FORUMS: list search recent posts

Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Aindreas Gallagher
Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 7:34:27 pm

ok it hasn't got rich corinthian leather - but there is a ton of chrome in general - and drop shadows generated under every last clip you move...

Interesting if the new broom seen in OSX calendar, ibooks, new osx maps etc were to come to X. Ives does look to be cleaning house?

And then of course there is the rumour that Jony said after looking at X - "hey, where are the tracks? Are you insane?"

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 8:05:11 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "ok it hasn't got rich corinthian leather - but there is a ton of chrome in general - and drop shadows generated under every last clip you move...

Interesting if the new broom seen in OSX calendar, ibooks, new osx maps etc were to come to X. Ives does look to be cleaning house?"


I've been using Mr Ive's iOS7 all day and I have to say I like it (apart from the icons) It might be nice if some Jony love came FCPX's way

Steve Connor

There's nothing we can't argue about on the FCPX COW Forum


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 8:22:27 pm

[Steve Connor] "I've been using Mr Ive's iOS7 all day and I have to say I like it (apart from the icons) It might be nice if some Jony love came FCPX's way"

Indeed!

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


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:04:50 pm

ello - are you like, a signed developer type there steve?

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 8:26:21 pm

Still havn't figured this out A?

X is FULL of tracks.

What you don't have anymore is inflexible concrete barriers between your tracks and someone demanding that the track has to reflect one purpose and one form before you can use it AS a track.

But they're there. I know because I have pictures of them...

Here are some of my audio tracks.



here are some of my video tracks in my Project Library...



And I could post more pictures of tracks inside my compound clips, in my audio files, in my Auditions, heck, X is FULL of tracks.

They're just not as dumb as they used to be - that's all.

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

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 8:36:56 pm

[Bill Davis] "Here are some of my audio tracks."

quite bill - but if you start cutting those audio tracks - say a music track with multiple other audio elements around - the new cut audio element is likely to jump up and down the hierarchy like nobody's business.

watching that spliced music track taking a vertical trip can be a little weird no? I have tested it, but I'm borrowing that gripe from hard core X dudes on here. they made me test the behaviour. It, like, for totally sure isn't perfect behaviour? - mind you, with X I'm not going into a dark room to sign a lifetime rental agreement with a giggling Shantanyu Narayan either..

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


Return to posts index


Bret Williams
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 9:34:24 pm

Yeah, that took me about an hour of that to figure out that you put a music track in it's own secondary. Problem solved. In fact, it's actually pretty easy to stack up a bunch of secondaries and think of them as tracks. Make them as long as your project and they really are the same as tracks. Can do the same for video if you wanted.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 8:54:01 pm

[Bill Davis] "Here are some of my audio tracks."

So what track do you keep your sound FX on?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 9:02:45 pm

Role: FX of course



Return to posts index


Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 9:17:51 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Role: FX of course"

So is that track 3 or 4, when I'm looking at the screen and want to know where to adjust something.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 9:40:06 pm

This. (don't you hate it when people say that?)

But this is a good point. Tracks can definitely act as an organizational tool.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 9:11:10 pm

[Bret Williams] "This. (don't you hate it when people say that?)

But this is a good point. Tracks can definitely act as an organizational tool.

"


Can? That's what they're there for. Or, at least, that's what they are there for for me. Organization and navigation. I want to--no, I'm going to say I need to--be able to see at a glance where my VO is, where my SFX are, where dialog is. The speed with which I can navigate around a timeline is directly tied into that. Tracks don't have to be the answer--colored roles, for instance, might work--but until this specific item is dealt with in some meaningful way, I will not be interested in using FCP X. This is principally what I don't like about the magnetic timeline; its not that its magnetic, its that its taken these other, more important to me, tools away.


Return to posts index


Charlie Austin
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 9:36:51 pm

[Chris Harlan] "but until this specific item is dealt with in some meaningful way, I will not be interested in using FCP X. This is principally what I don't like about the magnetic timeline; its not that its magnetic, its that its taken these other, more important to me, tools away."

Well, with the caveat that I honestly don't know what Apple is doing, I'm convinced they understand our concerns and are doing something about this. I don't imagine it's trivial, due to the fact that a single multichannel clip can have multiple Roles... But I've had a very good, detailed back and forth with some folks there on this issue. And getting responses like this:

Thanks for the suggestion, Charlie. I have forwarded it to the product designers and audio engineers.
Keep sending the thoughts in - the more detailed the better.


Gives me hope... Particularly the "audio engineers" part. :-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 9:43:33 pm

yep - seriously - whatever the guys say - there really actually is a core problem there. video is kind of fine really-ish as freeform, but audio is just a bit mad. Even some of the hardcore guys decry it quite regularly. that's why there is so much fantasising about roles being magical fix everything ponies - the general notion is that they will dynamically re-assert tracks on the fly for role tagged audio elements? like no one hasn't heard this a million times mind you....

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:04:47 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Even some of the hardcore guys decry it quite regularly. that's why there is so much fantasising about roles being magical fix everything ponies - the general notion is that they will dynamically re-assert tracks on the fly for role tagged audio elements? like no one hasn't heard this a million times mind you...."

True, it's workaround city at this point. I will say - and I have zero insider info here but... - it's my belief that Apple is aware of this, and is working on a solution for better visual timeline organization and better audio handling in general. I have had very long email exchanges with some folks there, complete with piles of screenshots and novel length critiques and suggestions. They know the problems, and haven't told me to bugger off. :-) In fact they invite me to send more, as detailed as possible. I'm looking forward to what they come up with. It's not a simple fix...

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index


Bret Williams
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:15:54 pm

I half have some faith that what Jony is doing in such a short period is going to ripple through everything Apple. This was a test for him, and although he generally seems to have grabbed every idea from jailbreaks or Android, he has passed with flying colors I'd say. The implementation of ideas just seems clearer, smoother, more integrated than android. Hopefully this will trickle through everything Apple.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:43:50 pm

[Charlie Austin] "In fact they invite me to send more, as detailed as possible. I'm looking forward to what they come up with. It's not a simple fix..."

What a novel approach. Instead of telling the creator of something that their work is total trash and the digital version of the spawn of the devil - you engage in constructive give and take - acknowledging the value and working on resolving what you see as less than ideal about their approach.

And you find a sympathetic ear!

Next you'll be suggesting that the folks building X are honest to god human beings... and your blasphemy will be complete, Charlie.

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

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 11:24:31 pm

[Bill Davis] "What a novel approach. Instead of telling the creator of something that their work is total trash and the digital version of the spawn of the devil - you engage in constructive give and take - acknowledging the value and working on resolving what you see as less than ideal about their approach.
"


possibly the trick is that you do the pair in sequence - intense vocal customer dissatisfaction can be half effective in setting the parameters for future constructive discussion?

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


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 3:31:19 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "possibly the trick is that you do the pair in sequence - intense vocal customer dissatisfaction can be half effective in setting the parameters for future constructive discussion?
"


Not in my experience.

I'll never forget a incident when my wife and I flew into Salt Lake City in mid-winter. At the time, we were AVIS Preferred customers and so we went to the outdoor kiosk to pick up our reserved car. The place was a madhouse. A huge snowstorm had messed up the entire system and there were literally 15 waiting customers all looking grumpy. As I made my way to the counter to check in, the counter guy was bearing the brunt of a massive verbal assault from a pissed off businessman - who demanded a supervisor on the phone RIGHT NOW. The counter guy made the call to corporate, and the businessguy started tearing the supervisor a new one as well - demanding not just a car, but the EXACT car he had reserved. Free to deal with me the counter guy gave me a strained smile and said, sorry, we're just totally out of cars and way overbooked. I smiled back and said something like "Looks like you're having a pretty bad day. We're Avis Preferred but I bet everyone else here is as well, so I can see that you're out of cars. I'll hang for a while and just in case things change, if you have ANYTHING - clean or dirty - old or new - sub-compact or truck, doesn't matter what class or rate - literally anything - that will be fine for my wife and I. I can see you have bigger problems than just mine. Then I smiled, gave the guy a shrug of sympathy and stepped back.

Literally one minute later, the lot guy came in the side door, slipped around behind the counter and quietly passed off soemthing to the counter guy.

Two sets of keys. Two. For fifteen upset customers.

He looked up, caught my eye. Smiled - and motioned me over. He bent across the counter, quietly said, "you're the first guy in the last hour that hasn't been a total dick to me. Have a great weekend." And slid me the keys to what turned out to be an SUV with snow tires.

When I left the place, the businessguy was STILL yelling at the supervisor on the phone.

Reminded me that we're all human beings and while yes, its possible to get better performance by demanding it, it's also equally possible to get great service by being the kind of customer people want to satisfy.

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

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 3:35:38 am

Can't innovate anymore, my ass...


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 2:20:51 pm

[Bill Davis] "Reminded me that we're all human beings and while yes, its possible to get better performance by demanding it, it's also equally possible to get great service by being the kind of customer people want to satisfy."

That was a lovely story demonstrating the old "honey or vinegar" thesis, and it's nice to hear that your courtesy and civility paid off.

Of course it has nothing to do with Aindreas's point. He was talking about effecting change in a companies behavior, you were talking about getting the best deal for yourself. Nothing you did that day was going to get Avis to have more cars standing by, to allocate resources differently, to change they way they handle customers on bad weather days.

Now it's unlikely that the customer screaming at the manager will have much effect either, but at least he's asking for change in the right direction. If Avis get's many calls like his, there's a chance they might change their policies. If everyone acted as you did the world would be a nicer place, but come a snowy day, you'd all be civilly stuck in the snow together.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 4:42:15 pm

[Herb Sevush] "If everyone acted as you did the world would be a nicer place, but come a snowy day, you'd all be civilly stuck in the snow together."

Nope.

AVIS was leaving money on the table that day.

No properly operated business can tolerate that (except as a rare exception) for long.

The correction mechanism was already built into the system.

The yelling guy will NEVER be the driver of systemic change because his effectiveness is blunted by the fact that for every guy who loses it and yells, there are a hundred (or more likely ten thousand) who have the manners NOT to yell at the counter guy because they know he can't effect any meaningful change.

This is precisely the problem with the year one X bitching.

It was people yelling about their FEELINGS (just like the car rental guy) rather than actually yelling about the problems. The solutions to most of the problems being yelled about were already understood inside Apple (as we can see in hindsight) and were being addressed all along.

So the only purpose the yelling served was to make the yelling people feel better. But I'd argue that the biggest effect of all the initial hue and cry was merely to delay the exploration of the software by the very class of potential users who could have best benefited from exploring it more deeply at the outset.

So now we have a peculiar and kinda wide swath of longtime pros who are nearly 2 years behind the curve in learning the quirks of what increasingly looks to be ONE long range professional contender for the future of editing.

Kind of a bummer for them.

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

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 6:02:48 pm

[Bill Davis] "The yelling guy will NEVER be the driver of systemic change because his effectiveness is blunted by the fact that for every guy who loses it and yells, there are a hundred (or more likely ten thousand) who have the manners NOT to yell at the counter guy because they know he can't effect any meaningful change. "

I take it this means you don't believe in the "squeaky wheel" thesis.


[Bill Davis] "So now we have a peculiar and kinda wide swath of longtime pros who are nearly 2 years behind the curve in learning the quirks of what increasingly looks to be ONE long range professional contender for the future of editing. Kind of a bummer for them."

Well if those poor fools don't ever use X, because it is only one of many NLEs, they will have saved themselves a lot of time.

On the other hand, if they do turn to X they will likely benefit from all the pioneers like you Bill, who have learned thru trial and error the best practices and have mapped out the way for the rest to follow.

Kind of a bummer for all those early adopters, but hey I'm willing to take advantage of all their hard work.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:07:07 pm

If we had (green) audio tracks, AND audio was also still embedded in (blue) video clips, which would control export? Do tracks get mapped to tracks or roles? Do the roles get mapped to tracks? Are tracks roles or are they tracks? It could get pretty messy pretty quick.

Perhaps we could have "role-tracks" where anything that is a particular role gets placed in an area that isn't really a track, but an organizational area that can still have secondaries and audio on top of audio within that area. THAT would kinda be best of both worlds. So all your FX might be the lower 3rd of the audio area, the music might be the middle and the VO or dialog might be top third. Expanding audio of blue video clips could pop the elements into their "role track" as an option, and keep them linked.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:42:47 pm

[Bret Williams] "Perhaps we could have "role-tracks" where anything that is a particular role gets placed in an area that isn't really a track, but an organizational area that can still have secondaries and audio on top of audio within that area. THAT would kinda be best of both worlds. So all your FX might be the lower 3rd of the audio area, the music might be the middle and the VO or dialog might be top third. Expanding audio of blue video clips could pop the elements into their "role track" as an option, and keep them linked."

That's more or less what I was thinking. I honestly don't mind expanded elements sticking with the video, as long as their roles highlight properly. But if Roles and their subroles in connected clips would stick together as a group, and possibly be color codeable and bus-able, that would solve my problem. If I cut a music clip and it moves up a little, no biggie... if it sticks in it's "group" If I want to do some silly single frame audio or video flutter cut I can just stick it in a secondary.

The "not easy" part comes when you have multitrack audio clips with different Roles (dia, mx, fx etc) and more than one is enabled. I imagine that's a hair puller. :-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 12:11:50 am

[Bret Williams] "If we had (green) audio tracks, AND audio was also still embedded in (blue) video clips, which would control export? Do tracks get mapped to tracks or roles? Do the roles get mapped to tracks? Are tracks roles or are they tracks? It could get pretty messy pretty quick.
"


apple would have to be super careful not to tip it over alright. But given the more complex audio OMF FCPX exports are ok as it stands now (right? I haven't a clue) - the primary issue is the workspace?

PPro is working audio lozenges anyway - from this week I can say that soho mix 5.1 or vanilla stereo is equally a lozenge in ppro - you are expanding audio in pretty similar fashion to X in PPro 6 right now - but it still has a centre line VA split. not all audio tracks are equal tho. If you drag in a 5.1 mix - it can only go to a new 5.1 track - which you twirl down to modify the sub-channels of. Any PPro audio "track" contains anything from a stereo pair to all parts of a 5.1 mix. PPro is not not FCP religiously discreet audio tracks.

but there are lanes.

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:38:56 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "there really actually is a core problem there."

I think what you meant to say was "there really actually is a core problem there for the smallish subset of editors who need to work with very complex audio mixes and find that the way X handles audio doesn't enable them to do that in the program - as it exists right now."

If that's what you actually meant, then fine. Point taken.

It's unfortunate for you guys in that class that while that definitely represents a slice of the people who hang out here - it's a pretty small slice of the overall class of editors that X stands ready - right now - to empower to work faster and smarter.

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: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:33:47 pm

It's the one that "lights up" when I select Show Role= FX from my Timeline Index.
Which means I can have both clip collision avoidance AND the ability to seek and find by roles all the time.

Sweet!


BTW, you can avoid much of the "jumping around" stuff under discussion here if you just are mindful of a work order that puts longer contiguous assets in upper tracks - and positions shorter assets in positions where the condiguous ones will block the smaller ones from moving too much.

Not really any different than a painter learning to work with lighter pallet colors first, and bringing in the darker ones later. It's just kinda how paint works.

The missing idea is working in X like it's X. And getting over the need to work in X as if it's still Legacy.

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: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:45:16 pm

[Bill Davis] "The missing idea is working in X like it's X. And getting over the need to work in X as if it's still Legacy"

All due respect Bill, I work in X like its X, and it needs better timeline visual organization. If you've got 10 audio clips stacked in a timeline, not a biggie maybe. It's an issue when you've got dozens.

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:50:24 pm

FWIW, any music clip I place in a timeline instantly gets secondary status. I know I'm going to edit it, cut it up, etc. So making it a secondary makes that function as it should. In fact, it contains it, so if I want to move the whole audio clip as a whole left or right or up or down, I don't have to marquee all the little parts, like in legacy.

Lately I've also started grouping other elements this way. Put all my sfx in a secondary. Instant organization like a track. Just have to remember to use the P tool to move stuff around within.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:58:12 pm

[Bret Williams] "Lately I've also started grouping other elements this way. Put all my sfx in a secondary. Instant organization like a track. Just have to remember to use the P tool to move stuff around within."

I've been doing that as well, and works pretty well... Now if the (mx, fx, dia) Roles would just stop trying to run home to the primary if I didn't want them to... :-) Maybe rather than Role Grouping, you could have the timeline separated into visual, expandable vertical "workspaces" FCP wouldn't have to figure out how to group things, you could just put clips in your user defined spaces and they stay there unless specifically pulled out. Maybe time for another email... :-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Jacob Brown
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 1:51:42 am

I've been editing a feature film on FCPX for last few months. my goals and creative process may be different then a lot of you alls. but i have a hard time understanding why the horizontal way of thinking that tracks invoque is a good thing for sound. every time i'm sitting in a sound mixing booth with a sound designer, they always over and over again talk about thinking on the vertical with sound.

for me, my fcpx process is very vertical. the stack of sfx that made the last moment impactful and powerful has nothing to do with the one i'm working on in the next moment. again this is just me, but i wouldnt want to connect them. to me they are discrete and the independent stacking at that moment in relation to primary timeline seems great.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 2:59:31 am

It's true that during the creative process FCPX's vertical system is quite awesome. I have never been able to edit and adjust as fast, try new things, have more fun.

The hard part comes when it's time to master/multichannel export.

It is here, if you weren't careful with Roles during the edit, that things can slow down as it can be harder to discern where elements are since they are stacked in different layers all over.

Although, if you are remotely cognizant of Roles during the edit, even if its a cursory Role distinction, it helps in the end up.

Some limitations:

You can't assign Roles in the import window, which would be great.

You cannot assign Roles to individual audio components in the browser, they must be assigned from a clip in a timeline of some sort. It'd be nice if that could change.

I do agree, though, that FCPX's vertical nature is very helpful.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 5:10:12 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "You cannot assign Roles to individual audio components in the browser, they must be assigned from a clip in a timeline of some sort. It'd be nice if that could change. "

Actually, if I'm understanding you, you definitely can assign roles to audio components in the browser, I do it all the time and it's a huge timesaver. Right click clip, open in timeline, assign Roles. Done. Great for multichannel split source clips. :-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 6:12:49 am

Kinda makes you wonder if those music guys Jacob is talking about are so comfortable since they presumably spend their days working with sheet music and scores. Which is kinda the ultimate VERTICAL arrangement of synchronized elements.

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

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 12:44:58 pm

[Bill Davis] "Kinda makes you wonder if those music guys Jacob is talking about are so comfortable since they presumably spend their days working with sheet music and scores. Which is kinda the ultimate VERTICAL arrangement of synchronized elements."

There's also a very horizontal staff that tells a musician exactly what notes to play and when, or when to not play notes.

An E can't be an F, but a B Flat can be A sharp as they sit in the exact same place on the staff.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 12:41:27 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Actually, if I'm understanding you, you definitely can assign roles to audio components in the browser, I do it all the time and it's a huge timesaver. Right click clip, open in timeline, assign Roles. Done. Great for multichannel split source clips. :-)"

But that's the problem, as I mentioned, it has to be a timeline of sorts.

If all my video clips have the same number of audio channels, I can select all of them and change the channel status, even name the stems as I want, but I cannot assign a role to each component.

If I do take the time to name each component, that information isn't searchable in the timeline index.

So let's say I named each channel of 64 two channel clips "lav" and "boom".

It's be nice to be able to add those to a Role.

I can't do it from the Browser unless I do all 64 clips separately. If I add them to a timeline, do a TL search for boom, nothing shows. If I add them to clean timeline, and assign a Role, I now have to source the clips from that timeline as the Role doesn't carry up to the Browser.

If I can't have a track that I can put the boom channel in, let me at least use the awesome fcpx devices to select all boom channels, or assign a boom Role to components from the Browser so I can use the index to select the Role.

Know what I'm sayin'?


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 3:12:17 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "If I can't have a track that I can put the boom channel in, let me at least use the awesome fcpx devices to select all boom channels, or assign a boom Role to components from the Browser so I can use the index to select the Role.

Know what I'm sayin'?"


Gotcha. You sent feedback right? ;-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 3:46:27 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Gotcha. You sent feedback right? ;-)"

But of course.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 7:14:14 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "[Charlie Austin] "Gotcha. You sent feedback right? ;-)"

But of course.
"


My concern... not really "concern" so much as philosophical quandary, actually is where you leave the concept of a UI as a thing that the USER configures - and when it makes more sense to provide consistency by allowing the interface designer to determine how things need to work.

I think that's part of what makes X both exciting and frustrating.

If 10 of us want to use Roles - but there are only a limited number of ways that ALL 10 of us need them to work - and if smaller and smaller groups then want features that might address THEIR needs, but don't really address the needs of the others in different niches - how do you prioritize the list of planned features?

Interesting stuff.

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

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 7:22:11 pm

[Bill Davis] "how do you prioritize the list of planned features?"

Probably with a list?


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:32:00 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Probably with a list?"

Dammit, now I have to go find a paper towel.

; )

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

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 11:07:36 pm

[Charlie Austin] "All due respect Bill, I work in X like its X, and it needs better timeline visual organization. If you've got 10 audio clips stacked in a timeline, not a biggie maybe. It's an issue when you've got dozens."

I really want what we called Zones (color coded, too).

It'd also be nice to be able to drag audio Roles in the timeline index up and down, and have the clips arrange themselves that way. It would also help for export to assign the Roles to particular channel orders.

At any rate, there's lots that can be done here, it's just a matter of time and interest if Apple does it.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 6:19:21 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "I really want what we called Zones (color coded, too)."

As I mentioned in my seminar, color coding is a wonderful thing for visual reference when you're working in the finder. But I've never seen a database where you can search or sort on an actual COLOR. WORDS for a colors sure. But not a color as a concept.

So it's great for labels. But kinda a fail for tags, IMO.

Be interesting if somebody would build a system where it automagically let you use color chips (maybe pantone values under the hood?) to do real search, sort and find. But as of yet, I've never seen anything like that in any database I've worked with.

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: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 6:47:29 am

[Bill Davis] "But I've never seen a database where you can search or sort on an actual COLOR. WORDS for a colors sure. But not a color as a concept.

So it's great for labels. But kinda a fail for tags, IMO."


But that's the point Bill, it is for labels. Not tags, not a database. a visual thing so you can be plying and say to yourself "here comes that effect section, and that explosion is too loud so let me grab it and change the level before the playhead gets there". That kind of thing. Again, relatively easy if you have a half dozen audio clips piled up, not so easy if you have 20 or so.

It's like your music analogy. Yes, chords are represented as a vertical stack of notes. But, without the horizontal lines that make up the staff, what the hell notes are you going to play? There needs to be a visual reference. Not rigid tracks, but some way to organize things other than "wherever it fits".

Don't get me wrong, I really really like "wherever it if its", but when an audio bed gets deep, magnetism needs a little help. And to me, this isn't really true on the picture side, though it's be nice maybe. But connected video clips pile up nicely and generally behave as you'd expect.

YM, clearly, MV :-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 1:06:56 pm

[Bill Davis] "As I mentioned in my seminar, color coding is a wonderful thing for visual reference when you're working in the finder. But I've never seen a database where you can search or sort on an actual COLOR. WORDS for a colors sure. But not a color as a concept."

Funny.

When I am doing long and convoluted spot market distribution, I actually write color based warnings and identifiers in to my spreadsheet (database) rules.

If an isci code is over 15 characters, the cell turns red. If a cell has a check mark (meaning its done) a whole row turns green, etc.

At a glance I have a easy to discern information from a sometimes confusing spreadsheet.

Pr gets color coding right. It's awesome. Fcpx would be more helpful if you could color code clips/roles/whatever.

If you don't like it, don't use it.

I don't know if you watched the WWDC keynote, but the new Mac OS has 'Tags'. Those Tags have colors.

Better warm up to it.

Colors aren't a text based search mechanism, but color certainly carries information, and we can assign information to it, be it text, pictures, feelings, warnings, whatever.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:39:49 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Better warm up to it.

Colors aren't a text based search mechanism, but color certainly carries information, and we can assign information to it, be it text, pictures, feelings, warnings, whatever."


Hey, I'm not arguing against building in a color labeling system such as you describe.

I'd just hate to see the editors coming from Legacy systems see the color tagging and become satisfied that that might be the FIRST place they go when they want to categorize things.

If they were to tilt in that direction, it could conceivably slow them from exploring and using the actual database tags - which would presumably be a system that they've NEVER had any experience with.

This is NOT a big deal.

I just know how long it took me to start to develop my own purposeful tagging rules for my own work. I'd like to see others not have to go through the same learning curve, particularly the legions of editors who might come to X without the experience of "shop" work - where an administrative layer is making sure they follow the internal shop asset naming rules.

No more than 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

Charlie Austin
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 7:02:05 am

[Bill Davis] "If they were to tilt in that direction, it could conceivably slow them from exploring and using the actual database tags - which would presumably be a system that they've NEVER had any experience with."

While I see where you're coming from, I really think you're misunderstanding everyones concerns. Color coding Roles, or grouping Roles, is strictly a way to get an *visual* snapshot of what's going on in your sequence, to me anyway. I use the index, tagging, markers Roles... All the cool stuff in X to find and keep track of specific clips, but there needs to be a way to keep things instantly visually readable, for lack of a better word, when I look at a sequence as it's playing along. Yes, you can highlight Roles, but as it stands now there's a problem in that multichannel clips with multliple Roles, highlight no matter which role you select. If you expand the components you can see which channel is highlighted, but if it's collapsed... no way to tell. It's an unfinished feature, bug, whatever, and Apple takes it seriously. X is amazing, but it's not done, not by a long shot. And honestly, I find that pretty exciting. :-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 1:51:39 pm

[Bill Davis] "It's the one that "lights up" when I select Show Role= FX from my Timeline Index. Which means I can have both clip collision avoidance AND the ability to seek and find by roles all the time.Sweet!"

So in this new speedy paradigm of editing every time I want to move a clip from dialogue to fx I have to stop and re-assign it's role. And then to understand what I have when looking at my timeline I have to select something on an index list and it will show up but of course only one thing shows up at a time so there is no way of indicating the various aspects of the mix at one glance - so I get to assign roles, select from an index, and still I don't have the complete organization visually available - ah ha, this is obviously progress.

Bill, you can't have it both ways. There are no tracks in FCPX, there are only timeline elements that look like tracks, but since they do not have the utility of tracks they are no more like them than a picture of a car is like a car.

A trade-off was made with the magnetic timeline - clip avoidance for track organization. I certainly understand why some editors would see the trade-off as a plus, but to pretend there was no trade-off is to deny reality.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 2:59:12 am

[Herb Sevush] "So is that track 3 or 4, when I'm looking at the screen and want to know where to adjust something."

Select it in the timeline index and you are "teleported" there.

Some people need to see the map and travel along the road.
Others just need the coordinates and land where they have to be.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 1:55:19 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Some people need to see the map and travel along the road.
Others just need the coordinates and land where they have to be."


And some fly to where the puck will be 3 hours from now, only the game is over, your team has lost, the rink is closed and no one's left to sell you a sno cone.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 2:07:09 pm

[Herb Sevush] "And some fly to where the puck will be 3 hours from now, only the game is over, your team has lost, the rink is closed and no one's left to sell you a sno cone."

Looks like Apple's won the game then. Skipping the iOS toys, compare Apple's computer growth to other company's. In a down market they seem to be climbing.

I suspect FCPX is doing relatively well for Apple too given the niche.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 2:11:03 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Looks like Apple's won the game then"

Unlike your obsession with the vendors we deal with I am only concerned with whether I win or loose - what is good or bad for Apple, Avid, Adobe or any other multinational corporation is of less importance to me then what brand of toilet paper I'm about to use.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 2:16:33 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Unlike your obsession with the vendors we deal with I am only concerned with whether I win or loose"

Of course that's up to you. Different teams have different strategies on the ice based on their strengths and weakness compared to other teams. You certainly may not like their style of play and, as a player, you may not fit into their strategy. Your agent will just have to look for a team that better suits your skills and style.

That doesn't mean their team is losing, when it's winning though.
They're winning the game even if you don't like the style of play.
Their winning doesn't serve you as a player though. You can't equate that with them being a losing team though.



Return to posts index

Mitch Ives
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:38:58 pm

For the record, his name is Ive, not Ives. As much as I'd be flattered if he had the same last name as me, I'm sure he prefer that we have no connection...

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index

andy lewis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 11:30:01 pm

Before FCPX came out I remember looking at FCP7 and thinking "I hope they don't turn clips into streamlined, shiny objects or anything... but I bet they will."

I really like the flat simplicity of Premiere. A clip should look like the platonic idea of a clip. It's only information, to represent it as an object is unhelpful. Maybe if it looked like piano roll - that's at least providing a real world analogue.

If Ive has any influence on FCPX, maybe it will be getting rid of some of that pointless real-world tinsel.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 11:40:00 pm

arrrg.

oh that's bad - mind you - the man's first name isn't exactly Jony either. It was Jonathan in apple PR for quite a while?
I still kind of remember the first time Jobs was all - "hey Jony" at the apple event.

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


Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 11, 2013 at 11:53:07 pm

I've been using the developer seed of iOS7 all day today too and I also like it. Much easier on the eyes and now every non-apple app looks dated.
I'd love to see what would happen if it trickled to the pro apps, but I've always been an advocate of FCPX becoming MORE apple-ish. I want things like colored roles and volume control in the media browser, etc.

If yesterday was any indication, I think we have lots of improvements to look forward to across the line of pro apps.

John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 12:30:53 am

I am curious what OS level tagging can do for fcpx.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 12, 2013 at 1:13:09 am

It's interesting to see that Sir Jony has decided to "Metro-ize" the software. Kind of ironic that the "tube" is quite the opposite ;-) I like both approaches, though.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

James Sullivan
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 1:18:51 pm

I just had to make corrections to a FCP X timeline for the first time. I have not worked in FCP X at all so I am a biased FCP Legacy professional. It is very hard to look at the new timeline and understand how the previous editor got there. Did he decide to expand audio clips? Is there mixed resolutions and framerates hiding all over the place. How will subtitles and adjustment layers ripple as I start mucking around?

I am also an online editor and if you think I get mad when an AVID editor stacks up more then three tracks imagine the ulcer that FCP X produces.

Tracks help editors organize. Sound design requires lots of tracks.

Can't we all get along?

James



Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 1:35:14 pm

You have to take responsibility to learn the language of FCPX.
Bad mistake for someone throwing FCPX at you without proper training.
FCPX is well organized (assuming the previous editor had the wherewithal).
Understand the timeline, Roles, the use of metadata and you'll understand FCPX.

No I don't want tracks and that's precisely why I like using FCPX after decade of linear editing, decade of Avid editing, decade of FCP Legacy editing.

[James Sullivan] "imagine the ulcer that FCP X produces. "

No ulcer as it's all very obvious to me and much harder to screw things up IMHO.

[James Sullivan] "Sound design requires lots of tracks. "

Which should be done in the appropriate program. It's not difficult to find things if Roles were properly used.



Return to posts index

James Sullivan
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 1:52:23 pm

I am with you. That is why I prefaced the whole comment by explaining my ignorance of FCP X.

The point I was trying to make was platform agnostic. I can open up an AVID, Premiere pro, FCP 7 timeline and know what to expect by looking at it. Even when I get to be comfortable with the new paradigm I still believe that the magnetic timeline, in it's current state, has issues on a very fundamental level. Also, any new editor out of school will never have seen an avid. (Mostly true?) There will be no discipline and as a result FCP X timelines are going to suck to correct by somebody other then the original editor until more information is presented or able to be expanded to the person catching the project as it finishes.

I am not saying that I do not think FCP X is bad. I am just expressing my frustration knowing how it is going to make life difficult for a ton of people until they make it awesome. Was final cut pro 1.0 good? No it barely worked.

I should be able to sound design in an NLE. Is it a proffesional mix? Hell no. But until producers decide to stop changing things and let me promote a project to mix then I would jump out of any NLE as soon as possible. Will this ever happen in the current state of the grind?

Holler,

James



Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 2:47:45 pm

I'm going to vehemently disagree with you.

The fundamental problem I have with other NLEs (and have since 1990) is the conflict with tracks as a compositing vs organizing tool. I want organizing as a separate utility. While Roles still needs more work as an organizing tool, I think it'll make it far easier to find things.

As far as audio work goes, I'd much prefer a direct (smart) link to a proper track based audio tool such as Logic than trying to cram tools that are at cross purposes into an NLE. One might view that as a "track mode" where necessary but I don't want to "walk into" an NLE with tracks at cross purposes. Personally that was what I dreaded back when I did Avid freelance. With FCPX I find it much easier to find things, especially with the Timeline Index, which, as an old linear editor, provides me the best of a scrolling EDL (now on steroids as far as finding stuff) along with a non linear timeline where, at any given point, I can see exactly what's happening without having to sort out what purpose a track serves.



Return to posts index

James Sullivan
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 3:08:11 pm

Great point! I actually am looking forward to the right project to start learning how to use FCP X the way it was designed. I can't wait to tag footage and setup massive amounts of metadata about all of the assets that hit the timeline.

Roles are going to be good too. My concern s that not everybody will use the program the "right way". Tracks were at least some common denominator that forced everybody into doing some things that made sense at the time.

I am curious. How many "tracks" do you normally get to in a standard edit? 3 deep on video and then however many audio tracks stack up?

James



Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 4:04:47 pm

[James Sullivan] "Roles are going to be good too. My concern s that not everybody will use the program the "right way"."

In fact the very subject is often a hot topic here. If one tries to force into being something it's not (track based) it will be a frustrating experience for the editor. Given it's the only NLE (at the least the only "major" one) that's not track based, it require a lot of rethinking.

[James Sullivan] "Tracks were at least some common denominator that forced everybody into doing some things that made sense at the time."

True. But I never had them as a linear editor (had to build elements for composting and keep them well labeled for revising) nor in my first NLE, CMX6000. In many respects, with 20/20 hindsight, a now see FCPS as the "other" direction NLEs could have gone in when they first appeared entirely on computers in the late '80s.

Keep in mind that FCPX isn't going to inherently present an editor picking up a job, an easier experience finding stuff. Like any NLE, it really helps if the preceding editor knows how to organize the project. Just as one can badly organize tracks in an Avid or have poorly organizes bins, one can badly organize Roles and Keyword collections in FCPX.

The key, and the thing many of us are still learning in FCPX, is the depth, variety and control one has in organizing things in FCPX. As articles appear online by experienced FCPX editors discussing their workflows, one begins to see how there are many different ways and philosophies in organizing things in FCPX, even for the same type of content.

The key to finding things in the timeline though is Roles and, admittedly, there's still some shortcomings in the current implementation. If the project's well organized, with Roles and the Timeline Index, it should be easy to find "John Dialogue" or "SFX" or "SOT" or "Music" though.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 3:10:43 pm

Craig, I'll concede everything you wrote except for this one line:

[Craig Seeman] "With FCPX I find it much easier to find things, especially with the Timeline Index, which, as an old linear editor, provides me the best of a scrolling EDL (now on steroids as far as finding stuff) along with a non linear timeline where, at any given point, I can see exactly what's happening without having to sort out what purpose a track serves."

There is no "sorting out what purpose a track serves", that's the beauty of tracks. You establish a format, put it on a post-it if you need to, and then you know at a glance exactly what's on any track without any sorting out, and it will be consistent no matter where you are on the timeline. In many cases it is consistent from timeline to timeline. For the most part any experienced editor can look at any other trained editors timeline on any NLE ever created (except for X) and they will know what they are looking at without any "sorting out."

With X you need to go through your index which highlights roles, but only highlights one role at a time, and whenever you move anywhere in the timeline you have to do it again because unless you are working around the magnetic timeline with some sort of "secondaries" strategy, you can never know what's going on just by looking.

I understand that you find this a trifling trade-off for your perceived gain, but it is a trade-off none the less. At this moment there is no way for FCPX to be as visually coherent as a normal timeline. Whether or not Apple feels like changing this in the future is debatable, especially since editors like you seem to find it so unimportant.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 4:33:43 pm

[Herb Sevush] "There is no "sorting out what purpose a track serves", that's the beauty of tracks."

As per my follow up post. It's easy to find "John Dialogue" Music, EFX, SOT, etc. as long as it was properly tagged. It's not displayed linearly though and I can see some have a serious problem with that. To me, personally, I find "John Dialogue" more helpful than trying to remember what A6 is for example. In fact, for me, That's even easier to deal with then trying to figure out what A15 is compared to A19 when you start getting into many different track organization functions. For me, the name is more important than the linear display. Admittedly that's because how my brain seems to work.

[Herb Sevush] "You establish a format, put it on a post-it if you need to"

There's nothing like picking up another person's edit and not finding the post-it. Your V5 may not be what I use V5 for. Roles forces you to put the "post-it" on each clip. Of course if that's not done (things left at defaults when that's inadequate) walking in to an FCPX job would certainly be a bad experience. There's nothing like seeing "Dialogue" when you really should have broken things out to "John Dialogue" and "Jane Dialogue" but then you can walk into a track based edit and find someone put Dialogue and SFX on the same track at times as well. FCPX is not exempt from poor organization. I just find "John Dialogue" easier to understand than trying to figure out what A5 was used for.

[Herb Sevush] "With X you need to go through your index which highlights roles"

But I like this. I guess as a linear editor I find the index like a much improved EDL with metadata in which I can find any clip and any Role and click on it and be there. At that point in time, on the timeline, I see everything I need that's relevant without out a slew of empty tracks. I like the consolidated vertical space.

[Herb Sevush] "At this moment there is no way for FCPX to be as visually coherent as a normal timeline."

To me FCPX is the "normal" timeline and tracks are aberrant. Vertical space is used only to the extent needed at that point in time. Horizontal space (time) stretching before/after what I need to see isn't important to my task at hand precisely because I don't have to worry about track composting vs track organizing continuity.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 2:50:32 pm

[Craig Seeman] "There's nothing like picking up another person's edit and not finding the post-it. Your V5 may not be what I use V5 for. Roles forces you to put the "post-it" on each clip."

One of the lovely touches of my dear departed *edit is that you could apply a name to any track and it would appear where the track header was - amazed that other NLE's haven't tried this. The "post-it" becomes part of the timeline.

[Craig Seeman] "I guess as a linear editor I find the index like a much improved EDL with metadata in which I can find any clip and any Role and click on it and be there. At that point in time, on the timeline, I see everything I need that's relevant without out a slew of empty tracks. I like the consolidated vertical space."

When I get producer's notes after I submit my cut I travel thru the timeline (back to front) stopping at the time codes indicated, trying to fix problems that have been pointed out to me - when I get to a spot my task is to understand what's going on in the timeline so I can make corrections - you seem to focus on looking for things and having your index take you there, my focus is on already being somewhere and trying to figure out what's going on.

[Craig Seeman] "To me FCPX is the "normal" timeline and tracks are aberrant."

Unless you've stopped working with any other NLE you are talking about preference not normality. Normatives aren't subjective. Yes, to the sub-class of editors who solely work in X, and have never worked with anything else, tracks are not normal; but to the much larger class of editors with experience in the entire scope of editing, tracks are the norm, even if you don't like them.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 3:06:16 pm

[Herb Sevush] "One of the lovely touches of my dear departed *edit is that you could apply a name to any track and it would appear where the track header was - amazed that other NLE's haven't tried this. The "post-it" becomes part of the timeline. "

I never used *edit, but if I'm understanding it correctly you want the option to name your tracks (eg., A1 as Dialogue, A2 as SFX, etc)? If so, both Avid and Premiere give you this functionality. Avid has had it for years, Premiere I know has had it since 5.5 (probably sooner).

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 3:11:37 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Unless you've stopped working with any other NLE you are talking about preference not normality. "

Preceding NLEs, for 10 years I had no tracks. On my first NLE, the CMX6000, I had no tracks. Trackless timelines predate tracks. That's normal to me.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:22:18 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Preceding NLEs, for 10 years I had no tracks. On my first NLE, the CMX6000, I had no tracks. Trackless timelines predate tracks. That's normal to me."

If your trying to say you've edited for years without a timeline, yes that's true, so did I. But your claiming that you've edited on "trackless timelines" for years, and that it was the norm for you - OK show me. Just remember that an EDL is not a timeline, under any definition. A timeline, which is a graphic representation of a film editors bench, has always had tracks up till now.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:27:41 pm

[Herb Sevush] "But your claiming that you've edited on "trackless timelines" for years, and that it was the norm for you - OK show me"

NLEs, CMX6000, I believe the first version of Avid 1989, Media 100 I believe was only a title track. So early NLEs were also trackless. Avid added tracks IIR and then others followed (CMX went under). I believe EMC also had no tracks although I only trained but never did actual jobs with it.



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:35:22 pm

Tracks versus trackless. Your info is largely incorrect. These systems had at least 1 picture track and 2 audio tracks. At least Avid did. Before that film tables did, too. Linear systems as well, since you were editing to a linear tape format. By definition these had 1 picture and multiple audio tracks.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:57:42 pm

Tracks as far as something one used as an organizing tool, didn't happen until one had more than one Video track and more than two Audio tracks.

At that point tracks developed two (and in my opinion conflicting) functions for layering and organizing. That is the root of the problem for me.

[Oliver Peters] "Linear systems as well, since you were editing to a linear tape format. By definition these had 1 picture and multiple audio tracks."

And layer meant building elements on separate reels which one labeled and saved separately. Those "tagged" elements are much close to Roles (Roles being separately tagged elements based on clip and not track).



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 6:11:56 pm

[Craig Seeman] "
And layer meant building elements on separate reels which one labeled and saved separately. Those "tagged" elements are much close to Roles (Roles being separately tagged elements based on clip and not track)."


I think you are REALLY stretching the analogy!!! ;-)

If you edited in a linear bay, you often had multiple source playback decks and a 2 or 3 M/E video switcher. This let you layer composites that were recorded to a single video track. If you are really determined to compared this to FCP X, then think of this comparison as a Compound Clip. Definitely not Roles. ;-)

But to Herb's point - to date, almost every linear and nonlinear edit system that deviated from tracks ultimately went back to establishing a track-based timeline. Or the product or company has long since gone out of business.

I'm not saying Apple will do that with FCP X, but that's the history so far.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 6:27:32 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I think you are REALLY stretching the analogy!!!"

No, I think there's reasons why some veterans (maybe not many) liked FCPX early on. After thinking it through I'm finally able to articulate one possibility. I've felt tracks were a kludge the moment I had to deal with the conflicting use of layers vs organization. Organization had always been separate for me and I prefer it that way. I don't think I'm alone in that.

[Oliver Peters] "If you edited in a linear bay, you often had multiple source playback decks and a 2 or 3 M/E video switcher. This let you layer composites that were recorded to a single video track."

Often I had to build and layoff elements to layer. This was even more so in the days before pre-read or the Abekas recorder.

And yes the separate machines didn't exist as "tracks."

[Oliver Peters] "If you are really determined to compared this to FCP X, then think of this comparison as a Compound Clip. Definitely not Roles."

If I built an element reel of mattes or fills or voices overs they each played a role. The reel ID (role) could be found in the list. While you may look at builds or elements as compound clips, i'm thinking of ID elements that would appear in my decision list. The timeline though was singular though. With FCPX those items are non destructively "connected" and movable.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:40:47 pm

[Craig Seeman] "NLEs, CMX6000, I believe the first version of Avid 1989, Media 100 I believe was only a title track. So early NLEs were also trackless. Avid added tracks IIR and then others followed (CMX went under). I believe EMC also had no tracks although I only trained but never did actual jobs with it."

I owned an EMC and it had A/V tracks. I worked briefly on Media 100 and it had A/V tracks. What did the CMX6000 timeline look like if it didn't have tracks? Seriously, if you could post a drawing I'd be interested.

The fact that Avid didn't have tracks early in it's gestation but then switched over might tell you something. You've already posted about your long experience working with both Premiere and Avid - tracks in both cases, and I bet you spent a lot more time with them than with the CMX 6000.

No matter how you want to spin it I would guess that over 90% of your own career spent working on anything with a timeline, previous to X, was spent working on something that had A/V tracks. Which is why as much as you keep fighting it, the truth is "normal" and "trackless timeline" don't go together.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 6:01:55 pm

[Herb Sevush] "No matter how you want to spin it I would guess that over 90% of your own career spent working on anything with a timeline, previous to X, was spent working on something that had A/V tracks. Which is why as much as you keep fighting it, the truth is "normal" and "trackless timeline" don't go together."

See my response to Oliver. Personally I think one NLE when in the direction of layered tracks and the others followed. If one had thought of these as elements (Roles) then something could have headed in the direction FCPX is going in.

To me, FCPX seems in many respects another natural outgrowth of the linear edit system. The Time Index, a metadata improved version of the scrolling edit decision list and Roles are the tagged elements used when compositing or otherwise layering simultaneous events.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 6:13:10 pm

OK so now I see where the semantical problem is coming from. You define as "trackless" anything that only has 2 audio tracks and 1 video track, regardless of the fact that they have actual tracks. OK got it.

I will still bet dollars to donuts that you've spent the overwhelming majority of your career working on tracked timelines vs trackless. And since this whole mini-thread was based on your calling trackless "normal" as opposed to "preferred" your still wrong.

Look, I know you can't ever bare to be admit error, but it would really be good for you, I promise on my 25 years in therapy - it'll be ok, it's a small point about word useage, it doesn't mean you're "wrong" as a person, it was just a tiny misuse of a word, a slip of the writer's tongue as it were.

Go on, you can do it, you know you want to say it ... I was wr.....

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 6:38:29 pm

[Herb Sevush] "you've spent the overwhelming majority of your career working on tracked timelines vs trackless."

That doesn't mean I liked it or preferred it. I spent over 10 years pre tracks and the next 20 some unhappy that tracks created a conflict between layering and organizing.

[Herb Sevush] "Look, I know you can't ever bare to be admit error"

It's not either/or. There are several different ways of looking at things. Several interpretations. There are reasons why some veterans like FCPX from the beginning and I am articulating one point of view. Obviously not your point of view. I never liked the layer/organization conflict.

For some of us, FCPX felt like a "natural" progression and I now understand why.
I still have my decision list with Timeline Index but with major metadata improvements.
I'm still dealing with a single Timeline but with the ability to layer.
Each "shot" is tagged by purpose (Role).

To me, and I suspect other older editors, this is a natural progression. Someone who didn't feel it was a natural progression would have been less inclined to like FCPX. Different points of view. I believe it's why some few veterans liked it (or saw its potential) even when it was bereft of critical features.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 7:09:19 pm

[Craig Seeman] "To me, and I suspect other older editors, this is a natural progression. Someone who didn't feel it was a natural progression would have been less inclined to like FCPX. "

I see, now we're moving from "normal" to "natural." Hey they both start with the letter N so I guess it works.

Craig, I'm glad I've never had to negotiate a contract with you.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 7:45:42 pm

[Herb Sevush] "I see, now we're moving from "normal" to "natural." Hey they both start with the letter N so I guess it works."

It was normal for the first 10 years or so I edited including the first generation (first versions) of NLEs as well. The the "new normal" was created. ;-) That felt unnatural to me.

[Herb Sevush] "Craig, I'm glad I've never had to negotiate a contract with you."

I resserve that for clients mostly.



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 15, 2013 at 5:01:55 am

[Herb Sevush] "At this moment there is no way for FCPX to be as visually coherent as a normal timeline."

I have to push back on this.

As soon as you start to understand the vertical stack linkage in X, you start to see the arrangements of the MODULES that make up chunks of the magnetic timeline.

You stop thinking about what the ENTIRE track has to do for it's entire length - and you start to see the structure of the module as an entity. If this module has the SFX on layer 5 - and the next one has the SFX on layer 3 - you can SEE it's because the first mod has extra elements that make layer 5 the best place to put the SFX for that arrangement.

You keep imagining that the ONLY way to know where the SFX is is to have ONE track for it.

That's just not true. I can hear it. I can see it by looking at the stack arrangement. And if for some reason things are too complex for me to "read" the arrangement - I can highlight the Role and the software will LIGHT UP the SFX in the stack arrangement I'm working with wherever it is.

Holding on to the idea that you NEED a discrete track to organize your thinking in X - well that IS "you're holding it wrong." And for many things (the sport of fencing comes to mind) you will never get the best results until you learn to properly grip the weapon - and, perhaps even more important - why that's the proper way to hold it.

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: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 15, 2013 at 5:21:24 pm

[Bill Davis] "hat's just not true. I can hear it. I can see it by looking at the stack arrangement. And if for some reason things are too complex for me to "read" the arrangement - I can highlight the Role and the software will LIGHT UP the SFX in the stack arrangement I'm working with wherever it is."

Bill, no one is saying you can't find a piece of audio on the timeline. What you can't do easily is navigate by it. A timeline is simply a visual representation of the order of events. It's essentially a graphical edl.

When I'm editing it is a strong advantage for me to see, at a glance, the location of my material and its spatial relation to other material, and to see it quickly. Being able to highlight roles is a step in the right direction, though not complete, since it only highlights one set of things at a time, and must be selected/deselected. Color-coding is probably the answer, though its probably difficult to implement, as Charlie points out, because of channel conflicts.

I think that's a fair question to ask when deciding about the current version of FCP X: What's more important to you--a more accurate map of events, or a timeline that is easier to re-arrange? A lot of people don't need the extra detail. I do.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 15, 2013 at 7:50:53 pm

[Chris Harlan] "I think that's a fair question to ask when deciding about the current version of FCP X: What's more important to you--a more accurate map of events, or a timeline that is easier to re-arrange? A lot of people don't need the extra detail. I do."

What he said.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 3:07:13 pm

[James Sullivan] "Did he decide to expand audio clips?"

Expanding audio clips is non destructive. You can expand and not expand at will. you can also expand just the splits which makes it easy to see overlaps.

[James Sullivan] "Is there mixed resolutions and framerates hiding all over the place. "

You can select all the clips in the timeline, open the inspector, and check. If you get a "Multiple Values" returned in the frame rate field and frame size fields, then the answer is, yes. ;)

I hope that the timeline index and pick up this information one day as it would make conform, or at least identifying what needs conform a snap.

[James Sullivan] "How will subtitles and adjustment layers ripple as I start mucking around? "

Just as you want them to, or not.

[James Sullivan] "Can't we all get along?"

yeah, just as long as you do it our way. :-D


Return to posts index

James Sullivan
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 4:39:51 pm

Sorry I am still in the middle of FCP X growing pains. I used to be able to look at a timeline and know what my dad was going to be like.

A question for Craig: What is the most important thing you have learned from adapting to so many new NLEs? I am only on my 4th and want to tap out.


James



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 4:45:12 pm

[James Sullivan] " used to be able to look at a timeline and know what my dad was going to be like. "

Wow. Those must be some pretty profound timelines! ;)

Yes, FCPX takes some rethinking, and it takes some actual real world use to get up to speed.

Once it's there, though, it all makes sense.

There is also some responsibility fro Apple to add more feature capability. These are still fairly early days, even two years later.


Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 4:48:09 pm

I always found that no matter where I looked or what software I used, my Dad was always unpredictable.

Even after I've used FCPX for a year solid, I'll have to make revisions and have a momentary 'oh crap'. Then I just get into it and start plugging away it all works out.

John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 5:04:22 pm

[James Sullivan] "What is the most important thing you have learned from adapting to so many new NLEs?"

Get as much "play time" as possible before working with a client. Ideally, if one has control, it's best if the first few jobs are unsupervised.



Return to posts index

James Sullivan
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 5:06:19 pm

Amen brother.

James



Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 13, 2013 at 5:13:30 pm

And the worst possible situation is being asked to pick up someone else's edit before one gets a handle on the given NLE. Even when NLEs seem similar the subtle differences, especially when the impact how another editor organizes things, can tie you knots.



Return to posts index

Mathieu Ghekiere
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 2:10:20 pm

To be honest, because of the magnetic timeline, I often find that in FCPX I can re-work an excisting timeline much EASIER then I could in FCP7. I can just remove things, replace some stuff, most of it all stays in sync, depending on how you put your beats of course. Sometimes with music as a connected clip, this isn't the case, but still. I had to do some changes on a timeline recently, and it was so quick to change things, check it, and export it.

The magneticism is definitely something you have to learn to work with. And there are some instances where it still works against you, and not for you (I had my time of hating secondary storylines), but a lot of it is adjustment, and it works like a dream once you get used to it.
And with lifting things from their storyline, working with connected clips, you can override some magnetics. A lot of time I think in FCPX we seem to have best of both worlds.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 14, 2013 at 2:37:42 pm

I find the magnetic timeline to be much faster in this regard as well.

Changes aren't as difficult to untangle.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 15, 2013 at 5:22:10 am

And the speed and convenience doesn't all live in the timeline any more.

I had a client call today needing me to send their artist a quick snapshot of a graphic element from a X project I did more than a year ago - so a new artist could match the style of the old piece.

ALL the clips from that timeline were long ago archived - but I kept it in my project library for reference - linked to nothing but a small iPhone version export to drive the Project Library view.

Found that in my Shared Assets folder - (still there even tho ALL the project assets were long archived and offline) - and was able to scan right to the frame in my project library. Launch and do a screen cap - and sent it to the client all inside 30 seconds.

A gentle reminder that with X I'm working in an editing system - not just an isolated editing program any more.

As you grow to know more about how it operates, you find these little possibilities that make things easier on a day to day basis.

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: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 15, 2013 at 12:19:39 pm

"Found that in my Shared Assets folder - (still there even tho ALL the project assets were long archived and offline) - and was able to scan right to the frame in my project library. Launch and do a screen cap - and sent it to the client all inside 30 seconds."

But all you are describing is a self contained file that lives with the edited project. This function has been available with just about every NLE for over a decade.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 15, 2013 at 4:17:23 pm

The distinction, Oliver, is that because X is referential and almost entirely metadata based, it's constantly creating useful elements automatically that the user is not necessarily aware of, but that become valuable as you better come to understand the structure of the program. Legacy never had anything close to X's "one click Share" at the app level and then to be able to use those reference files to populate a persistent and "live" library of the users work. This is new. And it's useful because the structure is solving common problems like needing to access and export historical versions that you didn't anticipate. It's a small but real convenience, IMO, stemming from the way X was re-imagined.

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: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 15, 2013 at 4:52:49 pm

[Bill Davis] "The distinction, Oliver, is that because X is referential and almost entirely metadata based, it's constantly creating useful elements automatically that the user is not necessarily aware of, but that become valuable as you better come to understand the structure of the program"

I guess the part I'm having confusion with is this. You are referring to the fact that a media file is being stored in the Shared Items folder - if and only if - you select one of the presets, like a DVD or a Vimeo upload, where that's part of the macro. It doesn't happen at all if you choose to export a Master File from the Share menu. So yes, X has a cleaner workflow with some built-in functions, but I fail to see how that is inherently different than what went before it.

For example, if you export a Master File to an external drive and then archive your Events and Projects. Then there is no direct link from that Master File back to the Project, unless the operator manually loads it back up. What am I missing here?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Jony Ives and the next FCPX GUI
on Jun 15, 2013 at 5:29:01 pm

[Oliver Peters] " guess the part I'm having confusion with is this. You are referring to the fact that a media file is being stored in the Shared Items folder - if and only if - you select one of the presets, like a DVD or a Vimeo upload, where that's part of the macro. It doesn't happen at all if you choose to export a Master File from the Share menu. So yes, X has a cleaner workflow with some built-in functions, but I fail to see how that is inherently different than what went before it.

For example, if you export a Master File to an external drive and then archive your Events and Projects. Then there is no direct link from that Master File back to the Project, unless the operator manually loads it back up. What am I missing here?
"


Yes. I don't understand either.


Return to posts index

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