FORUMS: list search recent posts

FCP X and Premiere Pro CS

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
David Mathis
FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 5:51:15 pm

Just the other day as my mind was going around in circles I was thinking does it make sense to have both installed on the same system? In some aspects X does have its advantages but sometimes I feel Premiere might be a more appropriate tool.

For me sometimes tracks make more sense because I have greater control of where a clip goes in relation to everything around it. Granted it is possible to do the same thing X but seems to require more steps than really necessary. As an example, most of the clips are on the bottom "track" above it is some light leak footage and on top of that is a title. I want to have all my graphics on the same "track" but X connects it to what clip is below it. The same can be said for audio. Perhaps there is something I am not understanding on a clear basis. I could even fighting the interface but to me tracks are more useful.

I just want certain clips to share a common space and not have the software dictate where it goes. That is just my honest opinion and welcome any feedback or thoughts on the matter.


Return to posts index

Julian Bowman
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 6:28:15 pm

One of the issues I really have with X is not being able to 'connect' clips in secondary lanes to other clips in secondary lanes. Forcing every clip to be 'connected' to the primary lane sometimes creates real and needless hassle. A good example is when I am cutting up music to lay down. I want all my bits of music connected to each other and ideally to anchor them to the start of the timeline without them being dependent upon a primary clip.

Sure, I can create a compound, but having to do so means I have to enter the compound window to make any changes, changes which then occur without the rest of the timeline in view.

If I could connect them all to themselves and then anchor them to the start i'd be happy.

I come across other times when moving or deleting something from the primary simply breaks my edit and it is most annoying when I don't realise it is broken till further down the line.

Again, being able to connect secondary clips to other secondary clips and being able to anchor them to the start would be a good addition.



Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 6:40:00 pm
Last Edited By Brett Sherman on Feb 14, 2014 at 6:41:21 pm

I think the bottom-line is if you need tracks then FCP X is not for you. I don't think they are going to bring back tracks. If they do, it will be something like organizing clips by role which is not exactly tracks.

For me, I don't miss tracks one bit. Where I used to have to have a minimum of 10 audio tracks in FCP 7. Now I have a couple audio tracks below the primary. Every once in awhile I run into a conundrum with the connected clips, but not very often. There are different conundrums you run into with a track-style editor. I'm not sure you could say one is better than another in that regard.

What I wish they would allow is transitions between clips not in the same storyline. It would be easy to do. You would just add an transition to the clip on the top. It would transition to whatever is below it. Right now they have to be in the same storyline which I find requires me to break the organizational structure of the video. If I want to transition from section A to section B of the video, I don't want their clips in the same storyline.



Return to posts index


Bret Williams
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 6:48:35 pm

And how would you transition from a clip on track 3 to a clip on track 2 in legacy? It functions exactly the same. Add a dissolve to the clip on "track" 3 and it fades to the clip below. In fact, in X, certain effects will actually pull the background (the clips below) into the effect. Something legacy can't do. So I really don't understand the comment.


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 10:22:31 pm

[Bret Williams] "And how would you transition from a clip on track 3 to a clip on track 2 in legacy? It functions exactly the same. Add a dissolve to the clip on "track" 3 and it fades to the clip below. In fact, in X, certain effects will actually pull the background (the clips below) into the effect. Something legacy can't do. So I really don't understand the comment."

I understand you couldn't do it in legacy either, so I'm not making a comparison. However, nothing was organized in Legacy. The idea of X is that it is organized so you can work in sections and move those sections around easily. With X I like to organize content. Interviews go in primary. B-Roll and Actualities go in the secondary. I find I have to move clips around to get a transition between them, often putting them in a secondary storyline, which then also makes it harder to reorganize.

Now I understand with a dissolve the clips don't need to be in the same storyline. However with a two-sided effects such as a push they do. That's the problem I'm talking about. It seems X should be smart enough to see okay you're trying to add a push, the A side is the clip you apply it to. The B side is whatever is below the clip. It sounds like you're saying some effects do what I'm suggesting. Is that new? Or are there only specific effects it works for? I haven't seen it happen that way.



Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:32:19 am

Many effects work that way. Including the push slide. Depending on what you choose in the inspector. And it's always been that way. It's a feature. and usually, it's outright annoying when the background gets affected with the transition. When I apply a push or other transition to a layer, not to a edit between two clips, I do not want the background to be affected. I want the effect to be a transition between the clip and an invisible transparent clip, revealing the background. It's not a fault in an NLE, but rather the logical default way it should work IMHO.


Return to posts index


Craig Shamwell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 3:14:59 pm

This is still one of my biggest gripes with FCPX...and one that should be at the top of the list to fix!!!


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 4:05:35 pm

Most of those effects can be opened in motion and the background source input be removed. I've only don't it once or twice so I forget the particulars. But yeah, I keep asking myself "who would want the background included?"


Return to posts index

Craig Shamwell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 2:50:54 pm

Ok, now I see what you are saying! On basic transitions it is possible though.


Return to posts index


TImothy Auld
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 11:50:19 pm

Yes. Finally. If you need tracks - whether you want them or not - then FCPX is not for you. I NEED TRACKS. To conform with any number of delivery systems. Jesus Hairy Christ! Who, that delivers programming in the real world, does not see this?

Tim


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 11:55:13 pm

[TImothy Auld] "I NEED TRACKS. To conform with any number of delivery systems. Jesus Hairy Christ! Who, that delivers programming in the real world, does not see this?"

This is an interesting comment. Can you explain what specific delivery systems require you to have tracks?

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:01:12 am

I know, it's terrible, without tracks I can't deliver anything? If only FCPX had tracks I could finally join the "real world"

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index


TImothy Auld
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:52:25 am

Quite happy that you don't have to operate under the constraints that I do, Steve.

Tim


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 2:09:07 am

I never said you were not part of the "real' world, Steve. Just that what FCPX has to offer at the moment does not - even remotely - meet my needs. Cheers.

Tim


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 17, 2014 at 7:16:35 pm

[Steve Connor] "I know, it's terrible, without tracks I can't deliver anything? If only FCPX had tracks I could finally join the "real world"
"


Glad you finally see it!


Return to posts index


TImothy Auld
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:19:57 am

Really Andy. Are you kidding me? Tracks? Who needs those in the real world?

Tim


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:25:09 am

That's not an answer to my question. I'm asking honestly. What delivery systems require it? Name some for me so I know what exactly you're talking about and can respond.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:32:07 am
Last Edited By TImothy Auld on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:33:33 am

Ok, what are you talking about? What delivery systems require tracks? All of them from my perspective. Some require one thing and another on this track or that but they all require that specific audio be placed on specific tracks. Is this outside of your experience?

Tim


Return to posts index


Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:50:25 am

[TImothy Auld] "they all require that specific audio be placed on specific tracks. Is this outside of your experience?"

No. I'm challenging your assumptions. If you're talking about something like sending a project out to Pro Tools for audio mix, let's look at what they REALLY and actually need. Your average audio mixer will want their import to be in a specific order, right? Dialogue on 1-4, FX on 5-8, and music on 9-12 just to use an example.

Now when the mixer opens his pro tools session is he opening your Avid or FCP7 project? No. Because you exported AAF or OMF to him which translated that audio which you diligently put into tracks. It translated it into the order of tracks that the pro tools session is comprised of. Simple translation. Audio 1 in Avid translates to track 1 in pro tools.

Now throwing out for the moment the mechanism by which you can currently get FCPX audio into pro tools, do you really NEED tracks or do you really just need a way for your audio to be translated correctly into a pro tools organization. I suggest the latter. The idea behind roles is that they allow you to organize your audio for export so that it's translated correctly for the mixer. I don't know how well it works because I don't have pro tools and can't test it, but the concept bears out. If all the pro tools guy really needs is to have his dialogue first, FX next, and music last, then there's no need for tracks if the organization and translation of elements can be done another way.

That is the point I wanted to make about needing tracks.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 1:13:11 am

I don't need or want to think about these things. I need them to work. And they don't in X. I do understand that in a year I may be working with this thing (as I used to call Avid) but right now I don't care. FCPX does not work for me or anything that I have to deliver. It may work in a 4K workflow (not even remotely a delivery situation) thing that I have coming up soon. But who is starting and ending post production in FCPX in a complex workflow right now? Or in six months? Or in a year? Or in five years? Can anyone out there tell me seriously that FCPX is a part of a five year business plan?

Tim


Return to posts index

Craig Shamwell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 2:56:09 pm

Timothy you are being very disrespectful of this forum and those who want more info about your workflow so we can more accurately help you understand that maybe your concerns may be outdated.
Unless you have a very specific agenda, which it seem you do with your statements, you need to go somewhere else and post.


Return to posts index

Howard Duy Vu
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 1:07:21 am

[TImothy Auld] "Ok, what are you talking about? What delivery systems require tracks? All of them from my perspective. Some require one thing and another on this track or that but they all require that specific audio be placed on specific tracks. Is this outside of your experience?"

Whatever, man. You're trolling or you don't even understand the basics of X. You give roles or subroles to audio and video in FCPX. Stuff like Music, and a subrole can be Music.Background or Music.Theme, whatever you want. It even makes more sense than A1, A2, etc.; it gets you to think about the CONTENT rather than what track it's on. From there, you export an AAF for something like Pro Tools (using XtoPro). It will translate these roles to tracks for Pro Tools, all nice and organized. You can even export a master with audio splits instantly cause it can put each role in a separate track in the quicktime. In the old way, an AE would have to take time to organize your crap.



Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 1:18:00 am

I have forgotten more about organization than you will ever know,

Tim


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 3:16:16 am

[TImothy Auld] "I have forgotten more about organization than you will ever know,"

Every single time someone has uttered this to me, it has been complete b.s.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 3:24:55 am

Is there a subject and a predicate there?

Tim


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 3:31:33 am
Last Edited By TImothy Auld on Feb 15, 2014 at 3:33:04 am

Not to mention that I did not "utter" it to you but to Mr. Duy Vu. Perhaps you should best let him respond.

Tim


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:16:44 am

And to finally put this to bed (he says like anyone will listen) You can do ANYTHING in X that you can do in 7 or Avid or Premiere CC (execpt for multi cam in CC) that you can do in any NLE. The problem here is that Apple thinks they are driving the post production debate, And from my perspective they should just give up. Someone tell me who is delivering anything (and yes I"ll take crocodile or housewife stuff) started and finished on FCP X. Anyone? Bueller?

Tim


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 7:52:52 am

[Brett Sherman] "Every once in awhile I run into a conundrum with the connected clips, but not very often. There are different conundrums you run into with a track-style editor. I'm not sure you could say one is better than another in that regard."

I honestly can't think of a time when I had a "conundrum" with a track-based editor. Can you elaborate? Not trying to be obnoxious; truly curious.

Chris


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 16, 2014 at 3:01:47 am

Moving a clip with audio and video from one part of the timeline to another where there is an audio track already there.

Lengthening an video clip puts a gap in your music track because you have an edit in it. So do you trim the audio and video together or do you trim the video then cut the gap you've created out.

Or worse, you try to shorten your video clip by trimming it, but you can't because two audio clips that abut each other won't let you.

There are always these sort of problems to solve when your trimming. Yes, there are ways to solve them. The same is true with FCP X. There are always solutions.



Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 16, 2014 at 3:15:02 am

Okay, I guess it's just a case of differences in perception. I don't necessarily see those situations as "conundrums," but as "editing." The nice thing about Media Composer is that it has wonderful asynchronous trimming, so you can decide in advance which side of abutted clips you want to trim and how to deal with music beds under video clips, etc. There will, of course, be times when you have to clean up the results of an edit, but because every edit is unique, I don't know how a software package could know what I want to do in all instances. I'd rather be the one in control, I guess.

Chris


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 16, 2014 at 9:52:48 pm

[Chris Conlee] " I don't know how a software package could know what I want to do in all instances. I'd rather be the one in control, I guess.
"


I think that's my point. No software eliminates these things. I think it's wrong to presume that FCP X doesn't let you control things. The particular user interface motions may be different but both Avid and FCP X sometimes require multiple actions to make the edit you want. By the way, I edited with Avid for about 8 years.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 17, 2014 at 7:31:01 pm
Last Edited By Chris Harlan on Feb 17, 2014 at 7:37:20 pm

EDIT: I've read further and I understand a bit more about what you are saying. I agree with Chris that what you define as conundrums, I just think of as editing. These are basically questions I would be asking about the material itself, and not about what I was using to make it happen. I agree that there are situations that X might be better suited for than other NLEs. For what I do, I don't see it.

[Brett Sherman] "Moving a clip with audio and video from one part of the timeline to another where there is an audio track already there."

Well, only if you don't know what you are doing, or haven't organized properly. If you mean you have to think about it briefly, well--yes. But I'd be thinking about which piece of audio belongs there anyway, right?

[Brett Sherman] "Lengthening an video clip puts a gap in your music track because you have an edit in it. So do you trim the audio and video together or do you trim the video then cut the gap you've created out.
"


I don't understand this. In my world, I'm crafting the video and audio tracks to work very tightly together. Scoring. If I add a line, or a scream, or a thunderbolt, I will always be paying special attention to how it affects the score. I wouldn't want the system auto-healing for me.


[Brett Sherman] "Or worse, you try to shorten your video clip by trimming it, but you can't because two audio clips that abut each other won't let you."

This I don't get at all. How would audio clips keep you from trimming video?


Return to posts index

Craig Shamwell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47:24 pm

Uhhhh....not true about clips above the primary storyline adding transitions.


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 6:42:35 pm

[Julian Bowman] "A good example is when I am cutting up music to lay down. I want all my bits of music connected to each other and ideally to anchor them to the start of the timeline without them being dependent upon a primary clip."

Use a secondary storyline, not a compound clip. It does everything you want it to and you can even edit directly into it from the event browser.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Julian Bowman
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 6:57:44 pm

What if the audio tracks overlap, which they often do?



Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 7:03:47 pm

Audio tracks CAN overlap in the secondary storyline. It works the same as it does in the primary. Here's a picture of what it looks like.



Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 6:43:19 pm

Don't put the music in a compound. Put it in a secondary and connect it wherever is most appropriate. Which is actually an advantage over a track based system. Suppose you're working on a video and the only thing that is important is how the music timing ends in conjunction with those last 4 shots. Have your music edit in a secondary, connected to the last clip. Then you can edit earlier parts of the video and audio without worry of how it's going to ripple the music down, screwing up the important end timing.


Return to posts index

Julian Bowman
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 6:59:43 pm

Fine for that specific example, but i tend to get to the end, at the end. I start at the beginning then work through the middle.

To be honest no responses to my issue have offered a more viable solution than allowing secondary clips to be connected to other secondary clips. Without that option (and ideally the opportunity to anchor them to the start of the timeline and not the first primary clip) then it will be one workaround or another.



Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 9:24:10 pm

If you're just editing your music, and you don't want to tie those edits to specific visuals, I tend to put the musician a storyline vs a compound clip.



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 10:30:23 pm

minor rant: I would like to target and overwrite a connected clip. I can't - new entrants outside the primary are indestructible entries - until you nominate and produce a secondary storyline.

it's a form of lunacy. there is far too much unbreakable hierarchy, and way too much confused modality between connected, secondary and primary, given they are all identical V/A objects entering the timeline.

completely personally, the X timeline is pre-structured with a degree of meccano intention that I actually can't stand. it's close to nails on a blackboard.

also there are all these default lines connecting everything to the primary. has anyone noticed that? why in the sweet christ am I having to look at that.

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


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 10:47:14 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I would like to target and overwrite a connected clip. I can't - new entrants outside the primary are indestructible entries - until you nominate and produce a secondary storyline."

Select connected clip. Go up to event browser. Choose new clip. Hit SHIFT+R to replace old connected clip with new one. The way FCPX does a standard replace edit is more like overwrite. It only works on a single clip, but it works fine. I almost never use overwrite as an option in X. Scratch that, I NEVER use overwrite as an option. I never find it necessary. Even if I want to overwrite a number of connected clips with a single long clip, the replace edit will time out to the length you choose in the browser, not the clip length in the timeline and it will connect above other connected clips down the line, making them unviewable. You can just lasso the other clips and delete them if you want to keep your sequence organized.

[Aindreas Gallagher] "also there are all these default lines connecting everything to the primary. has anyone noticed that? why in the sweet christ am I having to look at that."

You don't have to look at the connecting anchors. Go to the timeline display options (button in bottom right of project window). Uncheck the Show Connections box.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 11:03:21 pm

[Andy Neil] "the replace edit will time out to the length you choose in the browser"

What if you don't want this behavior? In my experience I want the opposite result virtually all the time.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 11:12:01 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "What if you don't want this behavior? In my experience I want the opposite result virtually all the time."

I was addressing Aindreas' desire to overwrite a connected clip. If you're looking to do a replace edit where the length of the clip in the timeline determines the length of the replacing clip, then you use one of the other replace functions: Replace at Start (OPT+R), and Replace at End (mappable).

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 11:16:18 pm

And if I wanted to do an actual replace edit as it is commonly know, that would be easy, right?

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 11:25:06 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "And if I wanted to do an actual replace edit as it is commonly know, that would be easy, right?"

Of course not. But I know you know that, Simon so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by playing dumb. Aindreas was talking about overwriting connected clips and I was simply trying to show a method that might give him what he's looking for that might be overlooked by most people not used to how FCPX does replace edits.

X doesn't have the ability to do playhead sync replace edits. It's a pet peeve of mine actually, but it also has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I'll tell you what, I wish to hell that Avid could do an FCPX style replace edit because I find that I need that kind of edit often.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 17, 2014 at 7:43:26 pm

[Andy Neil] "But I know you know that, Simon so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by playing dumb. "

Seriously? He was making a point, not playing dumb. You need to check your irony scanners; they may need a little oil.


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 17, 2014 at 8:23:02 pm

[Andy Neil] "I wish to hell that Avid could do an FCPX style replace edit because I find that I need that kind of edit often"

Because I'm not familiar with FCPX's method of doing this, how does it work? Honestly, I'd be surprised if Avid couldn't do it.

Chris


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 17, 2014 at 8:39:07 pm

[Chris Conlee] "Because I'm not familiar with FCPX's method of doing this, how does it work? Honestly, I'd be surprised if Avid couldn't do it."

It's a two function solution in Avid. The basic replace edit in FCPX will replace a clip in the project with the IN/OUT of the clip in the browser, changing the length of the timeline clip to match the length of the browser clip and if done in the primary storyline, it moves the rest of the timeline down to make room.

In Avid, it's equivalent to doing a replace edit and then a trim of the new clip to match a new length.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 17, 2014 at 9:11:06 pm

Gotcha. Yeah, that would be helpful on occasion. And you're correct, Avid doesn't have a similar function.

Chris


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 11:26:24 pm

[Andy Neil] "You don't have to look at the connecting anchors. Go to the timeline display options (button in bottom right of project window). Uncheck the Show Connections box."

that, as they say, was a deliberate conversational trap. I said default. i'm well aware of the fake neat view. it doesn't do much of anything - worse, it hides the reality.

why would I hide the underlying lunatic reality? I have less clue what zany linked stuff is going on at that point surely.
Do you commonly edit with all the interesting connection points turned off? Isn't that like blind man's bluff?

[Andy Neil] " It only works on a single clip, but it works fine."

Is that an advertisement? I have a stack of three connected b-roll clips say - what do I do now? oh right - i go into a new modality, a secondary storyline. or perhaps everything disappears into a compound nest. that's always a fantastic workaround.

I get it works - i just can't believe people think it works.

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


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 11:48:30 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I have a stack of three connected b-roll clips say - what do I do now?"

No, you keep reading where I say that your replace clip can lay atop all connected clips you want. If the replace clip is above the others, those others don't show up.

Before replace:



After replace:



Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:17:07 am

yes, but andy the stupid never ends.

http://imgur.com/5PsdycW

these are all floating objects in the snapshot - I have no real edit anchors or editorial space outside them. i can't cut in on the second level - to see what a short sharp clip does there before the third clip above it and to the right in time kicks in, because there is no real editing environment - all new elements will simply grow above.

this is all just made up object orientated stupidity.

apple have overdone the object identity of VA items - they have removed the surrounding environment because the engineers thought that was clever and would focus minds on the role of the elements.

I am inclined to think that was actually stupid in the long run.

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


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 1:01:30 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I am inclined to think that was actually stupid in the long run."

I certainly see your point, and I know I have no hope in ever convincing you otherwise, but i don't find it that difficult to work this way. At the very least it's no more difficult than trying to replace a clip on V1 in an Avid sequence with a slightly longer clip. Because of the track paradigm, in order to do that, I have to either perform a replace edit followed by a trim, making sure I include any overlapping tracks in the trim, or else an insert edit followed by an extract or lift and then selecting forward and reconnecting the entire sequence so it's in the right place.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 1:37:06 am

[Andy Neil] "I have to either perform a replace edit followed by a trim, making sure I include any overlapping tracks in the trim, or else an insert edit followed by an extract or lift and then selecting forward and reconnecting the entire sequence so it's in the right place."

no. that's kind of completely wrong actually. to make this as simple as possible. you cannot, as per my example, even FCP7 style drag and drop an item onto the second level, cutting into the second level video object and sitting below the third level video object.

to be clear - you cannot enact basic speculative editing decisions because of the enforced hierarchy.

it's not rocket science this.

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


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 2:02:14 am

You're mis-representing me. You quoted me talking about Avid and then proceed to tell me I'm completely wrong by explaining what you can't do in FCPX. Huh?

[Aindreas Gallagher] "you cannot, as per my example, even FCP7 style drag and drop an item onto the second level, cutting into the second level video object and sitting below the third level video object."

You're not wrong. At least not with a single move. You can of course drag the clip atop the 2nd level clip and then move the next clip down up so that it's above the new clip. Or you can mark an IN halfway into the 2nd level clip and an OUT at the point where the 3rd level clip starts and then hit Q to place a connected clip that is above the 2nd layer and adjacent to the 3rd layer which gives you the same result because unless you're compositing, having the new clip exist beneath the 3rd level clip does nothing. And if you are compositing? Just grab the edge of the new clip and drag and the 3rd level clip will rise up to get out of the way.

It's not rocket science. You're right. I have no trouble doing what you're asking, nor does it take me any real length of time to do it in X. But just like the point I was making before, I can easily point to things that are done FAR more simply in X than can be accomplished in Avid or FCP7 or Premiere. It doesn't mean anything.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 2:13:50 am

[Andy Neil] "You can of course drag the clip atop the 2nd level clip and then move the next clip down up so that it's above the new clip. Or you can mark an IN halfway into the 2nd level clip and an OUT at the point where the 3rd level clip starts and then hit Q to place a connected clip that is above the 2nd layer and adjacent to the 3rd layer "


and hello everyone to the utter and complete insanity that is FCPX. an editing system answering questions no one ever asked very badly.

apologies andy - that still is my basic position on it.

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


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:05:21 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "that still is my basic position on it"

We get it Andy. You're a Premiere person and that's cool. Not even sure why you continue to post on this forum.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 12:43:04 pm

old habits die hard. same goes for quite a few people on here. I haven't raged on the timeline in a respectably long time tho..

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


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 5:05:43 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "We get it Andy. You're a Premiere person and that's cool. Not even sure why you continue to post on this forum."

Media 100 4Lyfe!!!

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 6:07:06 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "no. that's kind of completely wrong actually. to make this as simple as possible. you cannot, as per my example, even FCP7 style drag and drop an item onto the second level, cutting into the second level video object and sitting below the third level video object."

It's true, you can't insert an edit into a connected clip. But if for some reason you want to, In X you:

1. Set a source I/O
2. Select your target clip and press CMD-G to make it a storyline.
3. Select the storyline container.
3. Place playhead at timeline in point and perform insert edit.

In a tracked NLE you:

1. Set a source I/O
2. Select your target video track and enable/patch it.
3. Select, patch, or disable audio tracks
3. Place playhead at timeline in point and perform insert edit.

But, in your example, why would you want to do that? It seems you're cutting a few shots together that will ultimately replace the picture in the primary. So... You want a short shot before the second clip? Put your playhead where you want it to end and hit SHIFT-Q. Who cares if they pile up? You're free to move the clip(s), roll them, trim them enable or disable them, turn their audio on and off, whatever you want. And you have much more freedom to do so because you're not "constrained" by fixed tracks. When you've got it all just right, select 'em and overwrite them to your primary, keeping the primary audio intact or not. Easy.

Your statement:

[Aindreas Gallagher] "to be clear - you cannot enact basic speculative editing decisions because of the enforced hierarchy."

Is factually incorrect. What you mean to say is:

"the magnetic timeline doesn't work like a timeline with tracks".

That would be absolutely correct.

The magnetic timeline isn't perfect by any means... -playhead match replace anyone? ;-) - X has lots of imperfections. But the ability to do what your example is illustrating isn't one of them.

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

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 6:44:24 pm

[Charlie Austin] "The magnetic timeline isn't perfect by any means... -playhead match replace anyone? ;-) - X has lots of imperfections. But the ability to do what your example is illustrating isn't one of them."

The magnetic timeline isn't perfect but it's fun to use - which in some circumstances is enough.

But it really amazes me that the lack of common or garden Replace Edit doesn't have us all storming the gates of Cupertino calling for our demands to be met.

In Media Composer, FCP 7 and Premiere, Replace Edit - the real thing, not Apple's Pepsi version - is the edit command I probably use more than any other, because in so many cases it's by far the fastest way to work, even if you don't require playhead sync editing.

If you do the kind of editing I do where the timing of the pictures to music and sound design is absolutely crucial and not an occasional action, the lack of this functionality really makes FCP X feel like something from the dark ages.

If you're also faced with jobs where you have to eye match footage, the absence of this feature is ridiculously painful.

And in terms of eye-matching the lack of gang sync falls into the same category of essential missing features.

It's astonishing that after all this time, Replace Edit has not been "replaced" - we've had all sorts of fun timeline innovations like dancing dots and what have you, but it beggars belief that Apple haven't addressed this.

Or have I been the only person actually submitting feedback about this? I can't believe that I am.

There are plenty of cosmetic enhancements that it would be great to see and everybody has their list - but this is not cosmetic.

This is editing 101.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 6:54:13 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "If you're also faced with jobs where you have to eye match footage, the absence of this feature is ridiculously painful."

Working on Once Upon A Time at ABC, I have to eye-match sometimes as many as 800 or more VFX shots per episode, so this lack of functionality would be a deal-breaker right there. I didn't know this, but if true, it simply doesn't meet the needs of people doing VFX heavy shows on a tight deadline.

Chris


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 6:58:04 pm

[Chris Conlee] "king on Once Upon A Time at ABC, I have to eye-match sometimes as many as 800 or more VFX shots per episode, so this lack of functionality would be a deal-breaker right there. I didn't know this, but if true, it simply doesn't meet the needs of people doing VFX heavy shows on a tight deadline."

Yes, indeed.

For eye-matching VFX shots this is also a serious headache. I don't do it that often these days, fortunately (!), but I can't imagine how I'd go about it in X if time was tight.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 7:44:55 pm

[Chris Conlee] "Working on Once Upon A Time at ABC, I have to eye-match sometimes as many as 800 or more VFX shots per episode, so this lack of functionality would be a deal-breaker right there."

Chris, can you go into a little more detail about your workflow regarding eye-matching VFX shots? Particularly how it pertains to replace and/or ganging? You use Avid I presume on Once Upon A Time?

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 7:57:41 pm

Yes, we use Media Composer, in a shared environment with 3 editors and 3 assistant editors. We have anywhere from 250 to 1000 VFX shots per episode. They get pulled and counts are delivered to our VFX vendor as EDLs, one per layer for multi-layered effects. They are then returned to us with 12 frame handles. The show is fluid and often-times changes are made to the cut between the time the counts are delivered to the vendors and when they return, so we can't count on always having the same amount of handle on each shot (ie, sometimes a shot has been trimmed, meaning we now have more handle, and sometimes they've been rolled out a bit, meaning we have less handle).

Because of this, we find an easily identifiable piece of action within the shot: perhaps somebody's hand crossing a particular object, etc. Then we find the same frame in the delivered VFX shot and simply press "Replace Edit" to replace the shot on the timeline with the shot in our source window (the matching frame serves as the anchor point). If we didn't have a "replace edit" function we would be forced to always match to the first frame in the shot, which isn't always a good candidate for eye-matching.

Also, we don't actually replace the existing shot, we place it on a video layer above the original dailies take, so we can always compare. Each successive version gets stacked one track higher, because sometimes the producers want to go to an earlier version.

Media Composer makes this easy too, by simply putting your locator bar over the shot in question and pressing "t" it will set an in and an out for the shot, then you can simply arm the track above and use the same "replace edit" key. Because Media Composer treats empty track like media (ie: slug or leader) it will happily "replace" the empty track with the new VFX shot.

I've also written a small app to automatically name locators on the MC timeline and create a SubCap file so we can also get visual identifiers for each VFX on the timeline. If anybody is interested in that app for Media Composer, you can get it for free here:


http://www.chrisconlee.com/Loc2VFX.htm

Chris


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 8:17:01 pm
Last Edited By Charlie Austin on Feb 15, 2014 at 8:24:53 pm

[Chris Conlee] "Media Composer makes this easy too, by simply putting your locator bar over the shot in question and pressing "t" it will set an in and an out for the shot, then you can simply arm the track above and use the same "replace edit" key. Because Media Composer treats empty track like media (ie: slug or leader) it will happily "replace" the empty track with the new VFX shot."

"Also, we don't actually replace the existing shot, we place it on a video layer above the original dailies take, so we can always compare. Each successive version gets stacked one track higher, because sometimes the producers want to go to an earlier version."


Actually, Auditions in FCP X would be a really nice, clean way to do this... Using "Replace and add to Audition" you could keep every revision to each VFX shot in the timeline if you wanted to, with no piling up of layers, and easily flip between/review them, until you're done with the cut.

Well, except for the fact that there's no Match Frame Replace edit available. :-/

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

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


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 9:12:11 pm

Thanks for the locator app. Very cool. I'm amazed that there are so many VFX shots in a tv series. Considering there are less than 500 in The Matrix and you're breaking that practically every week. The VFX guys must be chained to their Flames.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 9:28:55 pm

Yes, I think we're probably setting a record of some sort. The show uses virtual sets quite a lot, so in many scenes EVERY shot is a VFX shot. Then we have the usual CG specialty shots, wire removals, 3d creatures, you name it. Our vendor is definitely cranking 'em out, with as few as 15 days to get an episode's FX delivered!

We work for a couple months before the season's shows starts airing, getting the FX in the pipeline. But it definitely gets hairy once in a while. Lots of 80 and 90 hour weeks at the beginning and the end of the season.

Chris


Return to posts index

Craig Shamwell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 4:26:39 pm

Once upon A Time is pretty much all VFX Compositing!


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 7:32:24 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "This is editing 101."

Yep. And you're not the only one. In fact, I'm gonna go submit the same request again. For the millionth time. As I've said here before, and said to Apple as well, the string for the command is in the app. Just turn the damn thing on! Maybe its omission had something to with with the old project/event separation, but that's a non-issue now.

I personally have less need for ganging, but I've Mickey Moused it by making either making one sequence into a QT movie or compound clip,cutting it in in sync on top, and resizing it. Or make a sequence into a movie or compound clip and use that to make a multi cam clip which you can cut in below the primary and watch in the angle viewer. Both are less than ideal...

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

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 7:38:55 pm

[Charlie Austin] "In fact, I'm gonna go submit the same request again. For the millionth time"

And I'll do the same right now. Somehow you'd think there's a way of getting through to them on this ;-)

The workarounds just don't begin to cut it if you have more than a couple of shots to worry about.

And as I say, it's about a whole lot more than eye-matching - although eye-matching is still a massively important task for a lot of users in certain editing environments, like Chris' for example. You need to be able to shortcut it, not be obliged to take the long way around.

For me though, the inability to do quick playhead sync edits is a serious bugbear creatively. You must have this too with the kind of work you do.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 7:49:58 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "For me though, the inability to do quick playhead sync edits is a serious bugbear creatively. You must have this too with the kind of work you do."

Indeed it is. We get updated features all the time requiring over cutting existing projects. Have to use the first or last frame of a shot as a match which is a pain the ass when there's no good action there to match to, or there's a transition, or, or, or... Like I said, the string is in X, but it's so old it uses the term "organizer" for browser...

ReplaceWithSelectedMediaAtPlayhead
Replace the selected Sequence clip with the selected Organizer clip aligned to their Playhead locations


They need to update the definition, and turn the damn thing on! (which is what i just wrote in the feedback form)

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

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 16, 2014 at 10:16:59 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Feb 16, 2014 at 10:17:50 pm

[Charlie Austin] "They need to update the definition, and turn the damn thing on! (which is what i just wrote in the feedback form)"

One does have to wonder, after all this time of not turning it on, whether it's really just a matter of flicking the switch on an already developed feature.

I'd really have to think that there are some fundamental design problems that have prevented them from implementing this up to this point.

Which, if true, would be interesting ...

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 16, 2014 at 11:11:56 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "I'd really have to think that there are some fundamental design problems that have prevented them from implementing this up to this point.

Which, if true, would be interesting ...
"


That's probably correct... It seems like every "clip" in X, source or timeline, has to have a defined range. I think that's why you need to create storylines from connected clips to add transitions. 2 single ranges join to become a single range. I dunno...

So in the current replace from end or start, there's a target timeline clip range - even if you only select an I or O point the range gets completed to the tail or head , and a source clip range. And the first or last frame of each clips range is the "anchor" when replacing. But it seems there's some voodoo required if you want the playhead to be the anchor... They'll figure it out, hopefully soon...

On a related note, Don't know why I didn't think of this, but I just realized that there's a dedicated Motion feedback page as well, so I'm bombarding that with Keyer feedback. :-)

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

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 17, 2014 at 9:03:06 pm

[Charlie Austin] "So in the current replace from end or start, there's a target timeline clip range - even if you only select an I or O point the range gets completed to the tail or head , and a source clip range. And the first or last frame of each clips range is the "anchor" when replacing. But it seems there's some voodoo required if you want the playhead to be the anchor..."

That does seem likely, for sure, but hey, what do we know?

;-)

[Charlie Austin] "On a related note, Don't know why I didn't think of this, but I just realized that there's a dedicated Motion feedback page as well, so I'm bombarding that with Keyer feedback. :-)"

Actually I've just posted a few more things you can bug them about in relation to the keyer in my reply to Jeremy elsewhere on this thread ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Craig Shamwell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 4:54:56 pm
Last Edited By Craig Shamwell on Feb 18, 2014 at 4:58:45 pm

Andreas...the simple tasks you are talking about is absurd! You can very well do what you say you cant! YOU ARE WRONG AND LOUD! You are just one of many who really do not know the tools and how they work in FCPX!
So pay attention...please!!! So you have a primary video clip in the Primary Track...audio effects and such placed a the bottom. I can place one 2 or 3 or 4 or....however many clips above it. So lets say I have 3 clips above it, Primary being number one! Every clip covering the primary will be the "seen" clip. So lets say clip 4 at the top looks good but I wan to lay something right in the middle. I with the time it will take you to read it can, right click on clip 4, and select create storyline. Mark my in and out points. So far just 4 mouse clicks. Select the Position tool, and grab the selected clip or range within a clip and place it right over top of the third clip and its done!!!! So what is there in this process that you do not understand unless you did not explain your situation clearly or just want to disagree and diss FCPX??
And once that operation is done, I can slip any of the video using the trim tool without having any synching issues. I can also trim any of the 2 edit points on the fly! Now I challenge you to turn on your machine and try what I just described and come back here and apologize for causing so much grief to folks who are really trying to help you! Your assertion that FCPX has some kind of hierarchy that you have to fight with is in fact opposite of what FCPX really does. It takes away the constraints and unless you take the time and a few dollars to learn FCPX and all of it's not so evident features on the surface you are really unqualified to make such assertions. But you don't want to do you???


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 9:50:08 pm

hey sure I'm only rabble rousing. no harm once a month or so - I very rarely criticise the software these days. but as is detailed above - X has no true replace edit, and you were forced into secondary storyline modality to get to where you wanted to go in the response you gave.

Andy Neil knows the software like the back of his hand and he conceded - in the constraints I set out - the software can't perform what I would view as a basic editing action - because it builds vertically from the primary. having to create modalities like a secondary storyline is a bit tortured basically.

as to say - what is a secondary storyline other than tortured methodology to get around intrinsic limitations? And if I'm always thinking about the ceiling over my head, and when its going to require modalities like a secondary storyline, then I think I'm in a stupid timeline.

ok - not a stupid editing system - tons of it is whizz bang and i own my copy. but i refuse to cotton the timeline. that is the thing i harp on about.

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 9:54:21 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "having to create modalities like a secondary storyline is a bit tortured basically.
"


How's it any different from choosing "add track" in a tracked NLE?

[Aindreas Gallagher] "as to say - what is a secondary storyline other than tortured methodology to get around intrinsic limitations?"

Um... an additional track? :-)

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

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


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 9:56:36 pm

Ahhhh, it just never grows stale around here. :)

Chris


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 9:59:09 pm

I swear to god I'm not starting up.

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 10:06:04 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I swear to god I'm not starting up."

Hey, me neither. My response to you just popped into my head, not trying stir anything up. :-) Though our new voice here seems to be intent on something. lol

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

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"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: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 10:30:16 pm

nah just kidding charlie. we're long past banging pots over the software. realistically - what's going on inside the warner bros lot is going to make for fascinating reading and crow eating. once its industry apparent that team can work it, snark gets parked.

presuming they'll be engaged in incorporating invisible vfx shots etc - it'd go to shot replace methodology and everything. it'll have to be quite a workflow for the interested you'd reckon. also the degree to which they utilised core features like auditions and, yes, secondary storylines.

there's really no way the software is not getting an insane workout in that lot bungalow. mad to think its going on at the mo.

the editor did tweet this like:

https://twitter.com/S0nofaB1tch/status/373842909470023681

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


Return to posts index

Craig Shamwell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 19, 2014 at 6:42:21 pm

I appreciate your candid response Andreas! First I want to share the definition of "Hierarchy" with you: "a system or organization in which people or groups are ranked one above the other according to status or authority." Unless we are working in 3D space, every single NLE use this premise, except FCPX and Tricaster's system. In FCPX there is no "constraint" or forcing you to work on specific tracks dedicated for certain media. Instead, you can place (edit) anything anywhere without much thought. You are not forced to create a new track. You said that I have to create a new "Modality" with the concept of creating a new Stroyline...you don't! The Modality has already been created with how the editor works. You did not stop to think that it took you less than 15 seconds to read how to perform a replace edit in FCPX, but yet you think its some kind of chore. In actuality it took me less than 10 seconds to do it. And like I said, editing the 2 points inside the replace edit are stupidly easy to edit. The reality is, many operations are so simple in FCPX that its hard for editors like you to appreciate its simplicity. And the fact that it makes the editing window more of a canvas than a piece of "ruled" school paper, having to stay within the lines. And yes Andreas....you will start to think differently as you edit because constraints are lifted. This is not a forced thing either....it will be natural!


Return to posts index

Craig Shamwell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 5:00:17 pm

For your own info Andy:
"Andreas...the simple tasks you are talking about is absurd! You can very well do what you say you cant! YOU ARE WRONG AND LOUD! You are just one of many who really do not know the tools and how they work in FCPX!
So pay attention...please!!! So you have a primary video clip in the Primary Track...audio effects and such placed a the bottom. I can place one 2 or 3 or 4 or....however many clips above it. So lets say I have 3 clips above it, Primary being number one! Every clip covering the primary will be the "seen" clip. So lets say clip 4 at the top looks good but I wan to lay something right in the middle. I with the time it will take you to read it can, right click on clip 4, and select create storyline. Mark my in and out points. So far just 4 mouse clicks. Select the Position tool, and grab the selected clip or range within a clip and place it right over top of the third clip and its done!!!! So what is there in this process that you do not understand unless you did not explain your situation clearly or just want to disagree and diss FCPX??
And once that operation is done, I can slip any of the video using the trim tool without having any synching issues. I can also trim any of the 2 edit points on the fly! Now I challenge you to turn on your machine and try what I just described and come back here and apologize for causing so much grief to folks who are really trying to help you! Your assertion that FCPX has some kind of hierarchy that you have to fight with is in fact opposite of what FCPX really does. It takes away the constraints and unless you take the time and a few dollars to learn FCPX and all of it's not so evident features on the surface you are really unqualified to make such assertions. But you don't want to do you???"


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 11:49:33 pm

Fair enough if you don't like it or get on with it, but Is it REALLY so hard to believe that not everyone works in the same way as you?

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 6:37:24 pm

[David Mathis] " I was thinking does it make sense to have both installed on the same system?"

It does if you need or use them both. It's not like keeping a wolverine and a tasmanian devil in the same zoo cage.

My big moment of realizing I had been fighting the magnetic timeline was after having to go back and forth between X & 7 for so long that using tracks started to feel tedious. It really just comes down to personal preference.

If you don't like the messy spine look, there are ways to open a shot 'in timeline' and add titles, overlays, whatever you want in there and then click back to your main project. If you ever want to expand them, then shift-command-g will expand them. That's what I do, there are other ways.


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 6:39:49 pm

Regarding your first question, there's no reason not to have both if you own both. I personally have Avid MC 7, FCPX, and Premiere CC installed on the same partition. They all connect properly to my Kona LHI and I can use whichever one I need for the project.

Concerning the rest of your post. Everything you're discussing is completely relevant to you. But objectively, in your example, having the title on a specific track has absolutely no bearing whatsoever in the result of the exported file. In other words, the "usefulness" of tracks or track-based workflow is entirely in your head.

Most people who prefer tracks with the reasoning that they "just want certain clips to share a common space", do so because it allows for at-a-glance understanding of what you have. Perhaps you feel more in control or more organized in your edit. Nothing wrong with that. But it doesn't change what the file looks like when you're done.

If you're doing it so you can keep track of your assets for selection or other manipulation, well, the timeline index and roles feature can help you with that.

Bottom line, either you can learn to enjoy the freedom of not having to assign tracks to clips and play track tetris with your sequence, or not. But I've never not been able to complete a project in X simply because the titles weren't in the same "track" with each other.

andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 7:51:36 pm

[Andy Neil] "I can use whichever one I need for the project."

What's your personal decision metric for deciding which app to use for a particular project?

Thanks!


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 8:17:10 pm

[Richard Herd] "What's your personal decision metric for deciding which app to use for a particular project?"

Good question. It usually goes like this:

Projects which are quick turnarounds, heavy titles, short-form, digital narrative, shows with gfx packages, shows where I'm responsible for color and sound finishing, self-contained, most file-based workflows, mixed media, most mulicam workflows I'm going to use FCPX for. This is the bulk of my "at home" work.

Projects which are tape based, previously cut on Avid or FCP7, specific multicam workflows, film, long-form, shows requiring outside color and sound, 3D, shows with lots of "scripts" (for scriptsync) I'll typically use Avid

Projects which require gfx that I can only do on After Effects I'll use Premiere for.


I'll admit that I'm prejudiced against Premiere. I'm least familiar with it and many things about it annoy me, but I'm working through some of those issues if only to be proficient enough to fill out my resume. Basically, if I can do it in Premiere, I'm more likely to do it in Avid. I've got 14 years experience on Avid and despite what people have said about Premiere being like FCP 8, I just don't find it that way.

The long and short of it is if there's a mapped out production pipeline, it'll usually be Avid. If someone dumps a camera card in my lap, it'll probably be FCPX.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 14, 2014 at 7:55:11 pm

I have actually highlighted a group of titles and put them in a secondary together just to make them more visual so I can grab them and turn them off or on. This is usually at the end of an edit though. When I'm making versions with or without titles. It would be a hindrance during the edit of course.


Return to posts index

Ty Vann
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 1:18:04 am

trackless magnetic timeline editing is one of the unique features of FCPX that makes it a powerful and speedy editor. If you don't like it or can't adapt to it, obviously you need to move on. Or you can opt to edit storylines similar to TRACKS when desired. http://fcpx.tv/Pages/tracks.html


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 15, 2014 at 5:54:52 pm

A big thanks to everyone who participated and gave feedback. It was both entertaining and useful. The only other thing missing is the "Send To Motion" command. Perhaps there is a reason this has not been implemented as of yet.


Return to posts index

Craig Shamwell
Re: FCP X and Premiere Pro CS
on Feb 18, 2014 at 3:11:57 pm

What you are not understanding is that you "are" creating tracks!
In addition to color coding specific elements, Green for Audio, Purple for Titles, the concept of connecting a clip makes it easier to move the primary Clip without losing synch and timing to any elements attached to that point in time on that clip. Do you want to move a clip and leave everything else in place....SIMPLE!!!!! Hold down the "Tilde" key and move it anywhere you want. All the other Attached clips will stay in place and a gap will fill the space where the clip came from. At that point you can add another clip right over top of the gap and the time of the entire project will not be changed. This is very intuitive in my opinion. Want a cleaner timeline? Using compound clips is nowhere near as hard as you make it out to be. Simply select the clips you want and create it. All the associated clips will still maintain thier position relative to the main track. If you want to edit anything in that compound clip, sure you can open it the timeline editior, but an easier way is to simply "Break apart clip items" and edit, right in the primary editing window! And then simply "collapse clip items". Most folks simply do not know all there is in FCPX and how much easier and faster it is. Along with opening up to thinking just a bit differently in how you edit. Timothy Auld is posting comments that make no sense at all. And if he had any clue of what "roles" mean in FCPX he would know how silly some of his comments sound.


Return to posts index

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