FORUMS: list search recent posts

Why is there a project library?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Oliver Peters
Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 4:20:40 pm

On the current production, I'm following the pattern a number of you have outlined. Namely to edit selects and rough cut sequences as Compound Clips that are stored in the Event. At the moment, I'm only using the Project timeline as a scratch pad. So, first I edit in the Project, then Compound the sequence, and finally delete the clip(s) from the Project timeline. When I need to adjust one of these roughs, I simply open it from the Event and make the edits. I won't create an actual Project until the latter stages of this job.

So this begs the question. Why is there a Project Library at all? What useful function does it serve? You can have edits in an Event without any Project, but you cannot have a Project without a corresponding Event. So other than a place to park Shared intermediate exports and timeline render files, it doesn't seem to serve much of a useful purpose.

I think I remember that in the beginning there were differences between sequences in a Project and in an Event; but since 10.0.6, that doesn't seem to be the case any longer.

Thoughts?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 4:38:29 pm

I think the model of keeping shot footage separate from edits holds some merit, especially in situations where footage is reused on multiple jobs. Why clog up the Event with edits from multiple editors spanning several jobs?

And if I want to send an edit I've been working on here at my office to another editor, I don't need to send the entire Event, just the project file. I used to do this all the time with FCP7, where I'd take a complicated project and strip everything out but the sequence in question, and email that to the other editor.

While I think for self contained jobs, the compound clip project-in-event model can work quite well. So I think there are reasons to do both, depending on your situation.



Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 5:03:25 pm

That's a really interesting question, especially when you consider the horse power it takes to manage the project library (or organization necessary to keep it small.)

This simple change, like the tilde key, begs the question: was the initial concept so good to begin with?
I mean that regarding the two most elemental changes Apple made to the paradigm - the project concept and the timeline concept.

A year and a half after release, FCPX is "undoing" two of the most annoying and not so well thought out principles of it's program.

But yes Oliver, when you look at the project as a scratch pad where you assemble and correct your clips and then a simple command places those edits neatly into a folder ready to be assembled in a final project...then yeah, it seems suddenly weirdly redundant, kludgy and unnecessary to have a project library that loads every startup.
Especially when any events you want access that might contain other clips OR assembled projects/compound clips you might want to use in other projects are all available in the Event Browser.

All that's needed at this point is a simple viewer to see your projects in order to just open up the file you want to work on...like the perfectly good old days. It would be much faster to access other edits than moving back and forth to the Project Library. And of course you can organize your CCs right there in the Event Browser in any way you like and if you want to make a CC independent of other uses then you can also duplicate it and rename it right there in the EB as well.

On initial thought is seems like a much better option than the original concept in many ways.


Return to posts index


Marcus Moore
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 5:31:12 pm

[Jim Giberti] "This simple change, like the tilde key, begs the question: was the initial concept so good to begin with?"

The tilde key isn't any indication that the concept was flawed, but simply one that has cases where it needs to be overridden.

With it's connected clip structure, FCPX basically inverts what is considered "normal" behaviour. In FCP7 clips were islands until themselves, and you'd often be drawing out ranges to grab numerous clips stacked on top of one another to move them all in unison. Now, FCPX assumes that connected clips want a common behaviour, and you use the tilde key to override that behaviour. It's just coming at the problem from 2 different directions, and I personally find I need to override the assumed behaviour LESS often now than I did in FCP7.

I'd like to see the connected nature of clips expanded in the future, so that you cold attach "behaviours" to connected clips. So that if you add 10 frames to the primary storyline clip, any connected audio or video clips also add 10 frames as well. And again here you'd want an override key for special circumstances where that behaviour wasn't wanted.



Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 5:58:09 pm

[Marcus Moore] "The tilde key isn't any indication that the concept was flawed, but simply one that has cases where it needs to be overridden."

Exactly, it was implemented because the original concept was seen as flawed by so many professional editors.
If it wasn't flawed they wouldn't have needed to assign functions to override the initial concept, which they have.
It's not an added function, it's a "fix" to give editors the control that was missing in the initial flawed concept.


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 6:09:31 pm

So if it had been there from the start, would the concept still be seen as flawed?

I don't think there's ANY operation to which there aren't exceptions.

Unfortunately, we'll never know which added features fall into the category of "improvements" or simply "not done when launched".

Considering that some estimates have them starting to put together FCPX only about a year before that first professional preview in February of 2011- I find it amazing they were able to get done what they did.



Return to posts index


Jim Giberti
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 6:23:22 pm

[Marcus Moore] "So if it had been there from the start, would the concept still be seen as flawed?
"


Well for starters, I don't know of any technical concepts that aren't flawed in some ways.
But yes, if Apple had made this obvious and important function part of the initial design then it would have been much more on target as a flexible editor.

Those of us that have been working with X since the fist days and asking for logical and sorely needed fixes to make it a professional tool are being rewarded one way or the other. I think debating what was planned and what is being fixed is a dead end exercise.

But from a simple, definitive standpoint, in very essential ways like these two we're discussing, the program is moving toward what many of us wanted it to be initially. And the changes most definitely seem responsive at the conceptual level to me, and not part of a "roll-out" of unfinished features.


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 6:32:55 pm

I agree with you completely. Since we'll never know, there' little point in arguing what the FCPX dev team might or might not have had up on a whiteboard in 2010.

And I'm entirely comfortable with the idea that some of the concepts FCPX proposes may ultimately not work and have to be reversed. There's enough that's different about some of the ideas in FCPX that it would have been impossible to tell what problems could arise once it got out into the wild. In some cases that may be things like the tilde key, augmenting or improving functionality, or we may see them reverse course on something somewhere down the line.

I personally don't think they're completely off-base with anything they've done. Especially at this stage when it's obvious some ideas haven't been fully implemented yet (Roles).

I think the real indicator of where FCPX HAS struck paydirt in a new concept or operation is where we see that functionality adopted by the other players, like the skimmable thumbnails in Premier.



Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 6:47:59 pm

[Marcus Moore] "I personally don't think they're completely off-base with anything they've done. Especially at this stage when it's obvious some ideas haven't been fully implemented yet (Roles)."

Obviously I don't think they were anything like completely off-base either. I've produced every film and TV spot we've done in the past year+ in FCPX. But I made the commitment to switch to it well aware of it's flaws and hopeful that they would be addressed through community feedback. Any of the improvements that were actually part of the initial plan get my big thumbs up as well.

But going back to Oliver's initial question. I definitely don't see this as part of the initial plan. I do see it as an avenue they've opened that does put the "Project Library" concept at a disadvantage in many respects to this different way of managing projects and media through the new CC innovation in 1.0.6

It does, in fact, make the Event Browser a single source of both media and "projects" making it both faster and simpler to access assembled edits or raw media than working through the Project Library. And when you consider the resources that the Project Library requires, the idea of replacing it with a simple browser window looks a lot less CPU intensive, faster and more intuitive as well as improving on the over all paradigm of a self contained environment.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 5:36:39 pm

I agree that projects make it convenient to share edits with other editors. It also seems hard (impossible?) to remove render files from the Event through the UI. However, like a tailbone, Projects now seems like a vestige of an early design concept. It would be easy to add a few functions to the Event and do away with the Project library entirely.

Maybe if would be different if edits in a Project could be self-contained without the need of a corresponding Event. I wonder if the functionality of the Project library will change in the future, when and if Apple finally implements its own, sorely needed project/event management controls.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 5:46:51 pm

Oliver, I read your blog and your various articles on workflows, on cameras, and take to heart much of your advice and experience.

I work on long-term docu projects which take years, and I sometimes miss an entire generation of technology as it whips by. I am one of those experienced FCP Legacy editors who has been dabbling in FCPX.

So this question is truly interesting to me. The whole Sequence vs Project nomenclature really threw a lot of us.

I would submit that the Project Library is useful for storage of "ordered Events."

In my world of long form, a sequence can be cut, compressed to a compound clip and kept as a rough edit, or as alternative versions of a sequence, in the Event Library as you suggest.

But then when it comes time to look at the big picture, I can string together shots and compound clips in a Project timeline, and call the whole thing "Part 1, rough edit v4" and store it in the Library.

I can still work on any given short sequence via the Event/Compound clip method you suggest, but I can also see a rough edit of my entire movie by having the right clips and compounds in a saved Project.

Does this make any sense, or am I really just abusing what should be a streamlined, database approach to editing?

Doug D


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 5:54:31 pm

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "Does this make any sense, or am I really just abusing what should be a streamlined, database approach to editing?
"


Yes, you are exploiting the flexibility of FCPX, Projects are fine, I use them in much the same way as you do.

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 5:55:18 pm

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "I can still work on any given short sequence via the Event/Compound clip method you suggest, but I can also see a rough edit of my entire movie by having the right clips and compounds in a saved Project."

But you can do the same thing in a compound clip contained in an Event, which makes the Project somewhat redundant.

I totally get what Bill is saying about the potential of asset management, however, I work daily with true asset management tools and FCP X isn't even close in that regard. Plus, it's nowhere near robust enough to have hundreds of projects and events accessible all the time. So while I agree that it's a nice offshoot of the FCP X design, I really doubt that's what Apple intended, simply because it isn't very good at that.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 6:48:45 pm

But haven't we read on this forum in the past, that nested compound within compound clips become a problem at some point? I seem to recall someone using that workflow who hit a wall of non-performance, and the fix was that he had to spread things out sideways into Projects, not layer compounds within compounds?

Doug D


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 7:14:49 pm

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "But haven't we read on this forum in the past, that nested compound within compound clips become a problem at some point? "

I think that behavior changed with 10.0.6. In any case though, if you use a compound clip as simply another sequence, without using it as a nest within other sequences, the dynamics change.

In my example, I have no intention of using the compound as a nest. When I go for the final version of these spots, I'll edit the compound to the project and break it apart. Or I'll simply copy & paste clips from one timeline to the other.

Nests are inherently evil in a collaborative editing environment. I have to pass off my sequence to a mixer using ProTools and a colorist on Davinci. Nests are a no-no in these situations. I will have to send my final sequence to FCP7 (via Xto7) in order to generate OMF and EDL files. (FWIW - neither X2Pro or XML list files are an option.)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 7:48:36 pm

Understood. So, between your short form and collaborative environment demands, any given compound clip you keep in Event Library is finished, and expands to be re-editable on a timeline, with ALL the pieces you need for the particular piece. No nesting.

But I guess I WOULD fall into the trap of nesting compounds, because I would: Edit any given sequence, consisting of camera audio, VO audio, SFX, music, secondary storyline clips for layering effects, titles etc...and then collapse ALL of that into a compound clip, store it in Events as "Scene 22 v3."

THEN I would do that with lots of other scenes/sequences. Then I would need to lay out ALL those compound clips on the timeline, scenes 1 thru 22, in order to see the whole movie. And begin inserting MORE stuff into the timeline, like title cards between scenes for instance, maybe some more audio bridges between scenes. Whatever.

At that point, if I collapse the entire movie into a compound, e.g. "Entire movie v1.0" -- haven't I just committed the "no-no" of nesting a bunch of compounds within one mega-compound?

Whereas, kept as discreet Project in the Project Library, there are no compounds-within-compounds, only end-to-end compounds.

Doug D


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 8:21:41 pm

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "At that point, if I collapse the entire movie into a compound, e.g. "Entire movie v1.0" -- haven't I just committed the "no-no" of nesting a bunch of compounds within one mega-compound?"

For me, I wouldn't compound the movie. I take the individual scenes/reels/etc timelines and cut them to the "full movie" timeline (as a Project) and not compound. Either break apart or copy-paste. This way I have the complete film accessible.

I do not want to have compounds for this part, because often I make changes in this final timeline and I don't want any interaction to occur between the compound and the "child" timeline. I also want to get to all the pieces at once. No stepping in and stepping out.

I do see having tons of SFX/music/VO clips to be problematic if not compounded, because of how connected clips bounce around vertically. There needs to be a cleaner solution, like the "zones" idea of past threads.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 8:25:38 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I do see having tons of SFX/music/VO clips to be problematic if not compounded, because of how connected clips bounce around vertically. There needs to be a cleaner solution, like the "zones" idea of past threads."

I'm with you on that. I found that using a single, long, silent audio clip to separate roles works in a pinch. Hopefully we'll be able to group roles at some point....

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 8:38:09 pm

Well, agreed. That was my point, my workflow is to string all "scenes" or reels in a timeline as the entire movie, and THAT is what I save as a Project in the Project Library. If I want to save a version with the scenes shuffled around, I create a new project, paste in everything, do my shuffle, and THAT becomes another version of the movie, in my Project Library. THAT is what I thought the Project Library was good for, and am just asking if I am warping FCPX workflow to my older FCP7 preconceptions. Agree about zones concept.

Doug D


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 7:49:01 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I will have to send my final sequence to FCP7 (via Xto7) in order to generate OMF and EDL files. (FWIW - neither X2Pro or XML list files are an option.)"

What problems have you had with X2Pro? I've actually found it to be pretty good. I still need to go to 7 to spit out EDL's, which kinda sucks. EDL-X works well, but causes problems when you have transitions other than dissolves, filters, opacity changes etc. The EDL's are very accurate, but it doesn't add the notes details telling the online guys what filters etc you've applied to clips. I wish i didn't need EDL's, but I do. That sort of interchange with other NLE's, particularly AVID finishing systems, is the biggest roadblock for me in getting everyone here to switch.

On an unrelated note, I DL'd the trial of MC 6.5 just to see how it's progressed since I last used it. It reminded me of working in X storylines. ;-) Also... there sure are a lot of buttons. lol

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 8:14:08 pm

[Charlie Austin] "What problems have you had with X2Pro?"

X2Pro does not support linked files from QuickTime and AIF sources. Only embedded AAFs, which are problematic for the particular mixer I work with. Also, this facility doesn't own X2Pro. I have it personally, but on my home system. In the tests I've done with another mixer, the AAFs also bring across blank clips that I wouldn't want to include, like the muted tracks from B-Roll that I've cut across as a/v clips, but muted the audio. By going to FCP7, I can troubleshoot any potential issues for the mixer and deliver a reliable OMF.

[Charlie Austin] "The EDL's are very accurate, but it doesn't add the notes details telling the online guys what filters etc you've applied to clips. I wish i didn't need EDL's, but I do. That sort of interchange with other NLE's, particularly AVID finishing systems, is the biggest roadblock for me in getting everyone here to switch."

I personally have EDL-X and like it, but again, not available here. The irony is that I'm working with an A-list color correction house running Resolve. But, because it's on Linux, they have less issues with EDLs than XMLs or AAFs.

[Charlie Austin] "On an unrelated note, I DL'd the trial of MC 6.5 just to see how it's progressed since I last used it. It reminded me of working in X storylines. ;-) Also... there sure are a lot of buttons. lol"

I like MC6.5. Rock solid, but the AMA workflow is still a work-in-progress.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 8:17:51 pm

[Oliver Peters] "In the tests I've done with another mixer, the AAFs also bring across blank clips that I wouldn't want to include, like the muted tracks from B-Roll that I've cut across as a/v clips, but muted the audio. By going to FCP7, I can troubleshoot any potential issues for the mixer and deliver a reliable OMF."

FWIW, I think thats fixed in the latest version. Anything muted in the inspector isn't included in the AAF. It would be nice if they could get the AAF's to support linked files. X2Pro AAF's will open and populate a timeline in Logic, but there's no audio in the clips.:-(

I find Xto7 has bigger issues with this, as well as with multitrack source clips. I'm currently on a gig that's got 6 channel sources, and the sequences that pop up in 7 after translation are uh... interesting. If I've used a stereo FX track in X, I get all 6 tracks, linked, in 7. PITA...

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 5:40:42 pm

This is an excellent question for anyone who conceives X as essentially a place to EDIT video.

But I see it as more than that.

And the project library is literally the part of X that I think has the MOST power and potential in perhaps the entire app.

I see it as the connected storehouse of all your work. It sits behind the Storyline keeping a live, connected copy of each edited project accessible. From the project library, I manage deployment of my videos as they evolve. I send out early stage approval copies via email. I send out progress versions to clients. And when a project is complete, having it in the Project library and connected to its source assets via the Event Browser, AND simultaneously connected to the Project lets me revise and update it with ease.

I sometimes wonder about the workflows I read about here that seem to try to make X work a bit more like legacy, trying to compound and re-store "edits" in the EB, because to me, that seems to work around what I see as the essential flow of X.

It feels to me that in the search for familiarity, some folks might be building dams and diverting their data streams along the natural digital flow path in X - because they are trying to recapture the familiarity of concepts (nested flat file sequences?) in a program that doesn't really need them in the same way that Legacy did.

But I don't think about it a lot, because I've never been trying to recreate an existing complex workflow in the new tool, preferring to try to learn the unique strengths of the new tool and work with that afresh.

Just an alternate view. Not better or worse.

But I do LOVE the Project library. It's the shelf where my video products are stored - both in progress and completed - in a way that a outputting a cut off Legacy master file never was.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 5:47:52 pm

Bill, you have answered some of my convoluted questions to Oliver.

Doug D


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 6:04:52 pm

I'm glad this resonated with you.

I've become super sensitive to the fact that the more experienced an editor is, the more difficult it can be to adapt to X, since the really good cutter has had to build a complex and detailed process structure in their mind in order to excel at their craft. The more detailed and strong that structure is (which is a way of saying the BETTER an existing editor is!), the more difficult it can be to see something different and NOT try to conceptualize it inside the strong and rich "problem solving" language they've built and depend on for their very success.

(Maybe the reason I've had so much success with X is because I'm not as clever as many other editors - and I just find it way too easy to forget my past conditioning and start things afresh. Heck, after 18 months in X, I'm finding that I have to really force myself to remember how things worked in Legacy, even tho I spent a decade working in it! Maybe because I was constantly mentally switching between editing, writing, producing and running a business, so dumping one thinking process and adopting another is pretty much something I do all the time.

(wow, reading that last line, it's kinda the definition of "scatterbrained?"- yikes!)

Oh well.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 6:13:14 pm

[Bill Davis] "Maybe the reason I've had so much success with X is because I'm not as clever as many other editors - and I just find it way too easy to forget my past conditioning and start things afresh. "

Or are you simply using FCP X in a very limited and structured fashion that "stays within the lines"? In other words, are you actually missing some of the flexibility FCP X offers?

;-)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 7:29:44 pm

Absolutely a possibility.

I'm no more assured that my view is the correct one than anyone else. That's largely why we're all here. To test our ideas and see what fits.

For me, a central question might be this.

When a person is structuring a workflow in X - are they doing it with their focus on their conditioning and toolset experiences of X. Or are they trying to build workflows in X based on recapturing or leveraging experiences with something that was NOT X?

I suspect that more any editor does the former, the more rapidly successful they will be.

Less "fight" more " flow".

And we've certainly seen a whole lot of "fight", haven't we!

[Oliver Peters] "Or are you simply using FCP X in a very limited and structured fashion that "stays within the lines"? In other words, are you actually missing some of the flexibility FCP X offers?
"


Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 8:05:56 pm

Dupe post, sorry


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 6:10:40 pm

[Bill Davis] "I sometimes wonder about the workflows I read about here that seem to try to make X work a bit more like legacy, trying to compound and re-store "edits" in the EB, because to me, that seems to work around what I see as the essential flow of X. "

No more than people wonder about your approach I'm sure Bill.

I like FCPX and use it exclusively in our shop. But it has presented many frustrating moments for me in different production scenarios. Not because, as I see you often suggest, that I am resistant to the new way of doing things. No, not at all. It's because there are simply some things that, in my and many other professional's opinions, could be done better than the way it was initially designed. Obviously Apple agrees with us because every upgrade moves closer to our concepts of how it should have worked initially.

That's all. I Love the program and use most if not all it's strengths, but you shouldn't mistake thoughtful approaches to "dams" and "striving for familiarity." Sometimes people just do smart things that really work better for them and that don't require a constant assessment of their motives or loyalty to an approach.


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 6:55:52 pm

National Library Week coming in April. Let's say something nice on behalf of libraries everywhere! :)

Doug D


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 7:35:41 pm

FWIW, I like having projects separate from the event for a couple reasons. The main one is that for any given spot/trailer/whatever that I cut, I'll make multiple duplicates of the sequence before I even get to V.1. After that, I'll make multiple duplicates between v1 and 2, 2 and 3... etc. It's not uncommon for a spot to get close to or beyond double digit version numbers before it's done. So, conservatively, if I finish a spot at V.6, it's likely that I'll have at least 12-15 copies of it in the library. Multiply that by 2,3,4,5 or more different spots per job (event) that's umm... a lot. I absolutely don't want all those projects in my event. That's actually one thing I love about X vs legacy and others. If I have a folder with 20 versions of a cut in it, I don't need to open them all one by one to find the cool cheat I did in a WIP somewhere in the middle. Just open the folder in the project library and skim around 'til I find it. Love it.

The other is that by keeping them in the project library, my event stays relatively small and organized. I can then organize projects into folders, and at some point I can move projects I know I'll likely not need again - old WIP's, dupes made from going between versions, even old versions etc - into new folders and disable them with Event Manager or by just archiving them in the finder. In many cases we'll be working on the same project for many months and I shudder to think what my event would look like on a gig like this.

I could totally see using CC's in an event if I was only going to have like a dozen or less sitting there though. But for what I do, that's pretty unusual. :-)

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 7:46:58 pm

[Charlie Austin] "t's not uncommon for a spot to get close to or beyond double digit version numbers before it's done. So, conservatively, if I finish a spot at V.6, it's likely that I'll have at least 12-15 copies of it in the library. "

I've been working the same way up until this production and have found the Project library structure to be very cumbersome for precisely this same reason. One of the reasons I decided to alter the approach. Granted, I'm staying fairly simple with these cuts that I keep in the Event. No effects, etc. as you will lose some of these by breaking apart down the road.

[Charlie Austin] "I don't need to open them all one by one to find the cool cheat I did in a WIP somewhere in the middle"

But you have the same skimming capability in the event.

[Charlie Austin] " I can then organize projects into folders, and at some point I can move projects I know I'll likely not need again - old WIP's, dupes made from going between versions, even old versions etc"

Using a keyword collection for "edits in progress" does the same thing. At least within the Event view. You can always move a compound clip to a Project and store it the same way you are doing this.

[Charlie Austin] "I could totally see using CC's in an event if I was only going to have like a dozen or less sitting there though. But for what I do, that's pretty unusual. :-)"

I do see your point, but at least for me, I find the opposite to be true.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 8:01:22 pm

[Oliver Peters] "No effects, etc. as you will lose some of these by breaking apart down the road.

Yeah, and that's kind of a deal killer for me...

[Oliver Peters] [Charlie Austin] "I don't need to open them all one by one to find the cool cheat I did in a WIP somewhere in the middle"

But you have the same skimming capability in the event.


True, I guess to me it's just easier to organize projects separately from the Event.

[Oliver Peters] [Charlie Austin] " I can then organize projects into folders, and at some point I can move projects I know I'll likely not need again - old WIP's, dupes made from going between versions, even old versions etc"

Using a keyword collection for "edits in progress" does the same thing. At least within the Event view. You can always move a compound clip to a Project and store it the same way you are doing this.


Oh, for sure. But if you could see my project library for a feature we've been cutting stuff on for 8 months or so, it'd make sense as to why i don't want all that crap in my event. ;-)

[Oliver Peters] [Charlie Austin] "I could totally see using CC's in an event if I was only going to have like a dozen or less sitting there though. But for what I do, that's pretty unusual. :-)"

I do see your point, but at least for me, I find the opposite to be true."


I hear ya... The takeaway here is that X is flexible enough, and getting more so with each version, to let folks work in a variety of different ways. ;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 7, 2013 at 12:29:11 am

[Oliver Peters] " So, conservatively, if I finish a spot at V.6, it's likely that I'll have at least 12-15 copies of it in the library."

So what? Just stick them in a Project Library folder and keep them out of sight, out of mind if you're not working with them.

Is there something I'm missing here?

Is it a performance issue? If so, then the hoped for but reasonable to expect volume management improvements for the networked storage folks should make the problem go away over time.

Remember, X is still a youngster at this point.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 7, 2013 at 12:45:42 am

[Bill Davis] "[Oliver Peters] " So, conservatively, if I finish a spot at V.6, it's likely that I'll have at least 12-15 copies of it in the library."

So what? Just stick them in a Project Library folder and keep them out of sight, out of mind if you're not working with them.

Is there something I'm missing here? "


Yes... you're missing the fact that Oliver was quoting me. The line of "his" you quote above was mine... And my post above his was saying that I like the project library, for this reason. Calm down. ;-) lol

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 7, 2013 at 1:02:55 am

[Bill Davis] "Just stick them in a Project Library folder and keep them out of sight, out of mind if you're not working with them.
Is there something I'm missing here?
Is it a performance issue? "


When you open this folder, the files have to buffer into RAM to make them skimmable. Depending on complexity, this can take quite a long time, even if you just wanted to see the names. You also can't load all of these and have them as open timelines, like you could in FCP 7 or can in PProCS6. The timeline window simply won't hold them all and clears them out at what appears to be somewhat random order. In addition, the layout of this open folder in the project library window is pretty unwieldy once you have a lot of projects in there.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jon Cairns
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 7, 2013 at 2:46:04 pm

[Oliver Peters] "The timeline window simply won't hold them all and clears them out at what appears to be somewhat random order. In addition, the layout of this open folder in the project library window is pretty unwieldy once you have a lot of projects in there."

I like the idea of having this "space" to hold projects but I agree that it's not very ergonomic. It would be nice to have some viewing options, like changing heights or switching to list view or icon view. Maybe even be able to focus into folders.

Moving from timeline to timeline feels similarly clumsy to me. It would be nice to go directly from one open project to another without either going out to the project library and then back in or "moving through" open projects.

jon



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 7:38:23 pm

[Jim Giberti] "hat's all. I Love the program and use most if not all it's strengths, but you shouldn't mistake thoughtful approaches to "dams" and "striving for familiarity." Sometimes people just do smart things that really work better for them and that don't require a constant assessment of their motives or loyalty to an approach."

I've come to "get" that is sometimes seems that this is where I'm coming from. But I'm not - at least by design.

I'm trying to represent a view of the program that I believe is much wider than how it fits in the large shop collaborative workflow that is the MOST represented view here.

I'm not quibbling that many full time seat editors have issues with X. That's reasonable.

But I also believe that there's a lot about X that goes beyond just the storyline. And that for many editors, the storyline is - in their day to day experience - a comfortably simpler workspace than it is for someone trying to cut a film or documentary or a network TV show.

If X works brilliantlly for that editor. The discussion here belies that if it's ONLY concentrated on how X replaces AVID or FCP-LEGACY for large project work.

I'm fine with all the pushback. I can handle that. Maybe because my zeal is based on X satisfying my needs so wonderfully right now. So everyone who edits "like me" should know that it's a fabulous option.

I posted yesterday about how I LOVE it for cutting my VO work. Few of you likely DO VO work. So that may well not be relevant. But for those who do, it's likely interesting.

Guys like you are way smart enough to decide if it works for your maybe less typical but just as important workflows.

So I don't argue about that. I try to argue about statements that can be misconstrued by the general editor to cause them not to investigate what might be a great tool for them.

Or at least that's what I TRY to do.

:)

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 7:53:31 pm

[Bill Davis] "I'm not quibbling that many full time seat editors have issues with X. That's reasonable.
"


But I'm not one of those guys Bill.
I'm the president and creative director of The Imagination Company.
I'm a writer, director, film producer and music producer primarily with a strong focus on strategy and branding.
FCPX is a creative tool I use like Photoshop or Digital Performer.
Now, we do a lot of film and TV work so I work a lot in FCPX, but I'm anything but a full time seat editor.


Return to posts index

Bernhard Grininger
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 7:56:21 pm

Hello,

a speculation:

- The Event-Project structure is aimed at collaborative workflows yet to be released.0
- Multiple users accessing one Event via rudimentary rights management while working
on their private Project.
- User could share a Project as a Compound Clip into an Event.

Best regards,
Bernhard


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 8:03:25 pm

[Bernhard Grininger] "Hello,

a speculation:

- The Event-Project structure is aimed at collaborative workflows yet to be released.0
- Multiple users accessing one Event via rudimentary rights management while working
on their private Project.
- User could share a Project as a Compound Clip into an Event.
"


I concur. Alex4D did a post a while ago about some "hidden" code in X pertaining to a collaborative workflow. I think it's coming.

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 10:16:45 pm

I'm waiting for D Lawrence to weigh in on this discussion.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 6, 2013 at 4:10:18 am

[Jim Giberti] "I'm waiting for D Lawrence to weigh in on this discussion."

Hi Jim and fellow COWs,

Hope everyone's 2013 is off to a great start!

Haven't had much to add lately but I'm still reading and enjoying these threads. The fact that even Aindreas has nice things to say about FCPX shows how far we've come in past 18 months, right? ;)

Re: the project library:

[Oliver Peters] "I think I remember that in the beginning there were differences between sequences in a Project and in an Event; but since 10.0.6, that doesn't seem to be the case any longer."

Yep. The changes in 10.0.6 were a big deal. I think moving compound clips from the project database into events was an engineering necessity made to fix the project bloat problem. The consequence of this engineering change also changed the nature of projects. It now raises questions of what are CCs really? Why were CCs in projects to begin with?

[Oliver Peters] "So this begs the question. Why is there a Project Library at all? What useful function does it serve? You can have edits in an Event without any Project, but you cannot have a Project without a corresponding Event. So other than a place to park Shared intermediate exports and timeline render files, it doesn't seem to serve much of a useful purpose."

Agreed. Outside of sharing, what is the real value of the project library? I don't see it.

Moving edited sequences from the project database into the event database was a game changer. The event browser is a much more dynamic, flexible place for organization. Way better than the project library. All the event browser needs now is more flexible, granular sharing options, and the project database and library can go away.

Here's a thought - add more flexibility to the event browser, get rid of the project library, and call edited timelines... sequences! Something to look forward to in FCPX 10.3 ;)

Happy New Year, All!

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 6, 2013 at 5:06:53 pm

[David Lawrence] "Here's a thought - add more flexibility to the event browser, get rid of the project library, and call edited timelines... sequences! Something to look forward to in FCPX 10.3 ;)

Happy New Year, All!
"


I have to push back a bit on this.

In the metadata flow inside X, assets flow from import to the Event Browser - then to the Storyline - and then to the Project library - and from there via Share out to any destination.

If you take out the Project library - where do you organize, select and manage your sharing? Do you do it UPSTREAM from the Event Browser? And if so, how can you manage versions? DO you clog up your event library with an endless array of compounds sharing visual space with completed projects?

Maybe I'm dense, but it seems to me that "circling upstream" to try to do everything in the EB is, once again, trying to make X work more like legacy editors where there was NO "dedicated finished project storage and export space."f and we conceived of finished projects as dead end documents that were plopped on our desktops and cut off from revision.

Which no seems a VERY old-fashioned view to me.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Nicholas Kleczewski
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 6, 2013 at 5:16:15 pm

Yeah, there's no reason to eliminate the project library. It's a great place to use as a canvas for ideation and putting together final projects. There's no reason, just like all NLE's to give editors a choice. For versioning, donut making etc, the project library isn't a great place for finals. Take the idea of Compound Clips and go further with it for those people who need that kind of functionality and leave Projects alone for who that works for.

If Projects could reference outside render files and there was a simpler way to switch more quickly between projects that might help the cause, but I don't see apple doing that as the whole reason they invented separate projects I susposect was to keep media management rock solid and under the hood.

But more options are never a bad thing for Pros.

Director, Editor, Colorist
http://www.trsociety.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 6, 2013 at 5:46:58 pm

[Bill Davis] "metadata flow inside X, assets flow from import to the Event Browser - then to the Storyline - and then to the Project library - and from there via Share out to any destination."

Would you clarify how metadata gets from ingest to the Shared destination? Examples? I don't understand what you mean by this.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 7, 2013 at 12:25:31 am

As explained to me by Phil Hodgets back in my early conversations with him about X , this is a very significant piece of how FCP-X works under the hood.

Original data in the form of digital assets is imported - and the metadata that comes in attached to them is (in part, at least) brought along with the file. (clip IDs, limited camera info, etc)

In the Event Browser, what you're largely doing is ADDING metadata to those files in the X database that describes your editing selections, color corrections, etc, etc.

From there when you move your clips into the Storyline, that new larger set of metadata is imported along with your EB choices - and you can FURTHER add (or remove, or amend) metadata changes there.

It is this FLOW of metadata that travels with your clips in the editing stages that is what X stores about your choices along the way.

Essentially that's the FLOW of metadata within X.

Files come in, and their metadata files are added to or ammended at each stage.

The ability to take Timeline work and STORE it upstream in the EB is relatively recent. But while it works really well, it kinda begs the question of how many circular iterations (changes in the Timeline expressed back to the EB - into a new timeline - back to the EB - then into a new timeline, ad nauseum - makes sense?)

At some point aren't you in danger of creating a snake eating it's own tail?

That's why I like thinking in metadata flow terms. It helps me understand what makes sense to do upstream - and what makes more sense to do downstream.

Losing the Event Browser means we've turned a through street into a cul-de-sac, at least in theory.

FWIW.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 7, 2013 at 12:57:43 am

[Bill Davis] "In the Event Browser, what you're largely doing is ADDING metadata to those files in the X database that describes your editing selections, color corrections, etc, etc.
From there when you move your clips into the Storyline, that new larger set of metadata is imported along with your EB choices - and you can FURTHER add (or remove, or amend) metadata changes there. "


Sorry, but that's fundamentally how every NLE works and has worked since the beginning. I don't see what FCP X is doing as significantly different. Maybe just a larger amount of metadata.

You had said this was carried through to shared destinations. That's the part I don't see. For example, I cannot read any data from an exported Master File that traces back to Collection metadata you added in an Event or camera metadata from the ingested file.

Obviously through XMLs, maybe. But in reality what you are suggesting is actually being implemented by Adobe through the XMP data they embed into files.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 6, 2013 at 6:08:02 pm

Hi Bill, Happy 2013!

[Bill Davis] "If you take out the Project library - where do you organize, select and manage your sharing? Do you do it UPSTREAM from the Event Browser? And if so, how can you manage versions? DO you clog up your event library with an endless array of compounds sharing visual space with completed projects?"

Make a folder, call it Projects, put your projects and versions there. Done. Now you're organized, plus you get all the event browser goodness like keywords and smart collections. I'll take that.

[Bill Davis] "Maybe I'm dense, but it seems to me that "circling upstream" to try to do everything in the EB is, once again, trying to make X work more like legacy editors where there was NO "dedicated finished project storage and export space."f and we conceived of finished projects as dead end documents that were plopped on our desktops and cut off from revision."

I don't feel a need for a "dedicated finished project storage and export space." If the tools were available in the event browser, I'd roll my own. Of course, my output and mastering process is pretty specific and doesn't benefit from the project library's sharing features. But for other workflows (like Bret's sports example), I can see why the project library is still useful.

Perhaps it's different for you, but I think of my finished projects as very much alive. ;)

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 6, 2013 at 6:15:01 pm

[David Lawrence] "I don't feel a need for a "dedicated finished project storage and export space." If the tools were available in the event browser, I'd roll my own. Of course, my output and mastering process is pretty specific and doesn't benefit from the project library's sharing features. But for other workflows (like Bret's sports example), I can see why the project library is still useful.
"


Hi David, nice to see you back!

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 6, 2013 at 8:14:36 pm

Thanks Steve! Hope the new year is treating you well!

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 6, 2013 at 9:06:21 pm

[Bill Davis] "In the metadata flow inside X, assets flow from import to the Event Browser - then to the Storyline - and then to the Project library - and from there via Share out to any destination.

If you take out the Project library - where do you organize, select and manage your sharing? Do you do it UPSTREAM from the Event Browser? And if so, how can you manage versions? DO you clog up your event library with an endless array of compounds sharing visual space with completed projects?"


But this is true of any export from an opened Compound or Project.

You have all the same options.

Versions are handled by duping a compound clip in the Event, and then double clicking the dupe, versioning with Projects requires duping not only the project file, but also optional render files, as well as any previously shared files.

I like the way it is now. Use compounds for most of the edit, then add to a Project at the very end for Masters. I just wish we had a batch export functionality.

I like the fact that I can have timelines separate from Events and that I can use FCPX to make a Project archive of just the used (untrimmed) media.

Also, compounds can be keyworded, or setup for a Smart Collection so they don't have to clutter anything if you don't want to.

This is all hinged upon the new compound behavior, though. It is now much better and simply adds another option/tool to the criticized and perhaps mislabeled "inflexibilty" of FCPX.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 10:24:29 pm

[Charlie Austin] "I concur. Alex4D did a post a while ago about some "hidden" code in X pertaining to a collaborative workflow. I think it's coming."

What I find most perplexing about FCPX is that there is file level SAN support built right in to the app. It seems to promote sharing in a way that is certainly different from FCP7 and Pr, and is closer to Avid with different parts of the encompassing project available on the Finder level. It also seems incomplete/underpowered. The frustrating thing is that it allows a crucial function that you can't get with local drives, and that is SAN Locations. There is less need for something like Event Manager X when you have SAN Locations.

Using FCPX tools, you can media manage Projects to new Events. As a matter of fact, it's a really good way to trim Events down to a more manageable size and send it somewhere. You can't do this with compounds as easily. Granted, these functions might not serve every editor's workflow, but they are useful.

Let us not forget that Compound Clips have been given a huge make over since 10.0.0. Since 10.0.6, their functionality has improved, but not only that, they have completely changed in scope as well as function. Compound clips, were in fact, flawed in the beginning of FCPX. They would simply bring all things to a halt so much so that they were borderline unusable.

Now, they are a very functional organizational tool, as well as an edit tool. They can ripple changes across any Project that has them. They have been given the same ability as Multiclips in the edits can be "healed" (make a cut, then delete that cut). They have allowed a very fast "versioning" system. And perhaps most importantly, the performance allows them to actually be used.

[Oliver Peters] "It also seems hard (impossible?) to remove render files from the Event through the UI."

Single click Event, File > Delete Event Render Files.

Picture:



deleteeventrender.png

Results in this:



deleteeventrender_b.png


Return to posts index

Nicholas Kleczewski
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 10:14:28 pm

I think its basically been stated elsewhere, but broadly: Apple created a monster with Compound Clips. One that it could never put back in its cage.

I dont think they ever originally intended Compound Clips to take on the life that they have. Remember they didn't even use to populate themselves in an event after creation in a project till after 10.0.6. There was also a time when doing certain things to compound clips directly in the event and not a project didn't work right, color correction i remember at one point was pretty broken. But Compound Clips fix so many annoyances that separate projects for every sequence iteration has.

How silly is it with each duped project requires its own set of render files to point too? Not with compound clips in an event. They are the missing link to rough cut editing and iterating.

So i think it was said best elsewhere, they've been undoing a few things since 10.0 and I'm all for it.

I hope next iteration brings back tracks that you can give dedicated role assignments too. Tracks 1-2 always get audio associated with a Dialogue role. 3,4 always automatically get Music role edited there, etc. Then toggle it so that this only persists with inserts and overwrites are made but when Q is used the video and audio get put into their own outside space until you decide where you want it to go. something like that....

Director, Editor, Colorist
http://www.trsociety.com


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 5, 2013 at 10:27:01 pm

[Nicholas Kleczewski] "I hope next iteration brings back tracks that you can give dedicated role assignments too. Tracks 1-2 always get audio associated with a Dialogue role. 3,4 always automatically get Music role edited there, etc. Then toggle it so that this only persists with inserts and overwrites are made but when Q is used the video and audio get put into their own outside space until you decide where you want it to go. something like that...."

Ahh... nooo! ;-) All they need to do is let you group roles and all this track talk can end. You can add all the specific roles you want and they'll stay together. Done. D1, D2, D3, FX 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 etc. Fixed tracks, and the inevitable clip collisions that come with them, suck. :-P

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 6, 2013 at 6:47:46 am

I won't read all the threads. So ignore if already mentioned...

A big problem with Avid and Legacy was the whole project concept to begin with. Sure, it made sense to a single project single output concept like a movie or possibly even television episodes. Where scenes were shot to a script and edited to a final project. The footage, bins, logging, etc. went pretty much unused for the rest of time except for the occasional "best of" episode where clips could most likely be pulled from the masters anyway.

But take for example, sports. My first job in video was shooting all the sports, all year, at GA Tech Athletic Association. We also shot interviews with players for uploading to weekly satellite feeds. At the end of the year, we would make a comprehensive highlight film. During the season we pulled together reels of athletes or interviews for ESPN to use or for athletes demo reels to get into the pros. We also edited weekly pump up videos for the football team to view the previous week's highlights. We might also pull together spots highlighting all the sports together as a college recruiting film. There was no single project. There was literally EVENTS (games) and PROJECTS that utilized footage from many or all the events. We didn't use Avid or Media 10 or FCP. We were using the video cube. It essentially had no media management or even event/project interface. It simply had two types of files. Sequences and bins. I forget what they called them exactly. But all the organizing was our job. We simply had a folder for each sport. A bin for each game or interview session, etc. And in another folder, we had our sequences, which were projects. This was what we came up with after shooting and editing just a few games and reels. It was completely obvious that you didn't want to put the october football bins in a folder with the october highlight reel project. Made much more sense to have the media database (all our bins chronological by game/date) and all the projects separate. They all intertwined. We even made other bins for star athletes, or great plays, etc.

When I moved on to Media100, Avid, FCP 7, most of the time it was freelance, and projects did exist as more self contained items. But there were always those times when I was asked to pull footage from ... hmmm.. ... what was that project.... it's in a bin with a shot of... uh... and the search for a shot that could be in any number of poorly labeled projects began. Then in Avid we'd duplicate the bin and put it in our project, or even worse, open it in our project possibly screwing up any sequences they may have stashed in there. But now there was a project referring to another project that someone else had control over with no knowledge that you needed their footage. Or you made a duplicate of a bin, and possibly edited it or added to it. Now there were two bins out there with the same footage plus or minus some shots or sequences. FCP legacy was twice the mess because bins weren't even separate from sequences. You had to open a whole project to get at the other bins. Once two projects were open, rendering to the wrong project or importing to the wrong capture scratch created another possible nightmare if someone consolidated a project that unknowingly was twisted together with some important footage of yours that you hadn't backed up.

So - projects and events separate. No problem here. It seems to me that we have a perfect beast if they add just a few more media management options. You can work in an ENG situation like I described with the sports where projects often have no relation to any single event at all. Or you can work in a closed project mode. You can put your compound clips in the event and treat them as sequences a la FCP legacy. Or even a combination of the two. With the sports, I probably would have put the weekly videos in the events with the footage as they were kinda of bound to a time period. But other projects would be better served in a separate project library like more encompassing end of the year highlight films. With episodic features and tv, I could see the editied scenes residing with their respective events, and the actual episodes living as projects with nested comps, as well as a nested comp of the ever changing intro to the show. Change one intro sequence and they all change. So it's all much more versatile this way.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 7, 2013 at 12:09:17 am

[Bret Williams] "During the season we pulled together reels of athletes or interviews for ESPN to use or for athletes demo reels to get into the pros. We also edited weekly pump up videos for the football team to view the previous week's highlights. We might also pull together spots highlighting all the sports together as a college recruiting film. There was no single project. There was literally EVENTS (games) and PROJECTS that utilized footage from many or all the events."

Please, those who keep wanting to make X a tool for the kind of work YOU do - read this carefully.

It's a superb example of a professional editing workflow that is NOT targeted at the movie maker or a TV show maker - but it beautifully defines a type of REAL world of broad video production function that X has to address right along with the needs of the classic filmmaker.

Nice post Bret. Excellent example of how wide a target "professional editing" should be.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

John Heagy
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 8, 2013 at 2:51:09 pm

[Bret Williams] "So - projects and events separate. No problem here. It seems to me that we have a perfect beast "

You describe the same project and media usage we deal with. Our pool of media is not contained to episodes but seasons and beyond. The problem I see with Events is exposing FCPX to an entire season of media via events.

John


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 8, 2013 at 5:15:48 pm

[John Heagy] "You describe the same project and media usage we deal with. Our pool of media is not contained to episodes but seasons and beyond. The problem I see with Events is exposing FCPX to an entire season of media via events."

Let's back up a moment.

How do you handle this now in FCP7 and why can't this method be adapted to FCPX?


Return to posts index

John Heagy
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 8, 2013 at 7:34:36 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "How do you handle this now in FCP7 and why can't this method be adapted to FCPX?"

In FCP7 we import an xml and if the media is on the San it links up. FCP7 can link to an entire season of footage without having it all in the project.

The workaround in X is to use "one off" events solely to support a project and not use it to search and tag media. Apple's intent with events is to present media to all projects where one can search and tag media just like a MAM. That works fine for contained workflows, but not for un-contained.

To put the difference in basic terms: FCP7 can link to any file as long as the storage containing the file is mounted. FCPX must have media redirected into an event before it can link or even see it

I never said we can't work around it. I am saying that events do us no good if not used as intended, and are simply obstacles to linking media directly.

Apple decided to make FCPX both an editor and a MAM. That doesn't work well for large data sets or collaborative workflows.

The issues above are really based on finishing from an offline. Here it's easier to only take what is needed, creating a contained environment. My head spins trying to imagine using FCPX in a truly collaborative offline workflow using events as intended. Again, from an un-contained media point of view.

John


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 8, 2013 at 9:48:43 pm

Thank you, John.

See, I think this is the perfect case for Projects. You can take a Project and create it's own Event from a larger Event (similar to your XML workflow now). As a matter of fact, you can use an FCPXML workflow right now, today.

[John Heagy] "In FCP7 we import an xml and if the media is on the San it links up. FCP7 can link to an entire season of footage without having it all in the project. "

Where is the XML generated from?

[John Heagy] "To put the difference in basic terms: FCP7 can link to any file as long as the storage containing the file is mounted. FCPX must have media redirected into an event before it can link or even see it "

Kind of. An empty FCP7 won't relink to anything. An empty Event won't relink to anything either.

The moment you import a file, it is in the Event either with hard media or by reference. In shared environs, I'd imagine you would work with alias files.

Anytime you move or media manage that Event, the linked files go with it.

[John Heagy] "I am saying that events do us no good if not used as intended, and are simply obstacles to linking media directly."

You can Relink Project files without the corresponding Event in the Project Library. Similarly, you can import an XML and as long as the media is available, it will create an Event and import the sequence, and everything is linked.

This is where the Project Library is helpful, by the way, and really, where Projects and Events being separate is helpful as you don't need to have/load an entire Event just to work with one sequence (but eventually, you do need an Event. Files will get imported to any Event when relinking Project files, so it's best to create a new one and select it).

I guess I am having trouble seeing how this doesn't work for FCPX in an almost identical way to FCP7, even though it looks different. I say almost identical meaning that you will have to relink if working with Project only (vs importing an XML which will autolink).

I do see a problem if you need to "online" though as reconnecting to other media in FCPX is terribly non-existent. BUT, if you are using the original imported media to interchange out to/from finishing then it's easier.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

John Heagy
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 8, 2013 at 10:40:40 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Where is the XML generated from?
"


We have a custom app that links disparate media based on Reel ID and TC. We use this to generate an xml that links to media on the San.

[Jeremy Garchow] " An empty FCP7 won't relink to anything. An empty Event won't relink to anything either."

Sure it can, FCP7 never looks at media in the project to link to, it links directly via path. I can open an empty FCP7 project... import the xml I describe above, and Wa La! a 100% linked seq! The only item in the project is the seq created from the xml import.

[Jeremy Garchow] "I guess I am having trouble seeing how this doesn't work for FCPX in an almost identical way to FCP7"

If by identical you mean now needing a San Location for every project, an Event filled with aliases, and separate projects for every seq... then yes, identical ;) You'll agree that not using Events to assist in some way makes it an obstacle to work around and not an asset in this case? Can we make it work?... Yes... but it's no improvement.

[Jeremy Garchow] "I do see a problem if you need to "online" though as reconnecting to other media in FCPX is terribly non-existent. "

That's the least of my concerns because we can use FCPX xmls like we do today with FCP7 and produce a linked project. Of course we first need to create a folder point FCPX to it as a San Location then create a Event then point the xml media to it and then.. Wa La! a linked project along with 100s of pointless alias files.

Yes, I know we are in the minority here, but FCP7 flourished across the entire gamut of production from pajama editors to 100 seat collaborative productions. Apple seemed to intentionally truncate the productions FCPX could serve - or even worse - thought it would just pick up where FCP7 left off which means they were simply out of touch with reality.


John


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Why is there a project library?
on Feb 8, 2013 at 11:37:29 pm

[John Heagy] "We have a custom app that links disparate media based on Reel ID and TC. We use this to generate an xml that links to media on the San."

OK, then in FCPX you'd create a new set of criteria for FCPXML purposes, and set the path to this same media, no?

[John Heagy] "Sure it can, FCP7 never looks at media in the project to link to, it links directly via path. I can open an empty FCP7 project... import the xml I describe above, and Wa La! a 100% linked seq! The only item in the project is the seq created from the xml import."

Right, so you are left with a project with a sequence in it.

Although it looks different, this is exactly what happens in FCPX, but there's an alias file created if one isn't present. When you "reveal source" in FCPX, it points you to the hard media, not the alias file. Importing the XML also does creates an Event, so it's similar to an FCP7 project.

[John Heagy] "If by identical you mean now needing a San Location for every project, an Event filled with aliases, and separate projects for every seq... then yes, identical ;) "

You don't HAVE to have a SAN Location for every Project, though. You can import an XML anywhere.

As far as multiple sequences, there would be ways to make them all one Project if you really wanted to.

When using an XML, an Event is a consequence just like an FCP7 project is a consequence of importing a sequence. It is there, but its not going to get in the way anymore than an FCP7 project.

[John Heagy] "You'll agree that not using Events to assist in some way makes it an obstacle to work around and not an asset in this case? Can we make it work?... Yes... but it's no improvement.
"


I guess I don't see it as any much different, even though it might not look like an FCP7 workflow. in FCP7, the project held info that points to the files, in FCPX, the Event holds that info, as well as the Project. And, as this thread states, you can skip Projects all together if you'd like and go back to "one file" just like FCP7.

[John Heagy] "a linked project along with 100s of pointless alias files."

That's really what it is isn't it? The alias files are what sends the workflow over the edge. I can appreciate that, but since everything started aliasing itself on a SAN, I think about them much less than I used to.

[John Heagy] "Yes, I know we are in the minority here, but FCP7 flourished across the entire gamut of production from pajama editors to 100 seat collaborative productions. Apple seemed to intentionally truncate the productions FCPX could serve - or even worse - thought it would just pick up where FCP7 left off which means they were simply out of touch with reality."

Clearly, the only big operations they had in mind were theirs. I think they are smart enough to know that.


Return to posts index

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