FORUMS: list search recent posts

FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Chris Harlan
FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 1:18:32 am

"Metadata" seems to be one of the primary answers to the question "How is FCP X more sophisticated or advanced than it predecessor?" But what does that mean? FCP7 has a pretty robust search feature, and there is certainly a huge amount of metadata available for viewing in the bins, all of automatically indexed for search. I understand that FCPX logs a lot more camera data now, which is of course a step forward. But is it any more than that?

Other than camera info dumps--which, I agree, are quite useful--what does metadata in FCPX do that FCP7 does not?


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 3:30:58 am

Here's a small example.

I recorded a VO. As is typical, there were good takes and bad. In legacy, that meant that I had to put the whole thing on the timeline and edit the whole down via an initial edit.

The result was a group of individual clips laid out in time with only what I wanted (a typical timeline edit.)

If I were to delete any of those clips - the data about their trimming and duration disappears with them since the timing data is related only to the TIMELINE. Back in the browser, the original source clip has no idea that I've decided (even if only temporarily) that I'm only interested in a small part of the larger clip.

So compare that process with what happens in X.

In the Event browser, I skim and JKL my way to setting in and out points to define each "good" snippet of my master clip. After setting the edit points, I mark each one with a single keystroke (F) to make them (temporarily) a Favorite. That preserves the SELECTION data in a persistent form in a table that I can access as long as I need it. It's like a virtual snapshot of all my edit decisions. That decision info is PRESERVED by the NLE as metadata.

When I do this, the original clip shows my decisions by putting a green bar on that part of the clip INSIDE the Event Browser, which gives me visual feedback on what part of my overall clip I've selected, how many sub-selections I've made in in the master clip, etc. That green bar, by the way, is something you can click on as one way among others to "recapture" the selection decision should I want to alter or amend it later, so it's a useful tool in itself. This also demonstrates that the current data about EACH selection tag is clearly flowing between the browser and the timeline dynamically - in ways impossible in Legacy. (a color tag, for example, set in the timeline didn't EVER reflect back to it's source in the Browser.)

My next step would be to open the disclosure triangle for the clip in the event browser, where I'm presented with a nice table showing all my tagged "favorites" for that particular VO clip. This shows the metadata my "selections" have generated. It's an editable table kinda like an excel spreadsheet, and like one I can sort, or arrange clips into new orders if I choose. If I select all or any of those tags with the traditional "command click" on multiple selections, and drag the group into the timeline — BINGO, those clips arrive in the new "timeline" container as an already completed rough edit in a single step. One that reflects all the choices I made earlier ready for refinement or trimming as needed.

Still I understand that this in itself is not that different than what you can do, (albeit with more physical "cut and edit" trimming) in Legacy.

But in legacy, this is about ALL you can do with a clip in terms of using it's metadata in useful ways. In X, it's just where it begins. Because now that my "selects" are defined in the database, I can not only sort or search or manipulate that data on the CLIP level, I can work with it on a GROUP of clips. I can tag groupings of clips just like clips. (Clip Collections) Something simply not possible in Legacy.

In X, even if I make a bad mistake and delete or screw up my timeline, my original "selects" (however I've re-named them as clips or groups subsequently) are preserved in the Event Browser. So it's a nice hedge against deleting a timeline clip accidentally. Your decisions at the clip level PERSIST in X.

On the Legacy timeline, ALL I could do was move those clips around, or cut and paste them into new timelines. I couldn't sort them, or label them in groups, or manipulate them in any but the most rudimentary ways. And outside of saving "versions" of the timeline, none of the position information about scene edit decisions would STICK in the legacy timeline.

In X, just like in any database, once you tag something into a particular "class" that's just the start. We're used to databases where "first name" might be a field, but that field can be used to display that data as part of a a name tag, an address label, or as the salutation on a letter - whatever else you want the NAME field to apply to - you just hook it up. In X, that's just the same with clips. Once you define a clip with a "TAG" you can use it in conjunction with other tags to reorder and re-use the tagged clips to your hearts content. You can apply additional tags to already tagged clips to assemble them in sub-classes, append some or all with additional sort criteria, and search those tags all day long. If you can FIND them by tag, you can USE them by tagged groups. So the essential difference is that decisions you make in X can be made persistent and those decisions can be combined with other decisions in new ways. Also, like with all databases, your tags are so flexible they can come and go as you like!

So after I use the "Favorite" tag to define some group of VO clips as in my example above, I can apply a NEW tag to the arrangement, Delete the Original "Favorites" Tag from the set, and now use "Favorite" tag to define the some OTHER criteria I want to use later.

In legacy a clip would have a name set at the Capture Scratch level, but that and the master clip meta-data and and perhaps a color tag while it lived in the timeline was all that Legacy was set up to store and keep track of. Metadata is a whole different ballgame in X.

In short, in X, clips can be appended with an unlimited array of tags, those tags can be manually or automatically generated through user actions (dropping clips into a smart collection automatically applies that collections tags to all the dropped clips) and so forth.

Does that help outline some (among many) of the differences?

Sorry for running on, but it's a complicated topic and this really just scratches the surface.

Hope it helps.

"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


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 4:36:00 am

Great post Bill and really interesting. I just don't see what it has to do with editing. Seems like a really different set of tasks than what I normally do.

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


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 5:32:41 am

David,

It IS different. That's part of the gestalt of FCP-X now. I'm operating a video editing software that lives next door to a database and each is directly linked to the other.

I can edit without interacting with the database much at ALL if I choose. And believe me with the changes to X, it's been tempting to concentrate exclusively on EDITING operation to the exclusion of all else!

But I keep seeing flashes of how the database underpinnings can HELP me - if I just keep pushing myself to learn to value operating the database equally with operating my timeline.

Simple as that.

"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


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 6:32:34 am

Sounds good. I'll be curious to hear more about what you discover so please share any insights. I actually like the database aspects of FCPX, it's the timeline that doesn't work for me.

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:37:28 am

Bill, maybe I don't understand everything you are saying, but I'm having trouble picturing anything you are listing here as being more difficult in FCP 7. When I have a little more time I'll try to detail this, but I'm not understanding why you seem to think it is such a hassle to use a timeline as a source bin, or why you can't convert the contents of a timeline into its own bin, or why you can't use bins like groups, and why you can't use keywords and the search function in FCP7 on both clips and bins to do the kind of sorting you are talking about. Sure. It is a different approach, which some folks might really enjoy, but I am just not visualizing your description as an improvement. Only different. And in some cases with more keystrokes.

I certainly owe you more, though. You wrote a fine description of your process, and I owe it to both of us to go line by line, so you have every opportunity to show me the errors of my thinking. I apologize for not doing that now, but the hour is late. Perhaps in the next day or two I can give you a proper response.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 1:33:59 pm

One critical piece of metadata FCP X does not seem to log or at least display is reel ID. Embedded QT source IDs, like a reel number in an Alexa file do not show up. I'm sure some people and maybe Apple, too, will argue that file-based media doesn't need that, but in fact, reel IDs are proving incredibly necessary in this modern world, too.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 1:48:11 pm

[Oliver Peters] "One critical piece of metadata FCP X does not seem to log or at least display is reel ID. Embedded QT source IDs, like a reel number in an Alexa file do not show up. I'm sure some people and maybe Apple, too, will argue that file-based media doesn't need that, but in fact, reel IDs are proving incredibly necessary in this modern world, too."

Oliver, do you have any idea how FCPX would handle other in-camera metadata -- specifically lens information that would be critical to VFX further down the pipeline?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 2:02:42 pm

[Walter Soyka] "do you have any idea how FCPX would handle other in-camera metadata"

To my knowledge, it's not there. I don't believe any of the P2 data comes across. With Alexa this data is carried in an XML, not the QT. Since FCP X doesn't read old XMLs, you don't get this info. Presumably Apple is leaning on the implementation of camera manufacturer plug-ins based on their SDK. That doesn't help with the QT issue though. For example, I never use native H264 5D files and always convert first. When I do, I add TC and Reel IDs. Only the TC is recognized by FCP X.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 3:18:35 pm

I am also excited by the meta data promise of FCPX.

However, if what you have written is true Oliver Peters, this is an astonishing hole in implementation.


Franz.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 4:45:45 pm

[Oliver Peters] "To my knowledge, it's not there. I don't believe any of the P2 data comes across. With Alexa this data is carried in an XML, not the QT. Since FCP X doesn't read old XMLs, you don't get this info. Presumably Apple is leaning on the implementation of camera manufacturer plug-ins based on their SDK. That doesn't help with the QT issue though. For example, I never use native H264 5D files and always convert first. When I do, I add TC and Reel IDs. Only the TC is recognized by FCP X.

Oliver
"


That it might not "automatically" look for "P2" data right now, but it DOES "look" for CF card data and SD card data, so it's clearly capable of "reading cards" with finesse.

So this is merely a development issue, not a capabilities one.

And the FIRST thing on the design teams list was clearly not "cater primarily to the guys with $60,000 cameras" (Are you shocked at that in a $299 downloadable program? I'm not.

I'm comfortable that if they continue to get the fundamentals of the development really right, I think it's going to grow into a tool that handles EVERYBODY's FILES - regardless of origin- including all the meta-data variants. (why build it as a "resolution agnostic" tool otherwise?) but it's not a Version 1 priority. Nor should it be in my estimation.

FWIW.

"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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 5:26:17 pm

[Bill Davis] "why build it as a "resolution agnostic" tool otherwise?"

I have seen this argument many times in support of FCPX as a "pro" tool, but it doesn't persuade me.

In the 1990s, resolution independence was still a fantasy. There were no systems capable of high resolutions, and the computers of the time struggled enough with fixed, low resolution frame rates. The benefits of optimizing for specific, current usage outweighed the benefits of building a generalized system which the current hardware wouldn't support.

But for any company designing a new NLE product in the twenty-first century, an age where standards are changing faster than ever and computers are incomprehensibly powerful in comparison to the systems of a decade and a half ago, why would you not build in resolution independence? Why would you not allow floating point computation for renders? Why would you not leverage other modern and well-designed technologies that you've built into your operating system, like AVFoundation, ColorSync, and CoreData?

A lot of the things we're pointing to as proof that FCPX was designed for pros may really just solid software engineering that will allow FCPX to grow over time and accommodate change better than FCP Classic's infrastructure allowed. Good systems architecture is helpful for development, but it's not a feature unique to professional applications.

In other words, given the absence of significant "pro" features like *insert-the-pro-feature-that-FCPX-lacks-that-breaks-your-workflow-here*, I think it's hard to argue that presence of some "pro" features like resolution independence conclusively indicates that FCPX was designed for pros. Building an app with features pros would use and building an app that pros can use are two different things.

Can pros use FCPX? Some yes, some no. It totally depends on your workflow needs. Smart features like resolution independence are certainly useful for pros, but they are also just plain good design, are very useful to Apple developers, and will ultimately lower Apple's cost of FCPX future development.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 6:05:44 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I have seen this argument many times in support of FCPX as a "pro" tool, but it doesn't persuade me.
"


OK. It's not a "persuader" for you. For the reasons you state. (perfectly good ones in my opinion) Fair on all sides.

I'll put you down for "to my thinking, I expect resolution independence from ALL editing software as a baseline value." FCP-X gets the "resolution independent" checkmark, as does PPro, Vegas, and AVID.

No significant winners or losers in that area.

I just appreciate that you're a clear example of someone who's keeping an open mind about the program.

You keep acknowledging time and time again that you're not actively looking to recycle "talking points' to either promote it or diminish it - but looking for the reality under the surface.

Something I believe is valuable to everyone here.

So I'll try my best to avoid future thinking that some people here might see file resolution capabilities as a pro/amateur differentiator - and not understand that it's actually more of a "given" today.

Thanks for helping me be better aware of that.

"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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:36:40 pm

[Bill Davis] "You keep acknowledging time and time again that you're not actively looking to recycle "talking points' to either promote it or diminish it - but looking for the reality under the surface. Something I believe is valuable to everyone here."

I thank you for that, Bill.

We don't always agree, but hopefully there's some value in the adversarial approach that sometimes develops here. It works well in justice, and I hope it works here, too. There's rarely a dull day on this forum, and I certainly appreciate how you have helped to broaden the way I think about the topic.

Hopefully the tension between our perspectives will help others who may be somewhere in between to make well-informed decisions.

Cheers,

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 4:27:31 pm

Oliver,

But isn't' the very concept of a "REEL ID" a contextual thing? I mean it's certainly important meta-data - to my knowledge there isn't actually a STANDARD for what a REEL is in the modern scheme of thing.

For one person it's a physical tape. For another it's a CF card. For yet another, it's a DISC IMAGE on a hard drive. And just to look at that last case, that DISC IMAGE can be cloned so that instead of residing on a particular drive, it might also simultaneously exist on a "home" server, and/or on a thumb drive on the road.

The point is that the very IDEA of a REEL ID, is going to be increasingly variable. One user may want it to be a 5 digit number. Another producer may want it to be 7 place alpha-numeric designation.

Presuming that's true, EVERY NLE manufacturer is going to need to do the same thing that Apple has done (and is clearly not the FIRST to do) here. Which is to provide a function where WHATEVER data is generated has a "capture pathway" into the DB.

My opinion is that if it's META-DATA by nature, all you can expect APPLE to do in the design phase is to provide ACCOMMODATION for any and all types of data that their range of users want to provide. Asking APPLE to be the entity that sifts and sort and pick winners and losers from among the REEL ID tagging schemes of a dozen manufacturers is a waste of time at this point, IMO. Also, parsing database information presented in a text stream (something ALL databases are built to do) is so simple that worrying about whether someone will write the correct "translator" to make a particular systems ID scheme work in FCP-X has got to be dismissively trivial. I can't fathom that since it appears that there are hundreds of thousands of X owners already - all camera manufacturers won't get around to making their camera ID data accessible to it.

So I guess I personally don't want Apple spending their time trying to determine and accommodate this manufacturer or that manufacturers particular REEL ID scheme. I want them concentrating on the GUTS of the program. Which is where they appear to be at this stage.

Trust me. In a capable database like the one underpinning FCP-X - if you have meta-data generated from ANYWHERE - there WILL be an easy way to leverage it.

(Heck, if I can CUT and PASTE text within it. (and I can!) then PASTE exists - and if it exists, then I can PASTE anything. Which is just another way of saying "general data import!" at a basic level.

Maybe they'll keep developing it so it someday has a dedicated "import text file" capability with some ordering or parsing of the data available on import - that would be nice. And would blow open the whole "can it read my XML (or even historical CMX files!) debate nicely. But I don't think asking them to concentrate on a front end at this point over "key features" is wise.

But that's just me.

"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


Return to posts index


Tom Wolsky
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 4:33:22 pm

I should note that reel information is available in FCP. It can be added and seen in the General display of the Info tab of the Inspector. It doesn't display in the browser.

All the best,

Tom

Class on Demand DVDs "Complete Training for FCP7," "Basic Training for FCS" and "Final Cut Express Made Easy"
Coming in 2011 "Complete Training for FCPX" from Class on Demand
"Final Cut Pro X for iMovie and Final Cut Express Users" from Focal Press


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 12:32:14 am

[Tom Wolsky] "It can be added and seen in the General display of the Info tab of the Inspector."

Sorry, but that doesn't seem to read embedded reels in existing QT files. I think Walter already said the same earlier, but here's an example from an Alexa file.



- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 4:39:56 pm

[Bill Davis] "But isn't' the very concept of a "REEL ID" a contextual thing? I mean it's certainly important meta-data - to my knowledge there isn't actually a STANDARD for what a REEL is in the modern scheme of thing."

Sure. But right now, Apple doesn't recognize its own "standard", which is an embedded name/number/etc. in the "reel" column within QuickTime. Camera manufacturers, such as ARRI, are using that to identify the card. Other folks, like Avid make a distinction between a reel/tape (something captured from a VTR) versus a source (file-based). Import a QT with embedded reel ID and it shows up as a source ID inside Media Composer.

So while it's contextual, Apple has provided a mechanism to use this slot in QuickTime files for whatever you need it to be. Sure would have been nice if they'd remembered that in the design of FCP X.

And please don't bring up Apple and STANDARDS in the same sentence ;-) Apple has never expressed any interest in adhering to any actual sanctioned standards.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 4:52:35 pm

[Oliver Peters] "And please don't bring up Apple and STANDARDS in the same sentence ;-) Apple has never expressed any interest in adhering to any actual sanctioned standards."

Really?

Funny, I kinda remember driving RS-232 and 422 decks 10 years ago out of FCP. Those weren't "standards?" (I won't belabor the point with a dozen other easy similar audio and graphics standards examples, (cough) AIFF, TIFF, ... oh never mind ;.)

I will admit that Apple has a penchant for doing their own "standards" development in-house.

With all the IP wars going on between the monster companies these days (hello KODAK!) I'm thinking that's been a pretty darn smart long-range strategy.

YMMV.

"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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 4:46:44 pm

[Bill Davis] "But isn't' the very concept of a "REEL ID" a contextual thing? I mean it's certainly important meta-data - to my knowledge there isn't actually a STANDARD for what a REEL is in the modern scheme of thing."

Reel ID is not contextual. It is a property of a clip's acquisition which should ideally carry through the entire post-production process. The physical acquisition format doesn't matter; reel ID exists primarily to allow multiple clips from different acquisitions with common timecode to be properly differentiated.


[Bill Davis] "Trust me. In a capable database like the one underpinning FCP-X - if you have meta-data generated from ANYWHERE - there WILL be an easy way to leverage it."

You don't, which was what Oliver was pointing out. Even when the Quicktime media file includes a reel number, FCPX ignores it. FCP7 did not.

Also, and I intend you no offense here, but given Oliver's extensive experience with Final Cut Server, I think we should be trusting him on the topics of capable databases and leveraging metadata.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 4:55:01 pm

[Walter Soyka] "You don't, which was what Oliver was pointing out. Even when the Quicktime media file includes a reel number, FCPX ignores it. FCP7 did not.
"


Well as Tom points out, actually not.

I'd forgotten, but yes, REEL data is in there. It's just not "front and center" in the display - but you can call is up by clip. So problem solved.

"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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:32:00 pm

[Bill Davis] "I'd forgotten, but yes, REEL data is in there. It's just not "front and center" in the display - but you can call is up by clip. So problem solved."

Problem not solved at all.

FCPX has a reel data field available in the info panel, but it doesn't correspond to anything in the media file. This can actually create problems, because FCPX's reel data isn't real (pun fully intended).

Try this: assign a reel to a clip in FCPX. Quit, then launch FCP7. Import the clip. FCP7 does not see the reel ID that FCPX assigned, because FCPX does not write the change back into the media file as it should and as other QT-aware applications expect. (Go back to FCPX, and you'll see the reel ID is there. It lives in FCPX's database only, and that particular datum is not currently portable.)

Try it the other way: import a clip into FCP7, then add a reel number. FCP7 will ask you permission to change the file on disk. Quit FCP7 and import that clip into FCPX. No reel ID. Just for fun, import it into Premiere Pro: the reel ID is there.

I suppose this in and of itself may not really matter for FCPX, since the reel ID won't often be useful without other conform tools, too. That said, reel ID metadata -- one of the most fundamental elements of video metadata which NLEs have been correctly tracking for decades -- is critical for interchange, and FCPX isn't quite where FCP7 was on this.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:46:54 pm

[Walter Soyka] "That said, reel ID metadata -- one of the most fundamental elements of video metadata which NLEs have been correctly tracking for decades -- is critical for interchange, and FCPX isn't quite where FCP7 was on this."

You are totally correct sir.

X after 100 days or so, is lacking in quite a few areas compared to Legacy after 10+ years of solid incremental development.

It's NO CONTEST, really.

And I'll admit that it's lacking in these same areas (and even more) compared to it's primary competitors.

So if those specific capabilities are someone's baseline deal breakers for choice and use criteria, an editor needs to look elsewhere right now.

I suspect, however, that the FCP-X benefit package (astonishing price/performance ratio, file based workflow integration honoring exceptionally robust metadata capabilities, and access to the planetary class engineering resources clearly enabled by being under the wing of the most economically successful company on earth) will help resolve these issues sooner rather than later.

I'm comfortable with this bet.

YMMV.

"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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:59:21 pm

[Bill Davis] "astonishing price/performance ratio"

Really? Price yes, performance, hardly. Sure, you can quickly and imprecisely slam clips together. The rest of it slows to slug-level performance. Build a sequence of about 15 animated titles with every 2-3 overlapping and then let me know how it performances.

And speaking of price, look what DaVinci is doing for FREE compared to what Apple is doing. Not really much contest, I've afraid.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:26:16 pm

[Oliver Peters] "And speaking of price, look what DaVinci is doing for FREE"

For those of us who had been living under a rock for the past 7 hours (!), BMD has released DaVinci Lite 8.1.1 [link] with UNLIMITED nodes and DNxHD MXF support for free.

I am shocked.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:35:39 pm

[Walter Soyka] "UNLIMITED nodes and DNxHD MXF support for free"

Whoa! DNxHD? How nice!


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why? (NOW OT: Resolve)
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:43:29 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Whoa! DNxHD? How nice!"

Shane Ross called it -- we're entering the age of DNxHD [link].

But did you see the part about unlimited nodes? Resolve Lite is now a full-featured color grading system. For free.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why? (NOW OT: Resolve)
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:32:48 pm

[Walter Soyka] "[Chris Harlan] "Whoa! DNxHD? How nice!"

Shane Ross called it -- we're entering the age of DNxHD [link].

But did you see the part about unlimited nodes? Resolve Lite is now a full-featured color grading system. For free.
"


It is amazing. I'm guessing that this is the first move in a 3rd party hardware square-off to reap the opening up of Media Composer.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why? (NOW OT: Resolve)
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:39:21 pm

[Chris Harlan] "It is amazing. I'm guessing that this is the first move in a 3rd party hardware square-off to reap the opening up of Media Composer."

Bingo! Now I get Jeremy's point. This isn't to sell Decklinks to colorists -- it's to sell Decklinks to editors by offering them the ability to color for free. AJA doesn't have a value prop like this at all. Ouch.

Collateral damage -- any value Symphony had left might have just withered away.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why? (NOW OT: Resolve)
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:43:29 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Bingo! Now I get Jeremy's point. This isn't to sell Decklinks to colorists -- it's to sell Decklinks to editors by offering them the ability to color for free. AJA doesn't have a value prop like this at all. Ouch."

Oops, yeah. I take back that last post. Now, you see!


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why? (NOW OT: Resolve)
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:48:09 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Oops, yeah. I take back that last post. Now, you see!"

Indeed. Mine was a failure of imagination.

I was thinking about BMD selling cards to colorists, and I imagine they have already nearly saturated this market.

BMD, on the other hand, is thinking about selling conform and color to Avid editors in a box labeled "Decklink." It's really brilliant.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why? (NOW OT: Resolve)
on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:40:48 pm

[Walter Soyka] "BMD, on the other hand, is thinking about selling conform and color to Avid editors"

And premiere, and FCP7, and FCPX after capture card support, and windows versions for those apps....

and whatever else that comes along.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why? (NOW OT: Resolve)
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:48:05 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Collateral damage -- any value Symphony had left might have just withered away."

Not that I was ready to pony up, but any lingering thoughts I had in that direction have pretty much been quelled.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why? (NOW OT: Avid)
on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:11:37 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Not that I was ready to pony up [for Symphony], but any lingering thoughts I had in that direction have pretty much been quelled."

I'm taking the DS demo for a spin, but I'm having a hard time figuring out how serious Avid is about the product, and I don't want to buy in unless there are going to be some major updates soon. (My concerns there mirror my concerns about Apple and FCPX). The Autodesk marketing juggernaut makes Smoke look much more appealing, while Avid marketing seems to not know that DS exists.

Bringing finishing back to metadata, does anyone know how FCPXML handles auditions? Are the alternate takes exposed to Resolve (and someday Smoke), or would versioning with auditions require multiple exports?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why? (NOW OT: Resolve)
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:42:46 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Shane Ross called it -- we're entering the age of DNxHD [link]."

Avid has a lot of work to do if they want their MXF formats to be pervasive (in my opinion).

[Walter Soyka] "But did you see the part about unlimited nodes? Resolve Lite is now a full-featured color grading system. For free."

And to really use it, you need to buy Blackmagic hardware. You know that killer app thing I was talking about? :)


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:41:20 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I am shocked."

It is the killer app for Blackmagic hardware.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:51:35 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "It is the killer app for Blackmagic hardware."

Is it? You still need a monitor. I wonder how many the $1k price of the license was a deal-breaker for.

Then again, I thought it was a killer app at the stupid cheap price of $995. I pulled a Kona out of a machine just for Resolve.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:55:28 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Then again, I thought it was a killer app at the stupid cheap price of $995. I pulled a Kona out of a machine just for Resolve."

FWIW -and on topic (sort of) - Resolve works with XML roundtrips to/from either FCP 7 or FCP X. And by default Premiere Pro, too.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:06:48 pm

I assume if you have a capture card, you have a monitor.

[Walter Soyka] "I pulled a Kona out of a machine just for Resolve."

I think you just proved my point!


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why? (NOW OT: Resolve)
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:26:56 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I think you just proved my point!"

Indeed. I don't disagree with you at all that Resolve sells Decklinks. I just wonder how many new hardware sales they'll be able to make by dropping the total cost of a grading system by only $995.

I'd bet the overwhelming majority of new Resolve Lite users will be rocking Resolve on MBPs at coffee shops without proper monitoring.

Sorry to everyone else for the off-topic diversion. Bringing it back...

I know FCPX has an item for color profile in the info panel; is it functional?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:39:44 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Really? Price yes, performance, hardly. Sure, you can quickly and imprecisely slam clips together. The rest of it slows to slug-level performance. Build a sequence of about 15 animated titles with every 2-3 overlapping and then let me know how it performances.

And speaking of price, look what DaVinci is doing for FREE compared to what Apple is doing. Not really much contest, I've afraid.

- Oliver
"


Neither you nor I are actually allowed to answer this except for ourselves.
Only the open market can establish the final judgement on things of this nature.

I've voted YES one FCP-X and will continue to use and explore it.

I expect you will now cease doing so since you've clearly judged it to be a "poor value" compared to your other available choices.

I honestly hope you're happy using them.

Good luck.

"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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:51:10 pm

[Bill Davis] "I expect you will now cease doing so since you've clearly judged it to be a "poor value" compared to your other available choices."

Oh, I'll continue to explore it, as well. I certainly haven't counted Apple out by any means. Unfortunately at this point, when trying to actually use it on projects for real clients, it hasn't performed as well as FCP7 based on the one criteria that it should - better performance based on a 64-bit architecture. I find that disconcerting. Some of that appears to be because of the unfortunate reliance on Motion for its effects.

I just think price is completely irrelevant in any argument related to Apple software. Their prices are set by marketing - pure and simple. This software wouldn't be any different if they charged $3, $300, $3,000 or $30,000.

But we are straying off of the topic: metadata.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:15:36 pm

Oliver Peters on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:51:10 pm

Unfortunately at this point, when trying to actually use it on projects for real clients, it hasn't performed as well as FCP7 based on the one criteria that it should - better performance based on a 64-bit architecture.

I think it is very important that this issue comes out into the open. There are some very serious question marks of FCPX and its ability to deliver performance mnsot particularly when it comes to rendering, and m ost especially when it's a question of rendering Motion 5 effects.

Here's a very good post from Timothy Payton (on another forum) that illustrates where some of the problems lie:

http://fcp.co/forum/4-final-cut-pro-x-fcpx/2175-looking-for-a-reason-to-act...

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:19:29 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Here's a very good post from Timothy Payton (on another forum) that illustrates where some of the problems "

Yes, I've actually been doing that - using the export as the render. The trouble with doing that is your project is still not rendered. So if you have to make any changes, you are back to the same slow, unrendered sequence.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:25:22 pm

Oliver Peters on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:19:29 pm

Yes, I've actually been doing that - using the export as the render. The trouble with doing that is your project is still not rendered. So if you have to make any changes, you are back to the same slow, unrendered sequence.

Yes, indeed, this was a huge problem for me in the job I was doing last week (as I know it was on your job as well).

The only option was a monumentally slow render of the current project - and all its variants (why do clients insist on changes?) - just in order to be able to play the timeline at all.

Rendering is shockingly slow, there's no two ways about it ...

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:27:13 pm

Not in any way doubting the results here, but I am wondering about the specs of the systems employed for these tests.

The first post notes an "older" CPU, but a fast graphics card.

I wonder what effect RAM availability has on the CPUs ability to render efficiently?

Still, interesting info.

"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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:08:37 pm

[Bill Davis] "I suspect, however, that the FCP-X benefit package (astonishing price/performance ratio, file based workflow integration honoring exceptionally robust metadata capabilities, and access to the planetary class engineering resources clearly enabled by being under the wing of the most economically successful company on earth) will help resolve these issues sooner rather than later. I'm comfortable with this bet."

It sounds like FCPX is a good fit for your workflow, and it's letting you be more productive than FCP7 did. That's good to hear, and I am happy for you.

I share your believe that Apple could resolve the issues we've all been laying out here for months -- but they've given me reason to question their intentions [link] over the last few years, so I am not comfortable betting that they will resolve them.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 5:03:34 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Reel ID is not contextual. It is a property of a clip's acquisition which should ideally carry through the entire post-production process. The physical acquisition format doesn't matter; reel ID exists primarily to allow two multiple clips from different acquisition devices with common timecode to be properly differentiated."

But it kind of is.

For instance, in FCP7 and using P2Flow, the reel ID becomes the clip ID, which is a really long number. It points directly to that specific P2 MXF file. Would you rather have a Reel that points a to folder name that might change(or get moved) or to a unique ID that points to one file no matter where that file is located/moved? Here's an example of some Reels that were handled by both P2Flow (third party) and Log and Transfer (FCP7):

reel.png

With Log and Transfer, the Reel is the name of the Folder. If that directory gets changed, moved or torn apart, the folder name is now meaningless as is the reel name. with the P2Flow Reel, that number describes a file no matter where it is, and it always reconnects really easily in FCP. This level of detail has made FCP7 more robust in it's media tracking for us (but of course it's not perfect as FCP7 can't rearrange P2 MXF file structures).

So in this case, it is contextual to the program that created the reel number.

[Walter Soyka] "Even when the Quicktime media file includes a reel number, FCPX ignores it. FCP7 did not."

With FCPX's camera import SDK, I think Apple is leaving it up to the camera manufacturers to determine what the best reel number is for their footage. I am totally fine with that. The very nature of the definition of what a "reel" is in digital terms is redefined. It is not a physical object or location anymore and different cameras store data differently.

Damn, I was trying to get some work done, but this conversation is good!

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:43:30 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "So in this case, it is contextual to the program that created the reel number."

You can assign a clip any reel ID you want. It shouldn't matter to the application how you choose to number the reels.

Personally, I see the value in unique reel IDs per clip, but I think ideally that should be a separate clip ID.

A common reel ID connects related clips, but if you overwrite the reel ID with a unique clip ID, you are actually destroying that potentially useful information. What if you had a dead pixel on a specific camera at a shoot? If you know the reel ID, you can quickly identify other defective clips for repair. If not, you must hunt.

Perhaps your application encodes this information within the unique clip ID it stuffs in the reel ID field, but unless it's "human readable" or every other application you use can deal with that custom encoding, you are taking tools off your bench.

Maybe we're arguing semantics, but I don't think that the reel ID is "contextual." The whole point of reel ID is to be a static identifier across contexts. If every app which accessed a particular media file could see the same reel metadata, the world would be a better place.


[Jeremy Garchow] "With FCPX's camera import SDK, I think Apple is leaving it up to the camera manufacturers to determine what the best reel number is for their footage. I am totally fine with that. The very nature of the definition of what a "reel" is in digital terms is redefined. It is not a physical object or location anymore and different cameras store data differently."

All fair points, but for me, this goes back to playing well with others. Reel ID is a free-form field which is very useful for interchange. I don't expect FCPX to have an opinion on it, but it would be nice if FCPX used it better.


[Jeremy Garchow] "Damn, I was trying to get some work done, but this conversation is good!"

Indeed! I'm going to to go try and get something billable done (until your next response pulls me back in).

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:08:53 pm

This is getting good!, Walter. Thanks.

[Walter Soyka] "A common reel ID connects related clips, but if you overwrite the reel ID with a unique clip ID, you are actually destroying that potentially useful information. What if you had a dead pixel on a specific camera at a shoot? If you know the reel ID, you can quickly identify other defective clips for repair. If not, you must hunt."

True. But in the P2 world, camera serial numbers are part of the metadata, so all I would need to do is search for the camera serial number itself.

[Walter Soyka] "Perhaps your application encodes this information within the unique clip ID it stuffs in the reel ID field, but unless it's "human readable" or every other application you use can deal with that custom encoding, you are taking tools off your bench."

There is other metadata that is more "human readable" userclipname being a good one.

Now, let's talk about Reel. The in tape sense, it represents a physical object. Reel 53 corresponds to tape 53 that is sitting on the shelf. When I need to recapture, I grab tape 53 as the computer asks for it. In a tapeless sense, and the way that MXF4mac/P2Flow works is that the reel corresponds to that clip and it's components. In FCP7, if you need to reconnect, reel/tc/clipname are paramount, that's it. With this method, reconnecting to these native MXF files has never been easier with FCP7. I can constantly reconnect things much easier with this method than full Quicktime methods. So in the case of FCP7, this reel ID is fantastic. Since other NLEs/apps might use it differently, so it might not be outside of FCP7, but there's no standard for any of this accept a field named "reel". That's why it's contextual. Certain applications might not have access to this clip data, or choose to use a user customized reel name. More context. For applications that don't use native MXf media, then that reel name has to transfer to the conformed media. It gets messy, fast.

[Walter Soyka] "All fair points, but for me, this goes back to playing well with others. Reel ID is a free-form field which is very useful for interchange. I don't expect FCPX to have an opinion on it, but it would be nice if FCPX used it better."

Agreed. I do think it's locked in some sort of weird state of flux. I think the camera import SDK will be essential here.

I am going to post a screen grab of P2 Flow here in a second in a response to Christian. It will make more sense in a minute.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:07:05 pm

Really nice post, Jeremy. P2flow and Pomfort look really excellent.

I agree with you that the concept of reel ID is outdated, and it ought to be replaced with a far more extensive set of meaningful and standardized metadata from the shoot.

However, today, reel ID is still important (though not always meaningful) across many workflows.


[Jeremy Garchow] "I do think it's locked in some sort of weird state of flux."

This is a recurring theme in my frustration with FCPX. Apple made a clean break from existing technologies and standards to focus on their vision of what post production ought to look like.

Unfortunately, back in the real world, we still have to deal with these technologies and standards -- and the workflows that support them.

Apple can't just declare things like EDLs and reel IDs big bags of hurt, ignore them (even if they offer new alternatives like FCPXML), and still keep their market share and mind share. If Apple is not interested in designing for their users' needs, then either the industry will have to adjust their work needs to suit the product, or the industry will move on to products that suit their work needs.

Flux hurts.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:32:37 pm

[Walter Soyka] "However, today, reel ID is still important (though not always meaningful) across many workflows"

Absolutely. I think the way MXF4mac has implemented it is very smart. It points to a file, not a file's location or container. The file could be anywhere in any container (folder not media container).

[Walter Soyka] "This is a recurring theme in my frustration with FCPX. Apple made a clean break from existing technologies and standards to focus on their vision of what post production ought to look like."

Yes. And they released it too early, or did they? They knew this thing was going to be a new venture. They new it was going to be full of bugs and holes as they don't beta test. So in this sense, since the people that are using it now are beta testing, the little island they have created is necessary. Otherwise it would be sure bedlam if everything were turned on and even more busted and not working. I also think they have to wait for certain OS features to be in place, but that's my optimism talking again, and who knows FCPX may never get there. But when I look at things like the sheer amount of metadata that's in there, those aren't amateur features. So, I can only think that something more will come of it. If not, there's other options. I still use FCS3 everyday for my regular work.

[Walter Soyka] "Apple can't just declare things like EDLs and reel IDs big bags of hurt, ignore them (even if they offer new alternatives like FCPXML), and still keep their market share and mind share."

I totally agree, it's not a very smart move.

But let's look at the capability they do give you. You can import DSLR h264 movies, which have no tc/reel. You can import from a camera archive like P2/AVCHD and the "reel" and tc come in to the files (Reel is the folder name in this case, just like FCP7). And then they have a Camera Import SDK for other formats. I haven't seen anything released in hat regard yet, so maybe it's not quite all the way functional. For the rest, there's an extensive batch naming system that works really well and really fast. So it's there, but not quite "there" if you know what I mean. I think all the pieces are in place, it just sucks it had to be released in this state, whatever the reason.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 3:29:00 am

Jeremy,

My own point of reference on this is Lightroom (though not in a "pro" environment).

Is there anything useful to be made of the comparison re: metadata?

Franz.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 4:18:08 am

[Franz Bieberkopf] "Is there anything useful to be made of the comparison re: metadata?"

You mean between FCPX and Lightroom?


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 6:00:09 pm

[Bill Davis] "But isn't' the very concept of a "REEL ID" a contextual thing?"

If you don't understand the importance of needing a REEL name, be it tape or tapeless, how on earth can you consider yourself a 'professional' video editor? The fact that FCX doesn't show you the reel name unless you dig for it also shows their views of the needs of the professional. It shows that they either have no clue what our needs are, or chose to ignore them.

I'm amazed that you are even questioning the importance of the REEL ID.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD...don't miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 6:21:07 pm

Well, perhaps because I think of it as a CARD ID, now.

And I have about 40 Disk Images of those cards - all TAGGED with their own IDs - that FCP-X handles fluently and flawlessly.

When clips show up in the EventBrowser as "offline" I can see those CARD IDs - because that's built into part of my metadata strategy. (and yes, I had to think about what would be the best way to TAG that rather than letting the camera manufacture TELL ME what that ID should be.) Then I insert the corresponding Disk Image via any storage media I like down (to a thumb drive CLONE of the original camera card) - and upon launching that - ALL my data re-links to my FCP -X project nearly instaneously.

That doesn't actually BEHAVE much like a REEL - which required a single, physical presence to be loaded in order for the editor to extract the contents from it. So in my considered opinion, in a world where I might wish to have multiple CLONES of virtual reels, someone else's idea of what I might need as a REEL ID, might range from simply inadequate to downright STUPID in the context of my preferred workflow.

Does that help you understand my thinking about REEL ID issues?

Or do you just want me to send you some of the old 1": type C reels in my closet from the early days of my career to prove to you that I have some understanding of what a REEL actually represents?

(sorry, just couldn't resist)

"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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 1:39:55 pm

Bill,

I'm not sure how your description of working with VO favorites is any different than sub-clipping in FCP legacy. Also if you use markers on the master clips instead of comping takes on a timeline, there's no real advantage that I can see.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 1:37:59 pm

Chris, were you able to use a keyword search window in 7?

I went from 6 to X and in 6 there was no window for that.

I thought the search window was new with X


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 1:41:56 pm

[tony west] "I thought the search window was new with X"

Previous versions of FCP had a Find function that worked contextually in the browser and the timeline.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 3:08:15 pm

How did it work?

Like if I used markers and noted a word like "river" in the marker how would the find located that?


Return to posts index

Christian Schumacher
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 3:27:57 pm





Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 3:35:50 pm

Also:

http://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/markers-are-your-friend/

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 4:44:34 pm

Yeah, but Christian, this is FCP7s way, and frankly, it does allow searching, but it's not very useful or powerful as every search takes a long time, and puts everything in to a new window/folder. It's not very efficient and not dynamic at all.

Here's how I like metadata in FCPX, and I also have some comments about other things.

It is true, embedded Reels don't come in to FCPX for some reason. They do come in if you use the "import from camera archive" function (sort of like log and transfer). This seems to be a bug of some sort as there's a reel column in FCPX. Perhaps it has to do with A/V Foundation vs Quicktime. I have no doubt reels will eventually make it in to FCPX, but it might take some work by camera developers.

P2 metadata does come in, but with caveats. It comes in to the absolutely massive metadata database that is in FCPX, but if you try and search for it in the browser, not all of it is available, it depends on the field. If you look closely at all the fields in FCPX, only the ones that are editable (the fields with the text box) become searchable in the browser. Here's three screen grabs of every single metadata field that comes in to FCPX. Some of this is P2 specific that has been "preedited" in P2Flow before importing to FCPX. The difference here is that instead of a straight import, FCPX is actually reading the P2 XML file and parsing the metadata. In your case Oliver, if and when Arri develops an Arri importer for FCPX, I am sure the Alexa metadata will travel, or FCPX will need to be updated to simply read the embedded data in QT files (which it already does for tc):

metadata_01.png
metadata_02.png
metadata_03.png

And here's a grab of the P2 fields that are implemented in P2 Transfers that have been preedited by me in P2Flow (searchable and non searchable) and some of these fields come from the camera metadata itself (like model name/number):

metadata_04_p2.png

Throw all of the politics aside for a moment and try to accept FCPX for what it is, not for what it isn't, or isn't yet. This level of information seems to indicate a connection to a rather large professional ecosystem that we just can't see yet.

Now, why is FCPX's implementation important?

Well, for me, it's how I keep track of things. The longer a project goes on, and the more projects I work on in between that initial project, the less I remember about that initial project. If everything is catalogued, I can search by a word instead of scrubbing 25 timelines of selects (or I can also scrub selects in FCPX very easily, with no timelines, if that's preferable).

Markers in FCPX also become searchable, AND they also transfer to the timeline index, so I can now search just the timeline for words in the marker.

And I'm sure you're asking, "Well, why don't i just put things in to bins and do it that way? It works fine!" Well, you can. But let's say you know there's a shot or series of shots that are from a certain location. Since FCPX has a dynamic keyword structure, those shots might be spread out across many keyword collections. In FCP, you can do a search for "Irvine, CA" and all those clips will show up which you can then make a smart collection for later use, or simply find the shot you need and add it to your timeline, and it's all very fast and very dynamic. In FCP7, you'd have to dig through multiple bins looking for a few shots within those bins. It's kind of messy.

If all of these FCPX metadata fields ever become searchable, you will be able to search for camera type (Arri Alexa or HPX-2000 for example) or embedded GPS coordinates (location), or once all the EXIF data becomes available, it will be searchable by lens, ISO or shutter speed. So if you need to do a certain treatment or series of treatments to certain shots from certain cameras, you will be able to parse that information by searching for "50mm EOS" or whatever. If you have multiple angles, you will be able to sort your footage by camera angle, or add a CC filter to certain angles just by typing "Cam_B" and adding a filter.

Metadata is data that describes data. As we move to an increasingly file based society, this metadata will do more to describe our footage and our deliverables much more so than a filename allows.

From an editing stand point it allows keywords to be searched without having to dig through many collections or bins. Simply select the Event, type the word you are looking for, and there's your shot(s). Of course, this means you must take the time to enter this information up front. Since I have been working a metadata structure with P2Flow for a number of years now, this workflow is not a new venture for me. i find the more time I take upfront to properly add metadata, the greater that effort serves me as the project drones on, that is, it saves time later on. It's the very reason Murch uses File Maker Pro as he said in the latest interview video. He wants to know where things are to give him a birds eye view of the project, without looking through mountains of footage/bins/selects/timelines. He can search by scene number, for example. FCPX begins to account for that style of thinking and workflow inherently in the application, and presents it in a very clear and dynamic fashion.

Sure, maybe not everyone needs that level of detail. I for one, welcome it as I like it and think it's very useful.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 5:02:31 pm

Which is all well and good.

FCP-X takes "Find Whatever" AND gives you a way to persistently group all the Whatevers together - and after you've done that, you can narrow that list down to only BLUE Whatevers, and make THAT persistent recallable data.

If you can't see how that might be more useful that being limited to "find whatever" then fine.

Your choice.

"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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 5:33:40 pm

[Bill Davis] "Which is all well and good.

FCP-X takes "Find Whatever" AND gives you a way to persistently group all the Whatevers together - and after you've done that, you can narrow that list down to only BLUE Whatevers, and make THAT persistent recallable data.

If you can't see how that might be more useful that being limited to "find whatever" then fine.

Your choice.
"


Why do you think I can't do "find whatever" in FCP 7? AND put them in a group? I'm getting the feeling that some folks here never used the more advanced functions of "find." You DO know that you can search keywords, don't you? And that you can label sub clips? And that you can combine all kinds of searchable metadata like "Linda," "MCU," "Blue," and "Whatevers?"

And that it would gather your search into a single bin? And that you could make a permanent copy of that bin with a couple of keystrokes?

I'm not trying to be obstinate here, but I'm just not seeing the magic.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 5:52:09 pm

[Chris Harlan] "I'm not trying to be obstinate here, but I'm just not seeing the magic."

Do you really use the find function all that often? How big are your projects in terms of number of media clips and timelines?

When I use the Find function in FCP7, it results in a beachball until it cranks though what it needs to. Sometimes, it doesn't crank through and hangs. It sucks. i then have to go through clip by clip to find what I want. In FCPX, I can simply start scrubbing all the clips form the search with no loading/clicking.

Here's what happened when I search for footage shot by a particular shooter in a current FCP7 project, and the search took 43 seconds:



fcp7_find.png

With FCPX, I could start typing his name and before I was even done typing, all of his shots would be displayed.

FCPX is way more fluid and instant, and then tagging those clips is much faster and dynamic and you won't have multiple physical copies of the clips in separate bins where the master clip relationship might get screwy. You can choose to store them for later use, or not. Another instant search can bring them right back up again.

With 7 yes, the clips come up in a "results" bin, and then you can put those clips in yet another bin, but the implementation is no where near as useful and fluid as FCPX.

Also certain characteristics of makers simply aren't searchable in FCP7, and then once things go in to the timeline, even more of the metadata characteristics become unsearchable. Not so with X.

While yes, "Find" does work in 7, it's slow and inefficient compared to FCPX.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:01:37 pm

x


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:20:29 pm

[Chris Harlan] "No, not that much. I'm usually editing instead of data mining. "

Hmm

Well, I guess that pretty much negates everything I have said as my process has been reduced to data mining. Because I like to "data mine" by specifically searching for a clip that I need to edit, by text, instead of a double and single click fiasco, I am not editing or I am not an editor? Is that what you are implying here?

I don't get it.

Since you don't use the search function in FCP7 (which I don't blame you, it sucks), then really, you have nothing to compare X to.

For those of us who actually need to use the search function to edit, X is awesome, and metadata helps in the edit, especially when you know exactly what you're looking for and forgot where you left it.

It is up to you to use it how you see fit, or don't.

[Chris Harlan] "My projects can be fairly large since they can involve whole seasons with a variety of permutations."

Whole seasons of raw footage or whole seasons of finished shows? So 20 Quicktime Movies or 20 episodes worth of raw footage? In which scenario do you think a search function might come in handy?

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:42:50 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Hmm

Well, I guess that pretty much negates everything I have said as my process has been reduced to data mining. "


Actually, I accidentally hit post direct before I was finished, so I think you'll find the whole reply less flippant and more to your liking.

[Jeremy Garchow] "Whole seasons of raw footage or whole seasons of finished shows? So 20 Quicktime Movies or 20 episodes worth of raw footage? In which scenario do you think a search function might come in handy?
"


Either/or/and both. Never just 22/23 Quicktime files. Even when it is that simple, it still breaks down to many sub clips, ancillary gfx, multiple sfx libraries, and a fairly large pool of music selections.

Also, why would you even consider editing 22 full episodes in a single project file, when all but a very few elements must be kept away from each other?


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:29:46 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Do you really use the find function all that often? How big are your projects in terms of number of media clips and timelines?"

No, not that much. I'm usually editing instead of data mining. But I do use it fairly regularly to round up sound effects and supplied gfx. My projects can be fairly large since they can involve whole seasons with a variety of permutations.


[Jeremy Garchow] "Here's what happened when I search for footage shot by a particular shooter in a current FCP7 project, and the search took 43 seconds:
"


I'm certainly NOT having problems like that on my 8 core, but I DO admit that it is slow. So, YES--quantitatively faster search.


[Jeremy Garchow] "FCPX is way more fluid and instant, and then tagging those clips is much faster and dynamic "

Okay, I'll buy that.


[Jeremy Garchow] "and you won't have multiple physical copies of the clips in separate bins where the master clip relationship might get screwy"

Can't agree. First, you don't get "multiple physical copies." That is an illusion. And second, you only get new master clips if you go through the process of making them so.


[Jeremy Garchow] "With 7 yes, the clips come up in a "results" bin, and then you can put those clips in yet another bin, but the implementation is no where near as useful and fluid as FCPX."

Now, Jeremy, the few extra keystrokes required to copy all of the contents of one bin and paste them in another is hardly "no where near as useful and fluid as FCPX." Frankly, the fact that, in FCP X, you can't have any kind of permanent bin at all is far more inconvenient than the occasional need to select all and then copy and paste.


[Jeremy Garchow] "Also certain characteristics of makers simply aren't searchable in FCP7, and then once things go in to the timeline, even more of the metadata characteristics become unsearchable. Not so with X.
"


This--like speed above--is the kind of thing I'm looking for. Could you elucidate a bit? What would I WANT to be searching for that I can't search for in FCP 7? This isn't a challenge. It is why I asked the question in the first place.

[Jeremy Garchow] "While yes, "Find" does work in 7, it's slow and inefficient compared to FCPX."

I'm guessing this is a pretty fair criticism of 7 v. X. Of course X HAS to be this way, as the search function is not ancillary--as it is in 7--but basic to its binning structure. With as much time as you've spent in X, do you miss bins at all? Or do you find X's structure superior in most or all regards? I know this is a matter of taste; I'm curious what yours is at this point.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:05:09 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Can't agree. First, you don't get "multiple physical copies." "

OK. But if you drag the clips out of the "results" bin and in to a new bin, they then leave their original position. So now you ether have to duplicate, copy/paste which makes it an affiliate clip of the original master clip (unless you choose to make it a new master which causes more confusion), or accept that these clips have a new home. To me, it is not an illusion.

FCPX allows a clip to be in multiple places at once without that mess. Some find this stupid/limiting, I find it smart and more flexible.

[Chris Harlan] "Now, Jeremy, the few extra keystrokes required to copy all of the contents of one bin and paste them in another is hardly "no where near as useful and fluid as FCPX.""

It's not about the keystrokes, it's about how FCP7 tracks the media. FCPX clips are always in the Event, no matter what, you single click the event, there's all your clips. With FCP7, clips are only in the place that you specifically put it. To use an analogy, with FCPX the footage is always in a big bucket that is easily searchable by the tags that are hanging off of it, once you are done you can simply throw it back in the bucket, or add a new tag to help find it by sight later. FCP7 puts things in compartments which you have to find, open, look for the tag, close back up, open another, etc and so forth. You cannot simply write "Broll" AND "Irvine, CA" on a tag and add to the pile, you have to split the clip and put it in a "Broll" compartment and a "Irvine, CA" compartment. Those two clips which are identical may or may not have a relationship to the clip in the timeline. It depends on which one you used. I personally think FCPX is way more highly flexible in this regard. I don't have to keep track of two clips. That one clip can be defined multiple ways, which is the very strength of metadata.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:19:29 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Those two clips which are identical may or may not have a relationship to the clip in the timeline. It depends on which one you used. I personally think FCPX is way more highly flexible in this regard. I don't have to keep track of two clips. "

I guess I just don't see the value of that. I can't think of a real world case where it would matter to me, or why it would shorten anything--certainly not in what I do, though I'm of course willing to entertain that there are more things in editorial than are dreamt of in my philosophy.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 6:58:39 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Why do you think I can't do "find whatever" in FCP 7? AND put them in a group? I'm getting the feeling that some folks here never used the more advanced functions of "find." You DO know that you can search keywords, don't you? And that you can label sub clips? And that you can combine all kinds of searchable metadata like "Linda," "MCU," "Blue," and "Whatevers?"

And that it would gather your search into a single bin? And that you could make a permanent copy of that bin with a couple of keystrokes?

I'm not trying to be obstinate here, but I'm just not seeing the magic."


Chris.

Look it's FINE if you don't see any advantage. Stick with what you know for as long as it works for you. IIRC, you're one of the guys planning to migrate to either Adobe or AVID for the future. That's perfectly cool as well.

I suspect with your hesitance to even CONSIDER that there might be parts of the X design that could be superior to what was implemented in Legacy will be a big stumbling block to your learning it. (I personally don't do well trying to learn stuff that annoys me. It shuts down my thinking and makes me resist the knowledge,but that's me - your learning style might work differently for all I know)

Some of us have spent years (11 plus in my case) editing in 7, then Switched to X and have found it both exciting and interesting and satisfying. Others find it a pain. That's GOT to be personal difference or EVERYONE would feel the same about it and that's just not what's happening here.

I'm seeing LOTS of things that I'm doing right off the bat in 10 that never became part of my workflow in FCP 1-7. That's likely because the kind of day to day editing I did wasn't built around a distributed workflow in a high-end house like many here. I've worked primarily in corporate communications and somewhat in Advertising. I've had maybe 20% of my work destined for broadcast, not 100% like many here. For the "production" editor who's focused on speed, efficiency and collaboration as the holy grails of editing, they're likely much better technical editors than I'll ever be. I was concentrating on being the "program creator" rather than exclusively the EDITOR. And I get that those types of editors miss capabilities in X that they had in Legacy. But that's how it is right now.

I also believe, however, that there might be something to be learned from those of us who've worked extensively OUTSIDE of broadcast but STILL in professional video editing, since we daily see a whole other slice of the industry. One that's actually growing a LOT faster than the broadcast sector right now.

I think X fits into MY part of the industry BETTER than 7. Not always, not exclusively, but for what I do, powerfully.

So I'm not really interested in going BACK to 7, no matter how much you tell me that my old tool did what I need just fine. (or even "better" I KNOW THAT. I was in the seat doing that for 11 plus years. Now I'm in the seat doing X. And I'm finding "new to me" capabilities that are HUGELY interesting and satisfying when I sit down to cut a project.

I'll respect that you don't "like it" or think it's "innovative enough" to impress you. Or maybe you feel that it's "innovations" are stupid and unnecessary. Or that it misses out on what YOU need it to be. That's fine. Thankfully, nobody will ever FORCE you to use it. But any contention that what I feel about it lame because I simply can't see how "superior" legacy was is kinda ODD as I've likely got more operation time in Legacy than anyone else I know - as a result of my start cutting with less than 2 weeks after it's intro at NAB 99.

The truth is that I've in front of Legacy in ALL it's iterations regularly for more than a decade and probably completed and delivered in excess of 400 projects with it - so it's going to be hard for you to convince me that I'm not in a position to judge the strength of it, verses the strength of the X approach.

Whether anybody here want to LISTEN TO or give ANY weight to what I'm saying here is totally up to the individual.

And I'm fine with that.

FWIW.

"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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:32:32 pm

[Bill Davis] "I suspect with your hesitance to even CONSIDER that there might be parts of the X design that could be superior to what was implemented in Legacy will be a big stumbling block to your learning it."

Bill, you totally misunderstand me. The whole reason I started this thread, and others like it, is that I DO want to know what is better or interesting about FCP X. I AM curious about such things. You don't need to defend your preference for FCP X to me. I think I've told you on a couple of occasions that I think it is a good tool for you. AND for many others. I don't begrudge anyone using it. In fact, I'm intrigued by it. So, I'm just trying to see it for what it is. I think you'll find in my reply to Jeremy in this thread, that he made me see--and agree to--his POV on several counts. I think you'll find, if you look across many of my replies, a similar pattern.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:20:42 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Bill, you totally misunderstand me. The whole reason I started this thread, and others like it, is that I DO want to know what is better or interesting about FCP X. I AM curious about such things. You don't need to defend your preference for FCP X to me. I think I've told you on a couple of occasions that I think it is a good tool for you. AND for many others. I don't begrudge anyone using it. In fact, I'm intrigued by it. So, I'm just trying to see it for what it is. I think you'll find in my reply to Jeremy in this thread, that he made me see--and agree to--his POV on several counts. I think you'll find, if you look across many of my replies, a similar pattern.
"


Fair enough, Chris.

I still finding myself occasionally getting weary of "defending" X against the onslaught of those who imply the since it don't work for them, then its dreck for everybody.

Those kind of "blanket" statements were much more common in the early days - when nearly everyone was confused by it's singular differences and translated that into plenty of "but it doesn't do (feature)" only for all of us to discover time and time again that, well, yes it did (feature), just differently than we were previously accustomed to. Case in point is everyone who yelled initially about the "single window" approach, before we understood that you can do virtually everything that was once done in the Viewer (albeit with some singular reservations like full-screen color correcion) in the Event Browser (and a whole lot more besides!)

Those who take it to task and follow up with the REASONING behind their positions have my respect and I try to be careful NEVER to belittle their opinions, since they may very well know a lot more than I do and have viable contextural reasons why it fails to meet their needs.

My occasional crabbiness in the context of a broad/stroke naysayer is MY issue, not anyone else's.

And I'm working on it.

Be patient with me, please.

"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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:43:06 pm

[Bill Davis] "I still finding myself occasionally getting weary of "defending" X against the onslaught of those who imply the since it don't work for them, then its dreck for everybody.
"


I totally get it. No problem.


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 5:51:48 pm

Right.

Just seem a little more cumbersome to me. I would rather not have another window have to pop up,
when I could just use that one that's already on screen in X.


Return to posts index

Christian Schumacher
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:24:01 pm

Tony,

You're entitled to find something cumbersome, specially if you didn't know it existed in the first place.
I guess this is why the debating forum is for, huh?

On the other hand, how is that custom window lay-out working for you in X? I find it extremely cumbersome to scroll down to negative space when having stacked clips to work with in a timeline that cannot be expanded.
But that must be only me, perhaps?

And Jeremy,

On systems I have been to, no beach-balling or crashing when searching at all. YMMV.
I can drag the resulting bin or some of the clips to a new timeline and have them all in there, nicely.
And they go to the sequence in the order that they are sifted in that resulting bin.
This is very, very helpful.

And all of this without breaking any project relationship. Expanding this search on that timeline, the Find command also selects all clips that I further search for, so I can then copy them or drag 'em to a higher position.

I'm taking your word when you said you didn't used it that much.
I like the former FCP for its flexibility, something the new generation of this software is going to miss.


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:01:03 pm

I didn't use markers in fcp 6. I was working with a director recently who really likes them for docs he works on and since I'm starting a doc I started messing around with them in X.

How does my not using it before change the way it works? You either have to open another window or you don't.

It's working out fine for me in X

What I have been doing is putting interview clips in an event.

I play the clips and mark and type notes as it rolling. If I type fast enough I don't have to stop the clip.

I can find those key words in the markers quick and easy typing in the search without opening another window or placing the clips in the timeline.


Return to posts index

Christian Schumacher
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:39:53 pm

Actually, you can search not only for markers, but clips and timecode also.
When you search for clips at the sequence level, it simply selects them for you.
This works with transitions too and it is a very handy feature.

Here's link for a short description of how it works.

http://www.larryjordan.biz/finding-clips-in-final-cut-pro/


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:06:11 pm

I hear you on that part, and thanks for the link with larry.

His example is

USING THE FIND COMMAND
The Find command (Edit > Find) is a very valuable tool when you are looking for something in a sequence.
For instance, type Command+F (Edit > Find) and enter the name of a clip.

That talks about the sequence.

I can find clips with the finder no problem and effects like you said.

I was kinda of talking about markers on a clip that has not been put into the sequence yet.

Let's say I have not decided I want a part of the interview in yet?

I'm looking for one word in a marker in a clip sitting in a bin (event)

See what I mean? It's a small difference but others have asked me about it also. I had to try to work with it to find if X could do it (it can)

I have to admit I was not used to working that way and when this guy was asking me about it I was like Huh?

I see what he wanted now. It's just not the way I worked before but now I like it.

If you have an example of finding a word in a marker in a clip in a bin, I will show it to him.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:34:52 pm

[Christian Schumacher] "On systems I have been to, no beach-balling or crashing when searching at all. YMMV. "

Yeah, and my bet is that those are small projects. I have a decent 8 core and fast storage. It's not my system, it's FCP. This particular project takes about 3 minutes to open. It's pretty big and has a ton of elements. It's 3 weeks of shooting 1TB of raw footage/audio (720p24, AVC-I, DSLR, AF100) and this doesn't include the DSLR ProRes transcodes, just the raw footage, countless sequences, and all of the P2 clips have a lot of metadata.

The simpler the project, the faster the search. FCPX is different.

This is someone who has used metadata as a tool to help me get the job done and enhance our workflow for years in FCP7, and it doesn't work as flexible as I want it to. Metadata is not an after thought for me. Here is the P2 metadata tool I use:



p2flow.png

All of this info gets sent to FCP (via XML) and the media is either connected to the native MXF files OR I can send this over to FCP ready for a log and transfer:



p2flow_transfer.png


All of that metadata is shoehorned in to FCP7 columns, which are fixed and limited (you can't create customs columns in FCP7, but you can create custom fields in FCPX). FCPX blows the doors of FCP7 in terms of metadata fields as my other screen grabs show.

Pomfort Silverstack is another example of a metadata tool for DSLR/Alexa/ProRes recorder footage:

http://pomfort.com/

[Christian Schumacher] "I can drag the resulting bin or some of the clips to a new timeline and have them all in there, nicely.
And they go to the sequence in the order that they are sifted in that resulting bin.
This is very, very helpful."


In FCPX, you could group these in a compound clip (which can act as a sequence), or add them to a smart collection, or select all, hit E and they all go to the timeline, OR NOT. I can simply find the clip that I want and edit it. Less clutter, less space, much faster and dynamic.

[Christian Schumacher] " the Find command also selects all clips that I further search for, "

Yeah, by clip name and some marker information/tc, but that's it. That is a tiny fraction of the available metadata. Try searching for a reel name on the sequence for example. Or any other data that is not tc/marker/clip name. You can't. I'm sorry, but FCP7 is not a metadata work horse. You are just going to have to trust that I actually use this stuff.

[Christian Schumacher] "I like the former FCP for its flexibility, something the new generation of this software is going to miss."

Oy


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:53:34 pm

Dude! I totally see where you are coming from in this. I NEVER need to get this granular since I'm project in/project out with a clean slate each time, and seldom any overlap between projects. Looking at what you've got going here, makes me see your POV a whole new way. Just curious--did Final Cut Server not deliver for you?

Also, can you call up those GPS points in FCP X? I think that would be terrific for location scouting.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:22:54 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Dude! I totally see where you are coming from in this."

A huge weight has been lifted. I'm glad I posted those pics as this has all been making huge sense to me, but I have to remember that not everyone is used to a metadata centric workflow. Thank you.

[Chris Harlan] "Looking at what you've got going here, makes me see your POV a whole new way. Just curious--did Final Cut Server not deliver for you? "

This was before Final Cut Server, and that wasn't in the cards for us at the time as to get it done right, you needed some serious hardware.

We now have a SAN which would benefit from a catalog system. We are looking at CatDV, but the jury is still out. CatDV does have the advantage that is works with MXF components (like MXF4mac which we use).

With Lion and FCPX, these MXF components don't work anymore so we have to sit tight for a little while longer and see what shakes out.

[Chris Harlan] "Also, can you call up those GPS points in FCP X? I think that would be terrific for location scouting."

The GPS requires a chip on the camera, and the camera has to have the capability. We don't have it, I just put in there to show where those fields come from. I know that it gets recorded as a tc stream of sorts and conforms to SMPTE's UMID. I think it would be really handy for reality shows, big ones that have many locations, or news of course. The "Search Google Maps" button is fun. Here it is for certain Panasonic cameras:

http://panasonic.com/business/professional-video-accessories/aj-gps910g.asp

Yes. FCPX has this location data in it, and it comes from the P2 XML in the case of P2 Footage.

I should add that all of this metadata is Spotlight searchable as well as the P2 metadata exists in text files that are attached to the footage. I really like the P2 format, it's pretty amazing and powerful if you crack it open.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:06:20 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "The GPS requires a chip on the camera, and the camera has to have the capability"

No, I know. I've got a little Sony HD HandyCam that I take hiking/backpacking. It has such a thing, but I haven't been able to make much use of it. Maybe I'll play with it a bit this weekend and see what it does with the data.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:43:07 pm

[Chris Harlan] "I've got a little Sony HD HandyCam that I take hiking/backpacking. "

Does it record to AVCHD or what format does it record?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:23:42 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Dude! I totally see where you are coming from in this."

A huge weight has been lifted. I'm glad I posted those pics as this has all been making huge sense to me, but I have to remember that not everyone is used to a metadata centric workflow. Thank you.

[Chris Harlan] "Looking at what you've got going here, makes me see your POV a whole new way. Just curious--did Final Cut Server not deliver for you? "

This was before Final Cut Server, and that wasn't in the cards for us at the time as to get it done right, you needed some serious hardware.

We now have a SAN which would benefit from a catalog system. We are looking at CatDV, but the jury is still out. CatDV does have the advantage that is works with MXF components (like MXF4mac which we use).

With Lion and FCPX, these MXF components don't work anymore so we have to sit tight for a little while longer and see what shakes out.

[Chris Harlan] "Also, can you call up those GPS points in FCP X? I think that would be terrific for location scouting."

The GPS requires a chip on the camera, and the camera has to have the capability. We don't have it, I just put in there to show where those fields come from. I know that it gets recorded as a tc stream of sorts and conforms to SMPTE's UMID. I think it would be really handy for reality shows, big ones that have many locations, or news of course. The "Search Google Maps" button is fun. Here it is for certain Panasonic cameras:

http://panasonic.com/business/professional-video-accessories/aj-gps910g.asp

Yes. FCPX has this location data in it, and it comes from the P2 XML in the case of P2 Footage.

I should add that all of this metadata is Spotlight searchable as well as the P2 metadata exists in text files that are attached to the footage. I really like the P2 format, it's pretty amazing and powerful if you bust it open.


Return to posts index

Christian Schumacher
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:04:26 pm

In big projects I don't get beach-balls, I get that tiny spinning reel.I understand they are quite different, no?
But I would have to check on that, since in those projects the editors always break them up in sections in order to avoid this kind of problems.

The caveat with "Compound Clips" is that they increasingly bloat your project file further in time, as you create them. Not good. If you're using it, you should know it. But it will get better, huh?

As I said, I can sift that resulting bin, like the "reel" column and get only the ones I want to see in order, This at the browser level selecting "used media" then I drag them to a sequence with "Show Duplicates" selected and voilá. Workarounds aren't exclusive to FCP X ;-)

I give you that X is more promising in that regard, but it's not there yet-such a persistent adverb in here.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:14:12 pm

[Christian Schumacher] "The caveat with "Compound Clips" is that they increasingly bloat your project file further in time, as you create them. Not good. If you're using it, you should know it. But it will get better, huh?"

So what? This happens with every single video application I use today. The more stuff, the more bloat.

This doesn't scare me, it's just what happens. You can expect to take on 4 tons of water and not feel the weight.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 12:45:57 am

[Christian Schumacher] "And Jeremy,

On systems I have been to, no beach-balling or crashing when searching at all. YMMV.
I can drag the resulting bin or some of the clips to a new timeline and have them all in there, nicely.
And they go to the sequence in the order that they are sifted in that resulting bin. "


Funny, I too read Jeremy's beach-balling dismissal of the FCP Find function, and I certainly seem to be, thankfully, missing that issue too. I work primarily on long-form 60 and 90-min doco projects with loads of material too, so I'd suggest that your SAN at work may be the culprit Jeremy, and that the beach balls you're experiencing have little to do with FCP itself.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 12:52:59 am

[David Roth Weiss] " so I'd suggest that your SAN at work may be the culprit Jeremy, and that the beach balls you're experiencing have little to do with FCP itself."

Well, it happened before the SAN too.
The SAN is a new addition, fast storage, this project, and this issue is not.

It probably has to do with sheer amount of data that's in my files (in the FCP columns).

There's much more then a few user clip names, a reel and some timecode.

It also has to do with the massive amount of media.

Sorry guys, it's how this works. Beach ball, watch clock, whatever, it's no where near as fast as FCPX that runs on the very same SAN.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 1:10:52 am

David,

I saw on the LAFCPUG website that you're one of the Stump the Guru's tonight.

When you see Mike Horton, if you remember say Hi to him for me. (I helped him start the group at the very first meeting and we're old friends.)

Take care.

"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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 7:50:27 am

[Bill Davis] "I saw on the LAFCPUG website that you're one of the Stump the Guru's tonight.

When you see Mike Horton, if you remember say Hi to him for me."


Actually Bill, I owe you one, because I would have missed the guru gig had you not reminded me that it was tonight. For some reason I kept thinking it was going to be tomorrow night, and your 5:15pm message is the only thing that got me there on time on the right day.

Thank you!

DRW

PS - I did tell Michael that you said hello.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 11:12:11 pm

Honestly glad it worked out for you.

Take care.

"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


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 3:36:17 am

I'll chime in and add that slow search is one of my issues with FCP7 ... so much so that it discourages me from using it. I use it most often with my sound libraries (and though they encompass many clips, they would certainly not be considered extensive).

Franz.


Return to posts index

Christian Schumacher
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 2:24:07 pm

I believe Jeremy's experience on searching in FCP legacy's "Browser" is limited to a fat project with a massive bunch of clips in it. And I don't think he is into long-form, as well.

A fast searching result is achieved when applied to specific Bins (and Projects) which should be organized beforehand. So, when working in the big ones that's a necessary step to deal with. You have to know the best practices that go along with the tool you are working on. And I strongly believe the same applies to X as well, but in different scenarios, of course.

One more thing to consider is searching at a Sequence level when the "search command" is much faster and becomes a powerful tool to select a determined set of clips at once. When you combine searching in Browser along with searching in a Sequence, which can then hold those previous Bin results, you have both clean and organized interactions within your Projects. And there's labels, markers, custom columns fields to add even more functionality to the tool.

I'm not saying FCP X Collections or its metadata capability are useless, mind you. But I think this came up after a fellow user argued if legacy's searching functions even existed!!! So we had to chime in to point out that FCP 7 (when you know what you're doing) can be capable of organizing big projects, hence its widespread use in professional and complex scenarios. But that doesn't mean it was a simple or a perfect workflow BTW.

I believe FCP X is successful when allows a light user to achieve the same organizing results on its own simple way, and that's a good thing to consider. But one has to equally consider the mileage that FCP 7 went through to handle those complex Projects that it did "in the past". And it was far from buggy and useless, c'mon I think those adjectives fit in better with the new iteration of FCP, so watch out the language used at our beloved legacy software. It is prudent to wait until FCP X matures, until then use your helmets and take the heat.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 4:00:23 pm

[Christian Schumacher] "I believe Jeremy's experience on searching in FCP legacy's "Browser" is limited to a fat project with a massive bunch of clips in it. And I don't think he is into long-form, as well. "

Big project, lots of media, and lots of metadata. I will have to show you what one clip looks like when I get back to the office tomorrow. Every column is full, and not just with one field, but multiple, as FCP7s columns are very limited.

I don't know what long form has to do with it except my sequences aren't as long. While the sequences aren't long, I make up for it in volume, I can assure you that. That sounds like some sort of euphemism.

[Christian Schumacher] " It is prudent to wait until FCP X matures, until then use your helmets and take the heat."

Dude. FCPXs searching is far better, more useful, more dynamic (and easier) than FCP7.

Combine that with the information that follows the clips in the timeline in the Timeline Index is great.

Got your helmet on? :-D

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 1:55:31 pm

My big question about metadata in FCPX is this: will it be open?

For example, Bill is collecting all his footage into one big, flexible, searchable FCPX database. Five years from now, he will have put an incredible amount of effort into tagging his footage and created inordinate value in his database. It will be an important asset for him.

What if Bill decides to switch to another NLE? Is he locked into FCPX's integrated DAM, or can he get that valuable data out of FCPX and into a new DAM of his choice?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 2:05:11 pm

[Walter Soyka] " Bill is collecting all his footage into one big, flexible, searchable FCPX database."

Good question. Explain that to my FC Server client. ;-)

Why do you think Murch puts more faith in his FMP database?

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 5:29:02 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Good question. Explain that to my FC Server client. ;-) Why do you think Murch puts more faith in his FMP database?"

Indeed. Looking forward, I think DAM lock-in is much more of a threat for most of us than project file lock-in. Any one project file increases in value until the project is delivered, and then it usually decreases in value thereafter.

Your DAM database, on the other hand, continually increases in value (and cost to recreate) as you work. If your metadata is not portable, you end up tying yourself to one vendor a little tighter every day.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 5:22:35 pm

[Walter Soyka] "
What if Bill decides to switch to another NLE? Is he locked into FCPX's integrated DAM, or can he get that valuable data out of FCPX and into a new DAM of his choice?
"


Walter,

In a world where 10 minutes after anything significant is released - somebody CRACKS it and posts it to the internet, are you really arguing that RAW DATA that is known to flow inside the FCP-X interface freely won't EVER be "hooked into" for export?

Even if only 500 people want to do that. (to stretch credulity to the breaking point) And some 10 year old in Bulgaria can drive half of THEM to his website to download "X-Data Cracker" for a $10 pay pal re-direct, you can COUNT on it happening.

Pure demand economics at work!

(only partly in jest here!)

(and come to think of it, I'm actually kinda pulling for some 10 year old in St. Paul, MN. It's winter kids, come in side, get warm and get coding! America's future depends on you!)

"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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 6:00:31 pm

[Bill Davis] "In a world where 10 minutes after anything significant is released - somebody CRACKS it and posts it to the internet, are you really arguing that RAW DATA that is known to flow inside the FCP-X interface freely won't EVER be "hooked into" for export?

Even if only 500 people want to do that. (to stretch credulity to the breaking point) And some 10 year old in Bulgaria can drive half of THEM to his website to download "X-Data Cracker" for a $10 pay pal re-direct, you can COUNT on it happening.

Pure demand economics at work!

(only partly in jest here!)

(and come to think of it, I'm actually kinda pulling for some 10 year old in St. Paul, MN. It's winter kids, come in side, get warm and get coding! America's future depends on you!)"





Are you really talking about demand economics for advanced features in a room full of people willing to pay much more than $299 for a modern version of FCP that works in their workflows? I thought the whole point of FCPX was to deliver the features that most people needed, and delay or ignore the specialty features?

Maybe the 10-year-old Bulgarians and Minnesotans are all too busy working on $10 EDL or legacy FCP project import for FCPX to start your metadata migration project today?

In all seriousness, Bill, Apple has chosen to totally ignore vast amounts of legacy FCP project data.. They made everyone start over, and you've been telling us over and over that it's a good thing.

What makes you think it will be different for FCP 11? What if they change their pervasive-metadata-relational-database model and it breaks all the hard work you put in? You could tag all your footage for years. It may be your metadata, but as of today, it's locked up and Apple holds the key, not you.

Think it couldn't happen? Ask a facility that standardized on Final Cut Server.

My main point here is that metadata that spans assets and projects is more valuable than any of any of your existing assets or projects themselves. Given how much business value you are locking up in one single place, I don't think it's crazy for me to ask about a migration strategy.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:49:07 pm

My contention, Walter is that since metadata is actually nothing more or less than TEXT with positional data in the form of OTHER text elements (Tabs, CR's et al) in a simple serial stream, it just stands to reason that the data will be accessible in the long run.

Even if someone has to write a small script or program to extract it.

After all, what would be the point of making it INACCESSIBLE?

It's not like the average FCP-X meta-data user is going to fill up his or her TAG database with credit card numbers! I just don't see Apple trying to hide TAG data text behind block cyphers or the like.

Makes no sense.

FWIW.

"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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:07:08 pm

[Bill Davis] "My contention, Walter is that since metadata is actually nothing more or less than TEXT with positional data in the form of OTHER text elements (Tabs, CR's et al) in a simple serial stream, it just stands to reason that the data will be accessible in the long run. Even if someone has to write a small script or program to extract it. After all, what would be the point of making it INACCESSIBLE?"

I have argued for openness in FCPX every chance I've gotten. There is no point in making the system closed, but opening it up does require some intention and expenditure of development resources by Apple.

As shown by maybe dozens of small examples throughout FCPX, just because a feature may be both important to users and relatively easy for developers doesn't mean it will be implemented any time soon (or maybe ever).

It's also not in Apple's interest to make it easy for you to move to another DAM or NLE. Apple's other database-driven pro app, Aperture, doesn't have an "export database" feature.

My original question was this: is the metadata open? Of course I think it should be, and of course it could be, but it seems at the moment that the answer is no.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:51:10 pm

[Walter Soyka] "My original question was this: is the metadata open? "

The created metadata inside of FCP is not. You can't export a batch list or other type of list with FCPX today besides FCPXML, and that of course does not include all of the clip metadata on export, just a few things. Who nows if it ever will. Is Adobe's XMP or Avid's metadata system "open"? Open is a tough term.

CatDV allows exporting of data through CSV and such, but you have to have CatDV to get it.

The metadata that is traveling with my P2 footage is available on the Finder level. It's not really "open" as much as viewable. It's an XML language so to see it easily, you probably need some sort of application that makes sense of it to parse it. P2CMS is a free one that does this.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 11:32:56 pm

And just like that, Apple releases some bug fixes:

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4589


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 11:53:10 pm

What’s new in version 10.0.2:

Fixes an issue in which a title may revert to the default font after restarting Final Cut Pro X
Resolves an issue that could cause files recorded with certain third-party mobile devices to play back incorrectly
Addresses a stability issue caused by changing the start time on a Compound Clip
Fixes an issue by restoring fixed tracks to FCPX
Fixes an issue by allowing import of old FCP program files
Fixes an issue by providing a viewer window


Nah, just wishing.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 12:03:04 am

Cruel!


Return to posts index

Christian Schumacher
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 3:07:57 pm

I believe that metadata in FCP X is oriented to work within iOS.
It isn't better - as others have pointed out - it is just suited for their main ecosystem.
You know, iPads, iPhones, iCloud...And anything around this model.

It is significant in the matter that every technology developed by Apple now is aimed at this.
And all softwares from Apple have to run on iOS - or are planned to do so ASAP.

Accordingly, Pro Apps were EOL'ed because they didn't fit that "new" model.
Judging by Apple's actions, the Mac OS won't last a longer lifetime here on Earth either.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 3:45:10 pm

[Christian Schumacher] "I believe that metadata in FCP X is oriented to work within iOS."

That may well be true, but we are miles and miles away from that today or in the foreseeable few years. iCloud, as it has publicly been positioned, is little more than a push-sharing mechanism for Apple devices. There doesn't appear to be any provision for permanent storage of user content in iCloud and that would be essential for this to work. Not to mention, given Apple's history with DotMac, MobileMe and Final Cut Server - would you trust this to be there five years from now?

Right now, only Avid and Quantel have any commercial cloud-editing product available and those are pretty limited in their current implementation.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Christian Schumacher
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:37:25 pm

Oliver,

I respect your input as it is an enormously experienced one.
But, see where I'm getting at...If only in 2010 you could've foreseen what just had "changed in post"?
A rhetorical question, of course.

I will grant you that it may take some mileage, but I am convinced that is going to be a very short time.
Unfortunately, this is my opinion. Take it with a grain of salt.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 3:47:51 pm

[Christian Schumacher] "Judging by Apple's actions, the Mac OS won't last a longer lifetime here on Earth either."

Just as Apple dropped the "Computer" from their name, OS X has dropped the "Mac."

URL aside, look at the references to 10.7 on the OS X Lion page [link], or check out the language in any recent support doc [link]:
Products Affected
Mac OS X 10.3, Mac OS X 10.4, Mac OS X 10.6, Mac OS X 10.5, OS X Lion

I don't want to be accused of reading too much into that decision, but I am sure it was not made lightly.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:58:51 pm

And speaking of metadata, is there a way to NOT to have Events' contents in the browser be grouped by date? This should be an OPTIONAL way to sort info. More often than not it's secondary information, not top-level, as it is implemented now.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:46:24 pm

[Oliver Peters] "And speaking of metadata, is there a way to NOT to have Events' contents in the browser be grouped by date? "

Yeah, I hate that part.

Click the gear under the browser and choose these options:



fcpx_date.png


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:56:40 pm

Particularly evil if you have a camera button battery go bad and find it's internal clock tagged a clip as having been created in 1969!

(I have a project with a clip exactly like that right now - and it's annoying as hell!)

This is clearly something that needs to be revisited.

"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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:35:05 pm

[Bill Davis] "This is clearly something that needs to be revisited."

You can modify the creation date and change that. Has to be done outside of FCPX, though.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 12:20:16 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Click the gear under the browser and choose these options:"

Thank you!

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 12:26:20 am

[Oliver Peters] "[Jeremy Garchow] "Click the gear under the browser and choose these options:"

Thank you!"


Actually I spoke too soon. That tool is for Events in the Library. It doesn't seem to get rid of grouping within an Event. Is that correct or am I missing anything?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 1:12:35 am

Actually the fix is in the same area but a different part of that tools menu:



Thanks again.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 1:17:18 am

Yep, you just beat me to it. Sorry I misunderstood, I thought you meant Events, not the media!

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Lance Moody
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 6:03:28 pm

While I am certainly growing to love X, I have to say that the way metadata is handled is CAUSING what I consider to be the biggest problem with X.

By apparently writing the metadata to the actual file, X chokes if the file is changed in ANY way.

This causes a myriad of problems by making stuff become unlinked (and worse, unlinkable).

I am not interested in doing any motion graphics or compositing inside FCP since the tools are always lackluster. So when I take a rendered item from After Effects and need to revise it, it is absurd that I can't just render the changed file again without having the changed file become an unrecoverable orphan and having to painfully import the rerendered file and replace the clips throughout the timeline.

This all worked fine and magically in FCP7.

Lance



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 7:19:24 pm

[Lance Moody] "By apparently writing the metadata to the actual file, X chokes if the file is changed in ANY way."

This isn't writing metadata to a file, this is changing the file, and FCPX has some super strict (and kind of ridiculous) rules in that regard.

Right now, modifying the file from an external application causes the file to go offline in FCPX, although you can modify still files externally and there's no penalty. We should be allowed to modify these files externally and not have them knocked offline in FCPX. I agree.

Jeremy

[Lance Moody] "This all worked fine and magically in FCP7."

It wasn't until FCP7, that the "automatically connect to externally modified files" became an option. So it is relatively recent magic.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Lance Moody
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 9:42:09 pm

Thanks Jeremy,

I believe we have always at least been able to manually RECONNECT to changed media. This is not even an option in X and that sucks.

Lance



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?
on Nov 17, 2011 at 9:44:44 pm

[Lance Moody] "Thanks Jeremy,

I believe we have always at least been able to manually RECONNECT to changed media. This is not even an option in X and that sucks."


Totally agree.


Return to posts index

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