FORUMS: list search recent posts

Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Greg Andonian
Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 28, 2013 at 10:04:09 pm

Yes, you read that right.

It only lasted a while, and FCPX as a whole is still not my cup of tea, but there are parts of it- namely, the "multiple in and out areas per clip" feature that have become very appealing to me now that I've realized that they fully solve the biggest drawback issue I saw with file-based shooting as opposed to tape-based cameras.

When I first read about this feature, I thought of it in the context of the source monitor trimming aspect of in-and-out points, and when I looked at it that way I saw it as something gimmicky that was added on, possibly at the last minute, to make FCPX even more "different" than other NLEs. Until it occurred to me that this same practice of adding multiple in-and-out points has been going on for ages- but not in the source monitor. I did this same thing myself back in my tape shooting days.

It's been a good while since I last captured a tape, and everything I've shot lately has been mostly single-camera "event" type stuff, so I haven't needed to go in and break a clip apart into multiple smaller clips very much- so I never gave this any thought. But yesterday I shot something that got me thinking about it again.

A guy from a place that exhibits and sells watercolor paintings came to my church and did a presentation about the history of watercolor painting and what his institution was all about. He brought a bunch of paintings with him and had them set up on easels as he was talking, he occasionally pointed at one and started talking about it specifically. I thought it would be good to have a close-up shot of whichever painting he was describing, but I didn't want to pan around wildly. So I decided to stay focused on him and then get a shot of all the paintings from up close afterward to use for b-roll, then cut to the CU of the one he was pointing at.

For some of them, I stopped recording in between paintings, but a lot of them were done as one continuous shot with multiple paintings. Afterward I thought about that and started wondering how I was going to do this. Since each file can only have one in point and one out point, What would be the best way to break this single shot up into multiple independent clips? If this was recorded to a tape I would log all the clips that I wanted and capture. But what do I do now?

As I started thinking about the various possible ways that I could go about this with Premiere, the thought occurred to me that if I was using FCPX, this wouldn't be an issue. At all. Because I'd be able to set multiple in and out points on the file.

As I thought about my dilema, and thought about the multiple in-and-out feature of FCPX and how much easier my situation would be if I had it, I slowly realized that this feature isn't and expansion of the source monitor's functionality- it's the file based equivalent to logging footage on a tape before it's captured. And once I saw it that way, my opinion of it changed drastically. And for the first time I actually started to really, truly wish that I had FCPX.

Now of course, that feeling faded away after I got my workflow in Premiere sorted out and thought again about the magnetic timeline and the limiting nature of the "primary storyline" paradigm, and thought about how nice it is being able to copy and paste between Premiere and AE and do a dynamic link. But I did want to say that I really like that multiple in-and-out feature, now that I understand its advantages better- especially now that the "persistent in and out" fiasco has been resolved.

______________________________________________
"Up until here, we still have enough track to stop the locomotive before it plunges into the ravine... But after this windmill it's the future or bust."


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 28, 2013 at 11:15:06 pm

I'm going to sound stupid here - and also like someone who hasn't spent near enough time with premiere (no more than X said everyone ever) - but I went nuts watching a guys workflow with PPro - one of the things I noticed was that the marker ranges are exposed really nicely?

this thing?

http://i.imgur.com/IDbajfy.jpg

**edit pause** ok - having done a bit of reading - this is heavily tilted towards prelude - I won't even get into the irony that FCPX tagging preflight is imploded in to the main app - which is a fab feature - but nevertheless - adobe is actually adopting randy ubillos's actual first cut scenario that then lead to imovie and X. The marker range scenario above in the pic comes out of pre-flight analysis apparently. Adobe are asking you to concentrate the task into prelude. Which is kind of crazy to think about really, given how all this worked out.

Still - I really do like the look of it - in later assemblies, that smart marker bin seems to be actively representing ranges and notation across multiple clip sources within a single selects timeline? If so that's pretty interesting stuff.

you'd think I would actually check any of this out.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Greg Andonian
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 12:58:53 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] one of the things I noticed was that the marker ranges are exposed really nicely?

this thing?

http://i.imgur.com/IDbajfy.jpg



That does look nice. Now that I think about it, I do vaguely remember reading something about this when CS6 first came out. I'm still in CS5 Land, so I'm not familiar with Prelude. It seems pretty cool though.

Well, now that I know about this, my brief (very brief) positive view of FCPX is at an end. It would be nice to have this sort of thing built right into Premiere, but I'd rather do it in Prelude than switch to X.

It is nice to see, though, that beneath the ultra-simplistic facade and the flashy circus animations, there IS still some well thought out professional-oriented stuff in there...

______________________________________________
"Up until here, we still have enough track to stop the locomotive before it plunges into the ravine... But after this windmill it's the future or bust."


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 6:43:45 am

Just as a thought exercise, here's how I'd approach it in X.

Lay the base video into the primary. (Range select it and hit W)

If you want the whole thing, your base edit is done in one click drag and one keystroke.

Semi-colon and Command-1 to put the play head at the top of the edit and open the EB.

Skim or high speed play through the "B-roll" - and "Favorite" a few second range on a nice locked down shot of each painting (I, O and F)

Choose "Favorites" in the EB filter pane to limit the EB display to just those clips.

Then I'd play down arrow to each EB Favorite - play the base track and - and tap Q each time I wanted to insert the correct painting cutaway at the playhead location.

Other than a bit of possible trimming or positioning of the cutaways or at worst needing to freeze on a few paintings to extend their lengths I'd kinda be done.

If I decided the base track needed to be refined, I could do it before or after attaching the cutaways - in X it doesn't really matter since they always stay relative to where I put them.

A few setup tasks, then a simple Q key insert for each painting still.

Magnetism does the rest.

I honestly think X would kinda freeking fly through this.

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

Mathieu Ghekiere
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 12:09:25 pm

FCPX often works like this.

For instance, you have some shortcuts to put something from the primary storyline into a connected clip and vice versa. In the beginning, I thought: why would I use this? work like this?

At some point during a job, I thought I needed it. I started using it, in the beginning a bit uncomfortable. Now I use it all the time, depending on the shot etc.

Multiple in and out points are great for, for instance, interviews. You just go to trough the interview, and everywhere you have a good answer, you just push the shortcuts. Then, with one shortcut, E, bam, it's all there in the primary storyline. Just connect some b-roll trough the Q shortcut.


Return to posts index

Dan Stewart
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 2:38:19 pm

I'm not following; how this is any better than going through an interview on Avid using in&out points and subclipping with a new bin with a couple of keywords in the subclip name..
Am I missing something? Perhaps the time for another look is coming near..



Return to posts index


Atilio Menéndez
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 3:50:20 pm

Well, there are significantly less steps involved.

Avid or FCP7:

1. Set IN
2. Set OUT
3. Make subclip
4. Rename subclip (several keystrokes)
5. Go back to parent clip

FCPX:

1. Set IN
2. Set OUT
3. Apply keyword or favorite (usually just one keystroke)

Repeat this all day and it makes a huge difference!

Keyword ranges can also overlap and be filtered in many ways, something which is much more powerful than organizing footage using bins and keywords in the subclip names.

And also when editing there is no need to keep removing subclip limits as in FCP7.


Return to posts index

Dave Brandt
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 4:13:33 pm

A while ago I tried to use fcpx in the way atilio described but the one key thing fcpx lacks here is a useful description of the piece that has just been keyworded or favourited.
I usually add a short description of what the subject is saying to the name of the subclip. Doing this in fcpx is very awkward. The only way I could get it to half work is to create compounds for each piece, but a really annoying thing about that is the compound goes to the root level of the EB, and doesn't go into the selected bin (keyword selection) ala premiere, fcp7 and avid. Creating keywords with labels like I would subclips gets messy with loads of keywords that still need to be tidied to folders etc.
I really wanted fcpx to work for this but I had to go back to premiere.
Maybe I missed something obvious in fcpx, but for now the subclip method works really well.
Dave
http://www.solidmedia.ie

http://www.SolidMedia.ie

Macbook Pro 17" i7 2.2 8GB
PC i7 32GB Self Build
FCP 7 FCPX Adobe CS6 Vegas 12 Nuendo 4


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 4:47:02 pm

If you're looking more just for subclipping, just mark as a favorite, and call the new favorite clip whatever you want in the event.


Return to posts index


Dave Brandt
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 5:04:56 pm

Hi Brett,
Tried labelling favourites, won't let me, do I need to click on the star or something? (Which would seriously slow down my subclipping)
Dave
http://www.solidmedia.ie

http://www.SolidMedia.ie

Macbook Pro 17" i7 2.2 8GB
PC i7 32GB Self Build
FCP 7 FCPX Adobe CS6 Vegas 12 Nuendo 4


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 6:27:12 pm

Dave,

You're quite naturally trying to make X work like your traditional muscle memory. It doesn't. Using keywords is not like using folders and bins at all. The mere application of a keyword functionally separates the range the keyword is applied to from everything else. That range can be added, subtracted, eliminated, or isolated from others depending on how you learn to use keywords and the database. Adding more keywords can put the same range in multiple collections. These identified ranges can be called up instantly, grouped, sorted and otherwise manipulated with speed and tremendous flexibility.

When you learn it - it becomes a HUGE organizational problem solver and efficiency leverager that's built right into the dashboard of X.

But it's also NOT particularly intuitive at first because it's kinda like an address book application. When you first open that, it's not particularly useful because it doesn't have any names or addresses in it. Over time, if you learn to put ALL your contacts into it, it becomes MASSIVELY useful, since you can not only search and sort out the information you want quickly, you can also add your own fields and do all sorts of other useful things to organize the information you put into it.

The database in X is like that. It grows with use and gets MORE powerful the more you use it.

You start to develop strategies for HOW to use not only the dashboard tags like Favorite and Reject, but to build your own unique system of filters, ratings, and keywords that help you work the way that you prefer to work - but much faster.

It's like magnetism. When it's a foreign idea, it's hard to understand how it will be helpful - but after you live with it, you start to see where it makes some common editing tasks hugely easier - and for others where it's not appropriate, you just work without it.

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

Atilio Menéndez
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 7:01:09 pm

You must be on list view and the clip has to be "expanded" (click on the little rigth arrow or press alt+right arrow). Then click next to the green star and change "favorite" to anything you want. You don't want to rename the clip itself since that renames all of its "instances" (differently as when when working on the timeline).

But I don't think that's the best workflow. I instead use markers (eh, "tags") for the more detailed descriptions and keywords for the more general categories. You can be as detailed as you want and use several markers within a keyword range or a favoritized segment, with none of the "mess". You can then see all markers neatly listed by selecting the clips and "expanding" them by pressing alt+right arrow. Works quite well except for one thing: the view always resets to the "collapsed" state instead of staying in the "expanded" state.

Searching through the markers using smart collections works fine, and on the timeline I find the timeline index extremely useful to search/navigate/rename markers, rename clips, etc.


Return to posts index


Dave Brandt
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 7:25:33 pm

Hi Bill, Atilio,

I understand the workings of the keywords and fcpx in general quite well. I have done quite a few projects in it to date and there are many things to like.
I am referring specifically to the process of "transcribing" interviews into subclips here though. I really wanted fcpx to work for me here as i was using green screen and I have to say the keyer in fcpx is amazing, much faster than ultrakey in premiere, and results are really good.

back to the topic at hand though, and i really am hoping there is something I'm missing here.

in premiere I load a clip into the viewer, then create/select an appropriate empty bin in the project window. go back to viewer and I start to play the interview.

when i get to the start of the answer (Which i can see from my waveforms) i hit i, it never stops playing, i then wait til he's finished, hit o and then whatever key command I have setup to create sub clip, I write a short synopsis of what he said, hit enter, then hit play again and off we go to the next bit.
I never have to touch the mouse, or twirl any arrows, it stays on my main interview clip, when I'm finished i have a tidy bin full of clips that resemble a transcript, i can then pick whatever I want and build my story, without looking at the footage, just by the clip name. (Which incidentally carries through to my timeline which i can "read" before I play.

I have not found a similar way to do this in fcpx without mousing, or like I said before, Creating compounds which moves me away form my original interview clip so i have to find it again etc.

I would love to know how you fcpx editors have overcome this?
thanks

Dave

http://www.SolidMedia.ie

Macbook Pro 17" i7 2.2 8GB
PC i7 32GB Self Build
FCP 7 FCPX Adobe CS6 Vegas 12 Nuendo 4


Return to posts index

Atilio Menéndez
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 8:56:22 pm

Oh yes, I truly agree that transcribing interviews is needlessly difficult with FCPX. I too haven't found a way which I am happy with, I hate mousing myself!

Perhaps the following could work for you: put your interview clip(s) in a compound clip, open it, go to the timeline index, select the first clip and let go of the mouse. Now you can play back and forth, insert edits (blade all), navigate/select segments (using up and down arrow keys), rename the segments (by pressing enter and typing) and delete useless segments, all without ever touching the mouse. For this to work clicking on the index first is important otherwise pressing enter to rename has strangely no effect.

It is not quite as good as what you describe but kinda close. Only problem is the edits then "live" within the compound clip and that limits organizing the material using keywords and searching. You can still apply keywords to the compound clips themselves, move and copy the edited segments from one compound clip to the other and so forth, but it is not quite the same. The compound clips then resemble the traditional bins, but you cannot easily look inside. If one could only "expand" the compound clips in the event browser and see the clips within this would be much better.


Return to posts index

Dave Brandt
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 9:22:29 pm

Thanks Atilio,

very interesting, but a heck of a workaround for something that i use so often! and seems like a few more keystrokes than necessary, also it would be difficult to truly arrange a story the way i do it, i just move the subclips around like sentences to tell it in different ways by looking at the clip names in the timeline.
for now i will just have to stick to premiere, I like a lot about fcpx, but its things like this that have me scratching my head, and i think there seems no way to do this in fcpx properly.

thanks
Dave

http://www.SolidMedia.ie

Macbook Pro 17" i7 2.2 8GB
PC i7 32GB Self Build
FCP 7 FCPX Adobe CS6 Vegas 12 Nuendo 4


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 10:21:40 pm

[Dave Brandt] "in premiere I load a clip into the viewer, then create/select an appropriate empty bin in the project window. go back to viewer and I start to play the interview."

OK, In X that's "Open a clip in the Event Browser. Then range select any part of the clip. You do NOT need to create any appropriate bin in any project window, becaue the way keywords work, it's going to automatically do that for you. You start to Play your interview. You select an In and an Out - and you have a range. Then you tap K and in the keyword viewer, you pick a tag to apply. Lets say you use the L key for (log) or the 1 key, it doesn't matter - ANY tag will do the job. If you want to be more overt, you can use SELECTS - and if you do, the next time you hit K to bring up the keyword display, you can just hit S and selects will show up ala autofill. Or you can use the 10 persistent tags in the keyword browser to make SELECTS one of the number tags. All the flexibility you could ever need, but the point is that you just apply the same keyword over and over with a single keystroke to whatever selection of ranges you want to separate out of the generall pool of footage.

That keyword collection IS your bin. So theres no real need to pre-define any folders with X.


[Dave Brandt] "when i get to the start of the answer (Which i can see from my waveforms) i hit i, it never stops playing, i then wait til he's finished, hit o and then whatever key command I have setup to create sub clip, I write a short synopsis of what he said, hit enter, then hit play again and off we go to the next bit."

I understand the style where attaching text blocks to clips was important back when there wasn't as robust a keyword search system available, but I find I just don't do that any more. If I create sensible keywords, that combined with the ability to scrub and view content that's been narrowed by keyword search, is much faster for me for drilling into and finding assets rapidly than reading across complex notes.

I get that some people are oriented to blocks of text. And if that's what works for you, stick with it. But honetly, that's one of the bigest changes in my my thinking with X. I'm now oriented to keywords used in conjunction with self-created ratings strategies. If I have 10 instances of places where the interview subject talked about "1st quarter results." I can rapidly add (or NOT add) tags like Q1, "Excellent" "results" and USE THIS at the point of keyword entry - which can help me rapidly bucket not just the content of the clips I'm considering, but also help me remember my qualitative judgements as well.

I never thought this way using folders for storage. It was a thing. I created it. It stayed that way forever. If I wanted to change the buckets or add the same asset to multiple buckets - it wasn't easy. So extensive notes were important.

The new capability I value is the almost instant ability to reduce my view via keyword find - then go back to viewing everything. Over and over. Rather than just putting myself into a "read a list of text sentences" view where I have to scan and mentally sort from a fixed list of possibly hundreds of instances if I have a long series of interviews on similar topics.

But in the end, it's to each their own. I know that long time traditional NLE users have cretaed amazing systems for folders and bucketing in tools that weren't necessarily really designed for those purposes - and I respect that. But these new tools can open up excieting new possibilities - but perhaps less if an editor only tries to use them to re-create a system that's utoo close to what the old tools enabled.

In the end, it's what we're comfotable with. And If that's the way you work best, by all means go for it. My way is not better, just different. But I do think some re-evaluation of old practices is healthy - and X does kinda cause folks to re-evaluate their old habits as they learn the new capabilities.

I just find that as I "think database" more and "think folders" less - both my speed of asset access and my confidence that I can't really "lose" anything is much stronger now than it was when I was working in a less search/sort oriented NLE. The very act of ranging and tagging a thing, puts it in a class that I can always find - heck, even if I tag it WRONG - just hiding all the "untagged" assets is a huge help in zeroing in on what I want to locate and lets me incrementally improve my tagging later. It's a bit more like word processing than sticky tag folder labeling - which I find really interesting.

Asset libraries are getting larger and larger. I think having more and faster tools for working with them is an important evolution in NLE operations.

But YMMV.

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

Chris Harlan
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 10:20:05 pm

In Avid, why would you bother breaking down a single piece of video, making sub clips and then renaming them? I just drop them into timeline--3 keystrokes--and then use the timeline as a bin. I guess I'm missing something.


Return to posts index

Dave Brandt
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 10:29:16 pm

Hi Chris,
It's just the way i work with long interviews.
If I have a bin full of small clips that are labelled according to what is said in them I can construct a story out of that much easier than going through a timeline and picking bits that way, especially if there are 5 or 6 interviews all relating and telling the one story together, it makes sense to label it as im listening to it anyways.
But I have done a timeline select plenty of times, especially if the interview is short and I know what they say where.
Dave

http://www.SolidMedia.ie

Macbook Pro 17" i7 2.2 8GB
PC i7 32GB Self Build
FCP 7 FCPX Adobe CS6 Vegas 12 Nuendo 4


Return to posts index

Atilio Menéndez
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 30, 2013 at 11:30:59 am

hi Dave,

you made me curious so I looked into my "method" again and discovered a way of working which is even more effective.

FIRST lay the interview on the timeline and by looking at the waveforms quickly insert edits at the pauses or remove chunks of silence, so you are more or less left with the interview divided into the "answers".

THEN start working on the timeline index as i described. you should never have to touch the mouse during the process.

as you start playing the first clip you press "enter" to change its name. you can then type as the clip keeps playing and you can finish typing even as the next clip is already playing. you then press "enter", then your shortcut for "select clip" (I use a key right next to "enter") then "enter" again and begin typing again. if you type fast enough you never even have to stop playback. this is indeed very effective, especially since you type as the clips play and between clips only three very fast keytrokes are needed.

nice thing is when you are done you can organize the clips with help of the index. just looking at the list of clips you can, for instance, select several clips which are not next to each other but belong to the same "topic". you can drag them around on the timeline and they automatically end neatly next to each other, no gaps in between. seems to me that it would suit very well the way you work and you DO see the clip names clearly both on the timeline and in the index.

here fcp7 is quite different. you must make clips independent first, renaming a clip stops playback, thumbnails get in the way of the names and filmstrips can't be displayed together with names, and there is no timeline index, which is a huge help to select clips and see their names properly. also the "magnetism" makes organizing clips a breeze. how does premiere work here?

I don't think the method is truly a "workaround", rather a different manner of working. the "type as you play" aspect is a huge timesaver!

what still bugs me is the resulting lack of integration with keywords. ideally, i think, there should be proper subclips, and these would be listed under the parent clip, just like favorites, markers and keywords are. one method of creating these subclips could even be to open a clip in the timeline and to work like I described above.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 10:29:31 pm

[Chris Harlan] "In Avid, why would you bother breaking down a single piece of video, making sub clips and then renaming them? I just drop them into timeline--3 keystrokes--and then use the timeline as a bin. I guess I'm missing something."

Chris,

You're not "missing" anything. You have great skills at using a system that's proved to be hugely functional and professional for years. You may not EVER need the newer search, sort and tagging tools in a system like X to do the work you need to do.

It's just a new way of looking at old tasks using systems that weren't as popular back when the interface of Legacy was designed.

There's absolutely no need to learn it unless you find yourself in circumstances where some aspect of your practice changes in ways that the altered toolset in a program like X can help.

And it may not EVER change into that.

The big difference is that in X, the database is pretty much an equal partner to the edit interface. It runs everything. And if you don't NEED a database to do your work, or simply don't want to change your practices to work equally in both a database AND in the editing timeline - then it's not for you.

It's just a tool to better manage some of the complexity of some types of editing. Not all, just some.

Only you know if you need it. And as much as you push back against it, you ARE keeping yourself aware of what it's good at- which is all that's required if you ever start to think that what it does might someday become important to the work you need to do.

Simple as that.

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

Chris Harlan
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 29, 2013 at 11:24:37 pm

Thanks, Bill. I was skipping through the threads so I'm not sure I understood the context of the question. I was questioning Atilio's five step Avid process in answer to Dan. Now, I see. Yes, if you wanted to use Avid in a searchable manner similar to X, it would take two extra steps. But as you so aptly point out, it would not be my preferred way of working.

Hey! I believe I saw you on the stage of the supermeet--if that was you calling out numbers--though I didn't know it at the time. I had fun. Its quite a show you guys put on. I wish that every show I go to would toss out that many prizes at its audience!


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 30, 2013 at 2:22:54 am

Dude, you were at the SuperMeet and didn't come find me so say Hi?

I'm bummed!

The Supermeet is high on my list of enjoyable things I get to do every year.

The only thing better than helping give out $80,000 worth of free stuff to an appreciative crowd is the chance to make and strengthen long time relationships. I look forward all year to catching up with old friends - and the Supermeet is ground zero for that for me.

As you witnessed, people get seriously gleeful. Even the people who don't win seem to enjoy the evening.

Next time, please corral me to say Hi. After all these years, part of the fun of the evening is being able to shake hands with people who are otherwise just names. For me, NAB is no longer quite as much about looking at things. It's more about meeting people, and I'm sorry we didn't get to do that.

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

Chris Harlan
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 30, 2013 at 2:35:18 am

Hey, maybe next year. I'd never been to the super-meet before; but I figured after the 2011 Hullabaloo that I'd check it out. It was fun.


Return to posts index

Greg Andonian
Re: Yesterday, for the first time, just for a while, I found myself wishing I had FCPX
on Apr 30, 2013 at 3:15:54 am

[Atilio Menéndez] Avid or FCP7:

1. Set IN
2. Set OUT
3. Make subclip
4. Rename subclip (several keystrokes)
5. Go back to parent clip

FCPX:

1. Set IN
2. Set OUT
3. Apply keyword or favorite (usually just one keystroke)



My workflow in Premiere goes like this:

1. Set in
2. Set out
3. Drag clip from source monitor to bin in Project window
4. Rename

Not all that bad, and it creates an actual clip instead of a subclip, which I like.

______________________________________________
"Up until here, we still have enough track to stop the locomotive before it plunges into the ravine... But after this windmill it's the future or bust."


Return to posts index

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