The search for the best way to do something, which I often find to be in conflict with the most popular way. *edit wasn't my first EOL, just the most egregious. Building my studio around FCP seemed the most solid stable way to go. Other than it's multi-cam feature, which is first rate, I have never been wildly enamored with FC. But like the older but wiser woman, this time around I was going for the safe bet, I was done with looking for Romeo. So to have the company suddenly EOL my entire workflow, unannounced, leaving me with no way to migrate my older projects, no appropriate replacement tool for my workflow, no way to expand my current business, with huge uncertainty about how long I can maintain my current workflow as I am frozen in time as the video work environment is changing all around me; and with retraining costs and new unexpected equipment costs needed to help me adapt - yes I think my business is more "at risk" than before. I could more easily accept it if Apple had simply failed as a company - but to be tossed out because I no longer fit their market profile, ay, that's where the canker gnaws.

AS to the effect of FCS3 being back on the market, that was a helpful step. Of course I am then stuck with trying to understand why it was ever taken off the market in the first place, but then that brings me back to Aindreas's kitten.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 3:53:48 pm

Awesome. Thanks, Herb.


Return to posts index

Christian Schumacher
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 4:45:15 pm

Interesting comments below, in regard to Apple's enterprise plans.


"The "Lion" Server may be the last version of the Mac OS X Server that matters, but if that’s the case, it’s going out with a roar. It’s a solid operating system that was designed for ease of use and lives up to that goal. What other goals Apple may have for the Lion Server aren’t easily described.Since Apple's exit from the enterprise server market at the beginning of the year, the company has tried to position its Mac Mini and Mac Pro server-ish configurations as replacements for the rack-mounted Xserve. But if Apple has plans to expand its server business, it’s doing a good job of disguising them. The operating system’s management tools are a confusing mix of legacy tools and new utilities that unnecessarily overlap in many places. It’s hard to recommend Lion Server to anyone except the most fanatical of Mac loyalists. Consumer king Apple could care less about its server customers, and I suspect that the company could walk away from that line of business in a year and only suffer minimal backlash from users."


"As it is, the lack of meaningful information suggests that the Lion Server may have been dumbed down past the point of no return."

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/Apples-Latest-and-Last-Enterpris...

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Apple/Lion-Server-Falls-Short-671492/


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 4:49:03 pm

I don't think Apple ever tried very hard in the enterprise space, would be no great surprise if they stopped trying altogether.

"My Name is Steve and I'm an FCPX user"


Return to posts index

Mark Morache
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 9:47:08 am

[Carsten Orlt] "Having tracks is something editors have to struggle with everyday because all tracks have to do everything at once."

I honestly don't know what you mean by having to do everything at once. And I would not say that I struggle with tracks. I sometimes get annoyed with the need to patch the source tracks with the destination tracks because the buttons are so small but I don't struggle at all. Tracks are easy to understand. They give me the three things I need to do my job. They give me information about what I've got in the timeline, they give me control to make the edits and changes I need, and they provide the power to turn all of these boxes and lines into the final magic that people will watch.

[Carsten Orlt] "but you can't change the basic idea behind it because that would mean you're back to tracks."

That was my point to this thread. Is there a way to make this work? I'm not convinced that the things I could do so easily in FCP7, like drop audio cross fades on my b-roll shots can work in FCX. I'm not convinced that forcing us to select one thing as the primary storyline will make things easier in the longrun, when often our edit decisions are based on things that are happening in more than just one track at one moment.

The truth is that this interface isn't entirely trackless. There are multiple tracks. They just show up when they're needed, and I'm not sure that makes things easier in the longrun. Yes, I'm not patching my source and destination tracks over and over, but organizing the media on tracks is not a struggle, and has always given me powerful control over my edit.

My bottom line is that I'm not finding this faster. Some things are faster, and some things take much longer. If Apple came up with a way of applying audio fades to multiple clips I'd be one step closer to loving this. Not just the fades, because I can copy and paste that, but the audio would need to be extended a few frames beyond the video edit, before the fade is applied in order to overlap the audio.

---------
FCX. She tempts me, abuses me, beats me up, makes me feel worthless, then in the end she comes around, helps me get my work done, gives me hope and I can't stop thinking about her.

Mark Morache
Avid/Xpri/FCP7/FCX
Evening Magazine,Seattle, WA
http://fcpx.wordpress.com


Return to posts index

Gerald Baria
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 1:25:13 am

As I see it the main thought behind the magnetic timeline is like how you mentally create a story in your mind. That there is a "backbone", and actual point, a summary, an abstract, a direction that encompasses the whole piece. And from there breaks away all the little pieces of the story into the secondary storyline, etc. Like when you write a book, theres the main story, and the character bakcstories just branch out of it. And clip connections and compound clips are like how you do a story board, scenes are separated scene by scene. They are like mini-stories, that when brought together creates the entire movie.

I took a look at the demo video of that Audi on the FCPX site, and how the video was structured on FCPX on an iMac at an Apple Store in Shanghai (they don't have one where I live), and what I noticed, during the part where there was commentary that they did not isolate the just the audio of the interview and place the video inserts at the primary and just synced it, they placed the entire video with audio interview on the primary storyline, and during the times that they need the race track video inserts, they just placed it as connected clips above it.

I think the magnetic timeline paradigm trains us to a more organized "mental process" of creating the story, a workflow for our mind. I see a lot of people here having the habit of dumping everything in the timeline and making choices from there, creating the story "as they move along", and I think thats a very messy disorganized way to work.

Apple/Steve Jobs has always placed great thought into how every single product is brought out. How each component should make sense. Maybe this is their way of teaching people to not just have a minimalist clutter free hardware and software, but having a clutter free mind as well.

Quobetah
New=Better


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 3:24:59 am

Can we edit with it? Sure. i have, i did, it worked, and if i HAD to i could do it again, but until every other viable NLE switches to a locked ripple, than i have the choice to work with the other ones, most of which are industry staples and arent going anywhere, maybe forever. Most editors i meet are so stuck in the ways. Is that good, maybe not butif the current traditions work today, theyll work tommorow too. Sure, they all need imporvements but ive never heard anyone complain about a standard 2 Window Source and Record/Tracked Timeline NLE.

If you love grow to love the magnetic timeline, more power to you, Master it and do what you do, ill stick with what i know works best for me.

Neil Goodman: Editor of New Media Production - NBC/Universal


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 5:05:16 am

"As I see it the main thought behind the magnetic timeline is like how you mentally create a story in your mind. That there is a "backbone", and actual point, a summary, an abstract, a direction that encompasses the whole piece. And from there breaks away all the little pieces of the story into the secondary storyline, etc. Like when you write a book, theres the main story, and the character bakcstories just branch out of it. And clip connections and compound clips are like how you do a story board, scenes are separated scene by scene. They are like mini-stories, that when brought together creates the entire movie."

And there is nothing that you described that hasn't been done, over and over again, without complaint, by an army of editors for the last 20 years using tracks. The only difference being that with tracks the organizational structure is both more flexible and easier to visualize.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Ben Scott
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 12:49:08 pm

I am not sure if I have magnetism to the magnetic timeline!

There are advantages and disadvantages, less time patching thats for sure, more time in the metadata and no IN/OUT across the timeline for ripple deletes etc

also I think for audio it is very confusing at times to not have tracks

what I really think the magnetic timeline will bring along with the improved media management is the ability to be confident you are getting a tidier project from offline to online

has anyone been involved working from other editors edits?

how much of your day is spent checking clip and sequence settings in FCP7 and collapsing redundant tracks so you can finish the piece more easily?

I for one would say thats reason enough for magnetic timeline, no more messing around with other folks misunderstanding of what editing is acceptable.


Return to posts index

Clint Wardlow
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 10:53:55 pm

"Acceptable editing!?!?" That term kind of scares me and makes me shy away from the magnetic timeline even more.

Sure I've dealt with other folks edits...and sometimes it is maddening (mainly because their style of editing is totally different from mine). I have had to fix bunged up audio that runs too hot (mainly because they are gauging it by how it sounds on youtube or some such) or has a bunch of pops and clicks because they don't understand audio needs to fade in and out at the beginning and end of each clip.

Still, I would rather put up with that than deal with a paradigm that forces folks into only one style of editing. And that is my biggest fear with the magnetic timeline. I wouldn't have so much of a problem with it if it were a choice instead of the only option.


Return to posts index

Mark Morache
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 10:31:21 am

[Gerald Baria] " I see a lot of people here having the habit of dumping everything in the timeline and making choices from there, creating the story "as they move along", and I think thats a very messy disorganized way to work."

I love to try to adapt the way I work with the project. Our shop has different photographers who shoot things different ways. I love that. Our editors likewise all have their different ways of working. I would never think of trying to make another editor work like me.

There are times when I feel like the best thing to do is to just dump everything in the timeline and get messy. I find wonderful happy surprises that way. You should try it sometime.

It's why I'm thinking the magnetic timeline is an interesting, but flawed paradigm. I'm going to continue to try strategies to make it work for me, but as long as I continue to feel like I'm working for it, I'm not going to be happy.

---------
FCX. She tempts me, abuses me, beats me up, makes me feel worthless, then in the end she comes around, helps me get my work done, gives me hope and I can't stop thinking about her.

Mark Morache
Avid/Xpri/FCP7/FCX
Evening Magazine,Seattle, WA
http://fcpx.wordpress.com


Return to posts index

Carsten Orlt
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 10:03:05 pm

Mark,

I really do admire your staying power to keep trying to make it work even though you see so many difficulties.

One question, and this is not a snipe but true interest, why do you stick with FCPx and not go to Premiere or Avid?

Best


Return to posts index

Mark Morache
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 12, 2011 at 11:36:35 pm

[Carsten Orlt] "One question, and this is not a snipe but true interest, why do you stick with FCPx and not go to Premiere or Avid?"

I've done Avid. It's always felt to me like I was driving the family van. It's stable but I'm not excited about going back.

I recently purchased Adobe CS 5.5, and I want to learn Premiere. I'm not anxious to start climbing another learning curve right away.

FCX just has so much freakin' potential. There are times editing FCX where I felt excited about what my fingers were doing. I posted this thread primarily to see what others thought about the magnetic timeline, because for me it's the toughest thing to get my head around.

As an editor, I can go from FCP7 to Avid to Premiere, and for the most part the strategies for editing will remain the same.

FCX changes all of that. It's not just about learning where they put the trim buttons, it's mind-numbingly different. The question is will they be able to mature it into something truly phenomenal, or will it always remain a sub-par intellectual exercise in reforming the editing paradigm. And when I say "sub-par" I'm not speaking of a failure, but something that's just not quite all-there.

Can they perfect this paradigm, or by it's nature will it always lead to a dead end?

I don't have the investment that many do on this board. I work for a local broadcast, and do shooting and editing on the side. Presently, my editing outfit is a single MBP 17" that I use for everything. I can do things for my paid job on FCPX that I can't do on our system at work.

I'm afraid that I'll commit a project to FCPX and somehow it will fail me close to my deadline, and I'll be sunk. I'm keeping a copy of my media on an extra drive in case it gets modified and goes offline. I'm duplicating my projects every 30-60 minutes without copying the render files so I have a backup.

I honestly believe that Apple will continue to try to make this the photoshop of NLEs. Just like the evolution from FCP1 to FCP7, we will see this new thing grow and improve. If the magnetic timeline becomes the sandy foundation that ultimately causes this thing to crumble, I'll be sad. It might be like trying to make a Thanksgiving dinner with tofurkey. It will never quite taste like turkey. Ever.

---------
FCX. She tempts me, abuses me, beats me up, makes me feel worthless, then in the end she comes around, helps me get my work done, gives me hope and I can't stop thinking about her.

Mark Morache
Avid/Xpri/FCP7/FCX
Evening Magazine,Seattle, WA
http://fcpx.wordpress.com


Return to posts index

Clint Wardlow
Re: It's not about the gap. Can we edit with the magnetic timeline?
on Oct 13, 2011 at 12:11:23 am

I am kind of in the same boat as you, but went in the opposite direction. I don't make my living editing, but use it for "art" projects and sometimes to supplement my income. I went the Adobe route just because the discount price was too good. I don't have tons of cash to sink into my editing station.

I do see some promise with FCPX, but decided to go with something that will at least be viable for the immediate future (and let me import old FCP7 projects). I have had only passing contact with FCPX but do see the potential for greatness in the future (though I hope they allow more customization of the work space lickety split).

I will probably purchase it in the future, but will await for one or maybe two upgrades. I do want to play with it, but can't justify the $399 price tag for something that only has limited use for me at present. I enjoyed your thread. It helped me to stick with my decision to move towards Premiere for the near future, but also gave me hope that maybe someday, FCPX will fit my workflow.


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]