FORUMS: list search recent posts

still driving me nuts

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
James Ewart
still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 12:12:32 am
Last Edited By James Ewart on Jun 2, 2015 at 10:36:16 am

I can get over most of it but ...

We come back to this time and time again. Calling a timeline a project is so hopelessly confusing and if anything it becomes more annoying as time goes on.

Language is language. To start calling carrots bananas just for the sake of being different is beyond ridiculous don't you think? How many years in and it still grates.

Call it a timeline. A timeline is not a project.

A project is "a piece of planned work or an activity that is finished over a period of time and intended to achieve a particular aim"


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 12:35:14 am

James, I have posted about this many times and most people think it is no big deal. To me it is significant, in demonstrating Apple's goofy consumer mentality. I have adjusted to "Library-Events-Projects" but to a client or friend I can only apologize. It should be "Projects-Clips-Timelines (Or Sequences, or Edits).

Doug D


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 7:51:57 am

I'm sure people will think "why is he still banging on about that?". But it's because It is constantly something have to make sure people don't get the wrong end of the stick about and so I have to call it a 'project timeline' to be certain I' am communicating clearly.

I can kind of get over Library (pointless but at least less confusing).

Event (well funnily enough I had reason to be rather pleased of that the other day. Multiple day shoot each Event a different day).

But WAY too late to change the name of a sequence or timeline to something used in every other NLE (I think) and referring to a completely different "thing".

I'll get over it one day.


Return to posts index


Tim Wilson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 9:54:48 am

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "I have adjusted to "Library-Events-Projects" but to a client or friend I can only apologize."

and

[James Ewart] "I'm sure people will think "why is he still banging on about that?" .... because I have to call it a 'project timeline' to be certain I am communicating clearly."


I call this kind of thing the Pebble in the Shoe Principle. As hard as it is to climb a mountain, it can be excruciating to walk a short distance on flat ground with a pebble in your shoe.

Apple may have created a previously unimaginably efficient mountain mover, but that doesn't mean that they haven't also created a number of brand new pebbles that didn't need to be created, and placed them squarely in your shoes.

This language is still a problem. It never had to be.

Of course, pebbles are stone age, and dinosaurs are stone age, so everyone who finds these shiny space age terms occasionally exasperating is surely a dinosaur, right? Right.


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 12:30:32 pm

Great now I have to stop saying...

"This is called a project...I mean sequence....or timeline..wait maybe just call it a project..."

during my instructions in class ;)


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 11:23:17 pm

Still scratching my head still trying to figure why Apple decided to throw me in a state of confusion. So much, that I might have switch over to Resolve, at least their language makes sense. Darn if Apple did not to put a lump of pebbles in my shoe. I now feel like a dinosaur. Ugh!


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 1:17:37 am

Pro Tip.

Everyone here has learned hundreds of thousands of terms.

Everyone here has also cognitively re-defined words that had a long standing meaning and have been perfectly able to function. The Gay Nineties after all.

Sit on the side of the road. Remove the shoe. Remove the pebble. Put the shoe back on. Proceed on your carefree journey.

It's just not that hard.

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: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 2:48:16 pm

In your Libraries, do you typically work on one Project? Like, you have one single timeline that needs to be exported from your Library? If you have another timeline that needs exporting (like a different, um, Project) do you start a new Library?

Do you use multicam, or synchronized clips, or Auditions?

I need to write this up, for reals, but I simply can't find the time. There are fantastic reasons that Apple, at least in my mind, has chosen to differentiate a timeline or sequence from a Project, but part of that means that you really have to use FCPX how it was designed to be used, and not use it like other project based systems. I know, that's shocking news I'm sure.


Also, if you told someone, I'll send you my timeline, or you asked them to send them their timeline, are you saying they wouldn't know what to do?


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 2:54:32 pm

Hi Jeremy.

I might keep two closely associated "jobs" in one library. Each of those might comprise 5 or ten timelines which I want to put into a transfer library but when I do, the Library is still quite a few gigs and I don't want it to have have actual media in it. But it still contains media I don't need as it's all in the duplicated library on the external drive. I don't ask it to copy media ... it still does though. or appears to and the size of the Library would suggest this is the case.

If I tell someone I am sending a timeline it's not a problem. But it's not called a timeline is it? It's called a project now!

And it still confuses people and I am so bored with writing project/timeline every time to make sure there is no confusion


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 3:15:08 pm

[James Ewart] "And it still confuses people and I am so bored with writing project/timeline every time to make sure there is no confusion"

So just call it a timeline if it's really that confusing. The FCPX manual uses the word timeline.

No one will fault you for it.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 3:19:00 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "The FCPX manual uses the word timeline."

Does it/

Terrible confession time. I never read the manual. Just did Ripple.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 3:22:30 pm

[James Ewart] "Does it/

Terrible confession time. I never read the manual. Just did Ripple.
"


You the list that FPCX makes of the Project? It's not called a Project Index, it's called a Timeline Index.

See?:



Return to posts index


James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 3:26:54 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "You the list that FPCX makes of the Project? It's not called a Project Index, it's called a Timeline Index"

sensing impending embarrassment

So what exactly is a project over and above a Timeline?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 3:48:10 pm

[James Ewart] "So what exactly is a project over and above a Timeline?"

A lot, at least I find it to be a lot. It's worth a write up with pictures and stuff, but I can't find time to do it.

For some, perhaps there is no distinction, a Project is simply a timeline, for me, I find that a Project is much more than a timeline.


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 8:25:25 pm

A project in FCP X is a single timeline. Period. What else is it? Name a single component that a project has
that is not in a timeline.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 1:12:48 am

I believe Apple refers to the window as the timeline, not the content within the window. That's still the project. If you look at the Event Browser, it separates clips and projects. Are you more confused now? ;-)

FWIW - Sony also calls timelines "projects" in Vegas. You can only have one timeline/sequence/project for any given open instance of Vegas; however, you can have multiple instances of Vegas open.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 4:57:29 am

[Oliver Peters] "I believe Apple refers to the window as the timeline, not the content within the window. That's still the project. If you look at the Event Browser, it separates clips and projects. Are you more confused now? ;-)

FWIW - Sony also calls timelines "projects" in Vegas. You can only have one timeline/sequence/project for any given open instance of Vegas; however, you can have multiple instances of Vegas open."


I can never understand who you manage to keep your head around all the different NLEs Oliver. You are a veritable NLE polyglot.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 1:05:21 pm

[James Ewart] "I can never understand who you manage to keep your head around all the different NLEs Oliver."

That's why I'm already nuts! ;-)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 10:42:09 am

[Oliver Peters] "I believe Apple refers to the window as the timeline, not the content within the window. That's still the project. If you look at the Event Browser, it separates clips and projects. Are you more confused now? ;-)

So is an empty timeline with no content a project or still a timeline?


Return to posts index

Dan Stewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 8:32:24 pm

And does it exist if no editor is there to work on it?



Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:18:48 pm

Take a look at this tutorial as an example of Apple using the word timeline. It's not the window; it's the timeline.

https://support.apple.com/kb/PH12547?locale=en_US

When you create a new library it auto creates an event but no timeline (project). The window as a place holder is still there.



Now this language is almost insane: "Append clips to your project in the Timeline." "To add clips to the Timeline do one of the following: ..." So your appending the project but adding to a timeline? No, because an append edit is not an insert or connect edit which also adds the the timeline. Also "append clips to your project in the timeline" almost sounds like the timeline is a window of the project. Bottom line is it's redundant to the point of absurd.

The only thing I can think of is that FC allows each clip to open in its own timeline and you can create sequences in that timeline which would not be the Project's timeline.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index


James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:22:48 pm

I hereby predict that in 24 months time Apple will capitulate in the professional NLE market.

Adobe and Avid need it.

Apple would rather sell phones.

I will not be celebrating.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:27:25 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:27:49 pm

[Craig Alan] "Take a look at this tutorial as an example of Apple using the word timeline. It's not the window; it's the timeline."

Actually you've misinterpreted what they write in the document, which sort of reinforces the point of this thread.

Read this terminology: "If you add or move a clip in the Timeline by dragging,"

You'll note the word Timeline is capitalized and it says "in", referring to the pane and not the edited sequence/project. So basically anything you do in that pane is the Timeline. The thing you create is the project.

Heads commence spinning. ;-)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 1:25:04 am

[Oliver Peters] "You'll note the word Timeline is capitalized and it says "in", referring to the pane and not the edited sequence/project. So basically anything you do in that pane is the Timeline. The thing you create is the project."

Also note this language:

"When you create a new library it auto creates an event but no timeline (project)."

Timeline (project).

Even Apple can't keep it straight. It's an embarrassment, really.

I look forward to Jeremy's post when he gets around to it (no rush), but I'm deeply skeptical Apple thought this language through. It's just stupid and unnecessary.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 1:36:26 am

"I look forward to Jeremy's post when he gets around to it (no rush), but I'm deeply skeptical Apple thought this language through. It's just stupid and unnecessary."

I still contend that they simply used terminology that was consistent with other Apple software. I think way more thought has been given to it here in this forum than in the halls of Cupertino.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 1:50:05 am

[Oliver Peters] ""I look forward to Jeremy's post when he gets around to it (no rush), but I'm deeply skeptical Apple thought this language through. It's just stupid and unnecessary."

I still contend that they simply used terminology that was consistent with other Apple software. I think way more thought has been given to it here in this forum than in the halls of Cupertino."


It very well could be that simple, but it is no where near as fun.

I do think some thought was given to it, to what a Project means and why it's more than a timeline.

Even if Apple didn't think it through (although I don't think that Apple is the type of company to not think anything through, that is to say, they think it through even if it involves risk and failure) but even if they didn't, I still think the name has a bit of merit.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 1:51:17 am

[Oliver Peters] "I still contend that they simply used terminology that was consistent with other Apple software."

Yep, that's the only explanation that makes any sense. Still wrong though! ;)

[Oliver Peters] "I think way more thought has been given to it here in this forum than in the halls of Cupertino."

I completely agree!

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 5:11:15 am

[David Lawrence] "[Oliver Peters] "I think way more thought has been given to it here in this forum than in the halls of Cupertino."

I completely agree!"


88 replies and counting!


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 8:28:54 pm

You are not dragging a clip into a window. You are dragging it to a target in the timeline within the window. E appends the timeline not the window it's in. I was thinking though that a timeline could be an empty timeline as a fixed container that is filled with a project (a particular sequence). However FC does not by default have an empty timeline open. It's only when you create a project that the empty timeline appears. The whole idea of creating a project makes no sense. It's as if preproduction does not exist. Truth is the project exists with or without FC.

The one way that a "project" is different than a timeline is that the project file is a small file that holds the edits and references to the media. But that's a "project file" and not just the project. It's already unergonomic to rename something for which there is already an industry standard term, It's incredibly unergonomic to give it a name that is already used for a different aspect of the work. If we call the timeline a timeline no one has a problem with it in FCP X and every other NLE. So far so good. The problem arises when we refer to our "project." Do you mean timeline or the overall job, assignment, film, etc. If using FC you need to then clarify - which is an on-going annoyance and lacks a certain professionalism. Pros may dummy things down for non-pros but feel no need to do so when communicating with another pro. Pros like the comradery of talking industry speak. Now this can evolve with time and new technology. But IMO FCP X is not really that different than other NLE in terms of the function of the different parts of the program. It has more in common with other NLE than it has differences.
But in version 1, it did use the library as a master folder that contained all your "projects" And that is where the terminology began. It was mistake for technical reasons. Apple corrected it. The "project" was put in an event because otherwise it would not be organized as part of a single "project". But now that many people use a library for each project (film) they are working on, it does not make sense to store the project (timeline) in a single event.

It's kind of like the his and her of grammatical correctness. Someone come up with a gender neutral term for his and her. I don't think anyone would have a problem with "project file" being what it is. But calling the timeline or even the space where the timeline resides a project is a poor naming convention.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 4:12:36 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "So just call it a timeline if it's really that confusing. The FCPX manual uses the word timeline.
"


Yes.

I use the word timeline all the time and everyone knows what I'm talking about.

I never used the word sequence. I would say timeline then and I say it now. Nothing has changed in that sense for me.

After finishing my doc, I would like the ability to make a DCP straight out of X

That's a bigger deal for me than the "project" name


Return to posts index

Nick Toth
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 3:15:31 pm

Wouldn't any FCP X user know exactly what you're talking about when you say project, event, library?

When I'm in the Midwest of the US, I know when they say "sack" they mean "bag". When someone in the Northeast says "grinder" I know they mean "sub" and vice-versa. :)


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 3:16:41 pm
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Jun 1, 2015 at 5:43:22 pm

[Nick Toth] "When I'm in the Midwest of the US, I know when they say "sack" they mean "bag""

It's a pop, not a soda. Got it? :)


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 3:21:30 pm

"grinder and sub??"

I though Grinder was a Gay casual sex encounter App?


Return to posts index

Nick Toth
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 4:15:55 pm

Well isn't it just like Apple to change the long-used meaning of a food item to something completely different... LOL!!


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 5:49:16 pm

[James Ewart] "Language is language. To start calling carrots bananas just for the sake of being different is beyond ridiculous don't you think? How many years in and it still grates.

Call it a timeline. A timeline is not a project."


This is pure semantics, and semantics is completely relative. This has never been an issue for me or for anyone I interact with whether client, editing colleague, or students. If you need to call it a timeline call it a timeline; I did the same with FCP legacy. I can understand this being an issue for others, but that is a personal choice to not let it go and make the translation in your mind.

This has nothing to do with Apple and everything to do with personal linguistic stuckness. Time to take personal responsibility and move on, or accept that you personally cannot or do not want to change.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 5:57:34 pm

[James Culbertson] "Time to take personal responsibility and move on, or accept that you personally cannot or do not want to change."

I can change I just think it's immature to change the nomanclature. Change for change sake.


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 6:52:38 pm

[James Ewart] "I can change I just think it's immature to change the nomanclature. Change for change sake."

I can see it being irritating until someone gets used to it. But I'm not sure how it would be immature.


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 7:13:09 pm

When I work with people in their early 20s and sometimes ask why they are called bins in Avid they rarely know why unless they went to film school.

By that logic, a project or a timeline should have been called a reel. Ha!


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 1, 2015 at 10:31:24 pm

[Darren Roark] "By that logic, a project or a timeline should have been called a reel. Ha!
"


The issue isn't that Apple used a different word for timeline. After all, Avid uses "timeline" and FCP7 used "sequence".

The issue is that they used a word that already has an established meaning within the editing sub-culture. If they'd called it a "Clippering" or a "Bazoola" confusion wouldn't exist. But imagine if Avid started calling a timeline, a "subclip".

People may not like the names, Library or Event, but they're not confused when talking about it with others. But it's difficult to tell when you're talking with someone and they refer to "project", whether they're talking about the timeline, or the entire she-bang.

Andy

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 1:18:21 am

[Andy Neil] "After all, Avid uses "timeline" and FCP7 used "sequence".
"


Avid calls it a "sequence", too. "Timeline" refers to the UI window, same as FCP X.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Scott Thomas
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 4:57:09 am

I changed jobs and had to go from saying "timeline" or "sequence" to saying "Tracksheet". Can you guess the system? I still catch myself saying that sometimes.

I was perfectly happy with "Edit Decision List" until these silly "Non-Linear Editing" systems came about. Why did they have to go and change a perfectly good naming system. I had reels and I may have even assigned them reel numbers (or sometimes names) and I may have saved my E-Mems for my transitions or my K-Scope effects to a floppy disk. Yeah, where the hell is my floppy? Bins? What, are we a K-Mart? Arrrggghhhh!


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 6:43:11 am

[James Culbertson] "I can see it being irritating until someone gets used to it. But I'm not sure how it would be immature."

So what is it I wonder?

"Clever" "Provocative" "Insightful" "Well Considered" even?

Perhaps "Playful" would be better?

For sure they must have thought about it a lot and decided it would rock the boat. But it's needless and a bit silly in my view.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 7:54:15 am

[James Ewart] "
For sure they must have thought about it a lot and decided it would rock the boat. But it's needless and a bit silly in my view."


Bingo! You nailed it James...

Hey, let's just rename a bunch of well known shite, it'll distract from all the missing stuff, and maybe they won't notice.

And, it seems to have worked, at least it did for some.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 2:42:08 pm

[James Ewart] "For sure they must have thought about it a lot and decided it would rock the boat."

I think they did it because they thought it made more sense that way. Why would they say to themselves "hey this is stupid, let's do it"

The only time I even think about the word "project" in X is when I'm creating a new one, and it won't even let you create one unless you NAME it.

If you named it "project" then that would be silly.

When I was working on my doc, I didn't want to string the whole film out in the timeline. I thought it would bog down, so I would work in sections at a time. (like chapters of a book)

When I was working in the "Weldon" section that was the name of that project. Weldon.

The people that I worked with knew the film wasn't titled Weldon. They knew that was a section of the film. They would say, "this or that needs to be changed in WELDON" not. "change this in the "project"

At no time was it ever difficult for any of us to understand what we were looking at or talking about.

Granted, my film was small budget, but I didn't hear those guys complaining about miscommunication on FOCUS because of the name "project" Shouldn't it have come up then? On a film that big?

There are changes they have made that I hate. Like Greying out iTunes. That makes it harder for me to see what's what.

I think Photos looks bland and ugly.

I think the icons for the apps look bland and ugly and cheap.

I'm sure they, and others would disagree : )


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 4:13:56 am

[James Culbertson] "This has nothing to do with Apple and everything to do with personal linguistic stuckness. Time to take personal responsibility and move on, or accept that you personally cannot or do not want to change"

Sorry, but that's pure BS James. Nomenclature in this business, like standards, was designed so that individuals all over the world can communicate accurately, period, end of story.

When you start to make the kinds of changes to long-standing universal terms as Apple has chosen to do in X, all you get is confussion, misunderstanding, and inaccuracy, which are antithetical to good communication.

Even the most ardent Apple fanboys acknowledge that the initial rollout of X was a huge mistake, the decision to change the universally accepted and understood terminology of film and video was Apple's second biggest screwup per X - if neither of those mistakes were made I seriously doubt there would be any of the controversy surrounding X, and it would probably have been much more widely accepted than it was initially or than it is today, four years later.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 4:54:36 am

Do you think if we we all signed a petition they might .... just might ... climb down on this one?


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 6:00:31 am
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Jun 2, 2015 at 6:02:08 am

Nope.

They were right in my opinion to adapt to using new (or even existing) nomenclature in new ways. If an editor could see the value of the new concepts - the range-based keywording system - the magnetic storyline - the timeline index!!! (see, timelines are STILL in X - there's an index of them and an oft used "open in timeline" command thats VERY functional!) then they would have to ADAPT!

The language signaled that loud and clear.

The reason they have Storylines and call Projects Projects instead of calling timelines projects isn't an accident, IMO. It's a calculated decision to construct a new set of ideas and adapt the existing the language to reflect that.

You want to hang onto the old language, knock yourself out.

Figure out what YOU want the word EVENT to mean. Shoot? Wedding? Job? Episode? And adopt an NLE that agrees with you.

But don't presume to tell me or any other editor what it MUST mean in order for my terminology to be "correct."

Not in a world where NOBODY had a super useful TAGGABLE RANGE in a video NLE until X.

Anybody who invents new processes or even adapts older ones into new systems (hover scrub???) gets to name them as they like. That's how this stuff works.

my 2 cents.

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

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 6:12:30 am

[Bill Davis] "The reason they have Storylines and call Projects Projects instead of calling timelines projects isn't an accident, IMO. It's a calculated decision to construct a new set of ideas and adapt the existing the language to reflect that."

Absolutely get that. But the thing that I called "immature" (somebody took exception to that but I think it is) was their decision to take a word in common parlance within the editing community (and the previous version of their NLE) and use it to describe something quite different. "Project".

Yes they are nailing the colours to the mast an good on 'em but to use the existing word "project" for a "Sequence" has not done anybody any good (least of all them) and serves no constructive purpose.

They could have called it a "Timeline" in the Event browser or "Edit" or even "My Movie". Just not "Project" please it has caused so much confusion and here we are still talking about it.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 7:52:58 am

Honestly, I don't care very much about all that. Apple decided to create a new paradigm and with that comes a different jargon. Silly? Yes, but hey, it's what it is.

To me complaing about these phrases is just as silly as FCPX advocates who think AVID is stupid because the interface looks (!!!) outdated... So what? At least in AVID you can make it look more or less they way you want it.

My biggest issue is: is FCPX really better or faster. I have grave doubt about the latter. GRAVE doubts. I find myself pushing a lot of buttons for simple things. I counted that making a simple audio-video split edit of one frame (for arguments sake) takes SEVEN actions in FCPX... And only THREE in AVID MC8... Add the much more immediate media response in AVID MC8 and then where are we? To be honest, I find FCPX easy to learn, is kinda nice... pretty restrictive in customising it to personal needs, it's cheap, it has powerful tool... but I have not found at all that it is FASTER. Project, event or library, sequence or bin whatever... I just don't want to work around so much...


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:16:49 am
Last Edited By James Ewart on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:33:24 am

[Mike Warmels] "My biggest issue is: is FCPX really better or faster."

.. of course therein lies one of the the big differences between all the users and all the different ways and areas we work in.

Faster by how much? You save an hour a day in Avid over FCPX? You may have incredibly tight deadlines to turn round a news piece. But in any event I don't know how you measure faster. Is editing a race? For some people in newsroom I guess it pretty much must be. I think you are always going to be faster (for a while at least) working within an app you have used most because you have learned to do things its way.

in FCPX you might find you have to think differently.

In any event I don't care a whole lot about how many cuts I can do in an hour.

Does it help me think more about shape, structure and pace without worrying about keeping things in sync or what's going on ten minutes or even three minutes down the timeline?

Yes it does.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:30:47 am

When I cut my shows I get a certain amount of time to make it in. Say for a 30 minute show about fashion (a children's series), I get 4 days to shape and structure each episode. If FCPX means it takes me an hour extra a day to do that, so four more hours for the whole show, then I have, by my calculations, four hours LESS time to think about story, pace, shape and structure because I have to spend so much time on getting the NLE to do what I want.

Thinking about story, structure and pace is crucial, but I want my NLE not to be an obstacle. I don't want to lose precious time on pressing buttons. I want to be able to change, shape, try, form and shape. So speed in trying and shaping IS important, I want to see if it works or how it can work better. And I am beyond the time in my life that I do those four hours extra in my own time. Producers and broadcasters skim so much of the top already.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:45:19 am

[Mike Warmels] "but I want my NLE not to be an obstacle."

I get you. All I can say is I am cutting stuff at the moment and occasionally thinking. "How would I have done that in FCP7 so easily" (really).

I do believe I am faster now but do understand where you are coming from. If you are battling the software to do something you could do before without even thinking about it, it can be distracting, slow you down and get in the way of your thought process.

Of course there is an adjustment process but there is a beautiful simplicity and elegance to FCPX although of course some things still annoy me.

The primary one for me is not having instant access to the opacity bar. And that does hold me up but not by more than other stuff speeds me up, which is principally sync and not having to worry about B roll getting knocked out of place, which saves me incredibly amounts of time.

Not having to worry about a section of the timeline if I cannot actually see it is really great. With FCPX you can have absolute confidence if you drop a shot in or lengthen a few frames nothing else is going to be impacted.

I love that.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:57:06 am

Oh I am not battling the software. I thought I was doing something wrong because if feels so slow so often. But after working with professionals who have been doing professional work on FCPX for two years now, I think I am working it the way you should.

I don't think FCP7 is the best comparison, an old lady now. But AVID for me certainly is. In many ways it's a lot more direct. And yes, it asks a certainly discipline in putting things in your timeline, but when it's there, it's there.

My main gripes are that FCPX gets slow. It does a lot of calculations in the background that I cannot see or even wonder what it's doing. I have to, just like many colleagues of mine, restart it three times a day so I clears its chaches or whatever it's doing.
I sincerely doubt the quality of its mediamanagement and its libraries, which are, in my humble opinion, excellent in AVID. Part of why AVID handles so solidly. So I wouldn't mind the extra button pressing in FCPX if it would respond immediately. But it doesn't. Pressing the spacebar gives me reaction times in payback between 0 and 2 seconds... varying.... 2 seconds to start playing is ridiculously long if you ask me.

FCPX is here to stay, that much is certain. But the whole thing seems very undeveloped and immature at this stage. And that includes (I honestly really agree with you) naming everything. (Projects, Libraries, Event, Start Range Selection, Skimming...).


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 6:56:07 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Thinking about story, structure and pace is crucial, but I want my NLE not to be an obstacle. I don't want to lose precious time on pressing buttons. I want to be able to change, shape, try, form and shape. So speed in trying and shaping IS important, I want to see if it works or how it can work better."

This is precisely why I choose to use FCPX over AVID or Premiere. Like naming conventions, it should be very clear that we each have our relative preferences and working styles. No different from the days of the FCP legacy / AVID wars.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 10:24:27 pm

That's all nice and dandy if you work alone. But once you work with color graders or audiostudio's, it's kinda nice to have a language we all understand.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 11:01:17 pm

Mike, you are taking to fcpx users don't send, um, projects out to audio or color.

The word Project has never ever ever not once, caused any modicum of confusion.

As a matter of fact, because of the ease of Roles, getting organized for finish is very easy with X.

Also, I don't experience the performance issues you are experiencing. What computer are you on?


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 11:59:00 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "
The word Project has never ever ever not once, caused any modicum of confusion.

As a matter of fact, because of the ease of Roles, getting organized for finish is very easy with X.

Also, I don't experience the performance issues you are experiencing. What computer are you on?"


My experience too. It may be the case that the colorists and audio post folks I work with talk about how immature FCPX's nomenclature is, but they also have no issues with what I send them and the process is as smooth as any I have encountered with other NLEs.

Editing is smooth as silk on a new MacPro and new MacBookPro.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 10:57:23 am
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Jun 2, 2015 at 10:59:24 am

[Mike Warmels] "I counted that making a simple audio-video split edit of one frame (for arguments sake) takes SEVEN actions in FCPX."

Funny. I can do it in three key strokes. Sometimes, two.

If play head is on the cut. Shift left or right bracket will expand the audio and select the edge. Command and period will then extend or retract. So that's two keystrokes to make a one frame split edit. Shift left (or right) bracket and period (or comma).

To effect the video, it's a few more keystrokes, but it's super fast. First I expand both audio clips, then select the video left or right edge, then trim with comma period. The combination is:

Hold shift.

Hit left and then right bracket.

Release shift and hit either left, or right bracket or forward slash to select which side (or both) of the video you want to trim, and then use comma period.

If you know that combination it takes under two seconds to get what you need. How much faster can we go?


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 11:10:26 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Funny. I can do it in three key strokes. Sometimes, two."

Thank you I'm going to try that Jeremy. A little nugget.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 11:10:28 am

In AVID you can.

You forget you have to select the clip first (action no.1). Then CTRL-bracket (action no.2), trim (action no.3) And you have to tuck it back in again (action 4.) If it's video a few more. And then I am not counting the audio fade business if the cut needs to sound a little nice.

In AVID: Ctrl-MOUSE click on ANY cut and you can drag the track (or tracks if it's audio) you want immediately - ONE move by mouse. By keyboard: one keystroke for trimming mode, select left or right and then nudge. And you don't have to be ON the cut exactly... just anywhere near will do. Plus you don't have to tuck it in again. Audio crossfade: two key strokes.

I know it feels like nitpicking... but after four weeks of editing straight on a few shows back to back... it feels tiresome in comparison.

But I do like the fact that FCX can be very short-cutty by keyboard. At first glance it's very mousy... and that doesn't do the wrist much good.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 12:27:40 pm
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Jun 2, 2015 at 12:29:04 pm

if you're using the mouse, just expand all the audio and use the mouse. It's one shortcut.

Now, adding a cross fade, yes, there's currently no on shortcut for it. I wish there were, but I can do split edits Very quickly in fcpx, it's so fast that I don't even think about it. Two keystrokes is nothing.


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 3:12:25 pm

[Mike Warmels] "You forget you have to select the clip first (action no.1)."

[Mike Warmels] "By keyboard: one keystroke for trimming mode, select left or right and then nudge."

I find it funny that you mention how you have to select the clip in FCPX to use keyboard shortcuts, but neglect to mention that you have to select the track in Avid to do the same thing.

I work in Avid all day, and personally I find it MUCH slower in terms of overall performance. I hit buttons fast and find that sometimes I've hit two shortcuts in quick succession and the second one doesn't register. So I wait and then have to hit the shortcut again to do what I want. This is particularly a pain when using the smart tool. I select the smart tool, move some clips, then turn it off. Only because the Avid was concentrating on the move I was making, it doesn't register that I hit the shortcut to turn it off and then when I attempt to scrub in my timeline, I end up grabbing a long piece of slug and erasing an entire track of video.

Don't even get me started on the autosave. After working with a program that always saves everything you do without interrupting you, waiting for the Avid to save all your open bins (sometimes in excess of 15-20 seconds) every 15-30 minutes is worse than annoying. And heaven forbid if you have a bin open that you don't own the lock on. Yes, it's not as enjoyable as it sounds being told that this bin won't be saved and requiring you to click "don't save" each time autosave kicks in. Yeah, that doesn't ever interrupt the flow of my work.

And Avid can have a long delay playing a sequence too since it has to load the whole thing into RAM first. It's been my experience, especially in the most recent version that FCPX is much faster on that front. Everywhere I look, there are delays with the Avid interface. Like to see your waveforms? Better wait for them to draw. Want to zoom in to your timeline after that, better wait for them to redraw. Perform a few functions, oh wait, suddenly the waveforms have to redraw again for no apparent reason. Need to move some clips? I hope you don't have audio scrubbing on because that's going to take a while. What's that? You can't turn off audio scrubbing while you're in the middle of moving the clips? You have to stop what you're doing, turn off audio scrubbing, and then go back to moving in order to regain any speed? How about trimming? Surely, making one frame trims with audio scrubbing on isn't hard. Oh, delay again. Wow. Lovely.

I like my Avid, but I'm also not in denial about how slowly it handles in comparison to the newer, faster NLEs. If Avid would stop adding functionality for niche film workflows long enough to improve the responsiveness of the UI, I would be happy. But alas, if the marker window has taught me anything, it's that Avid doesn't see any issue with the UI, or else is afraid to make any changes, even to performance.

Andy

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 10:19:58 pm

Well, that is where my experience is different. I have no delays. I don't use a full waveform, only where I select it with in and outpoints and that works fine.

I find FCX slow in its build up wave forms because there you can only choose between on or of. At least AVID allows you to choose how you use it.

I have no delays in AVID. I remember cutting in HD using four different external hard drives hooked up with USB2 cables... worked perfectly.

And trimming: you don't have to select. I have my smart tool of trimming always ON... and then it just click with the CTRL and you can trim by hand immediately. If you want to do it differently, go to trimming mode. AVID allow for several methods.

When it comes down to delays FCX uses so much memory. It's constantly doing stuff while the background window is idle, that it slows down after an hour of so... I don't have these issues with my AVID system. It's very smooth, stable and consistent, in fact.


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 12:08:27 am

[Mike Warmels] "And trimming: you don't have to select. I have my smart tool of trimming always ON... and then it just click with the CTRL and you can trim by hand immediately. If you want to do it differently, go to trimming mode. AVID allow for several methods."

I was responding to you specifically comparing FCPX trim using keyboard shortcuts versus using Avid with keyboard shortcuts.

If you're talking mouse controls, then you can trim by just clicking the audio or video edge and either drag or use keyboard shortcuts. Same number of steps. You work with smart trim tool always active? You can work with all audio expanded in X if you like. Instant access to your audio tracks.

I'm never going to suggest that X has as good trimming tools as Avid, it obviously doesn't. But it's just as easy to make the kind of split edit trims you're talking about. I see no measurable difference in editing time.

As far as your waveform workaround, it's just that. A workaround. I don't want to have to mark INs/OUTs to view waveforms. And I don't want it to have to redraw the damn things every time I resize my timeline view. FCPX draws waveforms faster, and they react to changes, and it just works better.

And I don't see the slow downs you're experiencing. Not since the 10.0... versions. FCPX works snappy for hours. The only lag I get is if I'm editing with a large number of multiclips up or editing with the inspector open. Is your Avid system on the same computer as your FCPX or are we talking two separate computers?

Andy

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


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 12:17:23 am

[Andy Neil] "As far as your waveform workaround, it's just that. A workaround. I don't want to have to mark INs/OUTs to view waveforms. And I don't want it to have to redraw the damn things every time I resize my timeline view. FCPX draws waveforms faster, and they react to changes, and it just works better. "

Avid caches the wave-forms now since version 7. I never have to redraw FWIW.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:59:48 am

I work on a brand new MacPro, 6 core, D700 graphics card and 48GB of RAM. That should suffice, I would say.

But it's not just me. There are two editing facility houses that I work with and they to have this issue that FCPX slows down after 1-2 hours of editing. Maybe we're working too fast on it or something. ;-)

And yes, I run the AVID and FCPX on the same computer. And to be honest, waveforms build really quickly on this machine in AVID. I just use the other method (or work around as you would have it) because I kinda like that I can see them when I need them.

But to be honest, I think FCPX is Work Around Central. In general I run into some very weird stuff. Some examples

1.Reveal in browser (a favourite option of mine in all NLE's - others call it Match Frame). I press reveal in browser (for which I have to select the clip first) and the browser opens up, needs time to load everything and for the waveforms (takes a little time). But then... I can't directly see the clip I wanted revealed. So I press 'reveal in browser' again and then it goes to the particular clip. Again: it's slowish and I need to reveal it twice...
2. Using XD-CAM stuff (or any MXF material like footage from the Canon C300). For some reason you can't import this. I looked this up and what I found is that Apple wants you to use XD-CAM material als native. So it cannot import it and convert it to Apple Pro Res. But... when handling non-Apple Pro Res footage, FCPX uses only one of your cores... And then I think: WHAAT? I thought this was a 64 bit machine? Why can't I use it now as it should.
3. Export (or "Share" - rolls eyes ;-) ). Exporting to different codecs is limited. You need Compressor to make a HUGE work around, but Compressor is a really outdated program. Plus the hassle of making profiles in one program and then importing that in FCPX is downright silly. FCP7 didn't have that, AVID or Premiere don't have that. IT's silly. So I now make an export and use my trusted old Quicktime7 to convert it to the size I want. And this is something I use a lot to get viewing versions out of the door.
4. Keyword are great. I think that works very nice. But what I don't get is why the browser sorts everything on date or something else I don't need. For instance, I am using lots of music sorted by kind. Say "funky". So I have like 50 track of funky music. But I have only two options to see them: as blocks with waveforms or as a list sorted bij date folders... I can't see just the list. I have to open all these folders, or minimise the clip browser where I see them al. Why can't I just see the list of tracks??

It's a lot of these things. And as I said: it works, it has some very powerful tools, there's a certain elegance.... but it is extremely clumsy on other counts. And to me it says: FCPX is immature... it's an adolescent at best.

Now, AVID may be a bit of an old geezer. But in my kind of work I prefer AVID for a few reasons:
1. The mediamanagement system is great. Yes, you have to digitise your footage first to make it work, but then: you have to transfer everything to Apple Pro Res for FCPX as well to really benefit from it.
But AVID's mediamanagement system makes the media work very direct plus a lot of effects and stuff are real time in the sense that it either is really REAL time or doesn't stutter, like FCPX does when effects ae involved.
2. It works great with color grading, audio mixing studios. The export features are excellent.
3. The ISIS network system when working in a larger facility works very well and is very solid. The SAN system you need voor FCPX is... well... not entirely developed.

To make sure, AVID isn't perfect. It has it s quirks. But so has any NLE I have worked on or with. the major redeeming factor for FCPX is it price: you get a lot of money worth. But my main point is that I don't really understand why the 'new paradigm' was necessary, what it added to workflow for professionals (so far)... but I can see it suits the need something that looks like could actually work on a iPad kind of device: it looks modern.

But if FCPX was priced like AVID used to be, I'd wonder if people would bother all the hassle.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:04:58 am

[Mike Warmels] "But AVID's mediamanagement system makes the media work very direct plus a lot of effects and stuff are real time in the sense that it either is really REAL time or doesn't stutter, like FCPX does when effects ae involved."

If you set playback to "better performance" you shouldn't get any stuttering at all. I get none on my 2008 MP even after applying CC and other filters.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 2:23:42 pm

Oh yes, that's a good: watching my HD footage in some crap resolution as it keeps changing the output resolution based on how busy FCPX is. I thought the time of SD was over.


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 10:39:53 am

1) on a lesser machine mine loads instantly in browser even if the browser window is closed to begin with. Does this happen with you after allowing time for the waveforms to fully load in the browser after an import?

3) Agreed, "share" is stupid. And I don't know any consumer level computer literate person that does not understand import export. So who does this help? You can export to master file and under settings tab you do have choices. Maybe not as many as you need? I always used compressor with FCP 3-7.

4) in the browser, click the gear and choose group clips by none.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 10:57:17 am

[Mike Warmels] "That should suffice, I would say."

Yes. It should be good. My machine doesn't slow down after 1-2 hours, though. What version of fcpx are you using? I will say that if you import clips that have 8 channels of audio and 6 of those aren't being used, it's best to turn off all the unused channels.

1) No doubt, reveal in browser/match frame needs help, especially with multicam.

2) I routinely use MXF material in fcpx without converting to ProRes or rewrapping to .mov. Native MXF has been available to all users since 10.1.2 I believe. With Sony material in particular, you must drag and drop the material from the Finder, otherwise the importer will rewrap to .mov. MXF works very well in fcpx.

3) I'm not sure what codec you need out of fcpx, but you can use Compressor presets right in fcpx. It couldn't be much easier. From fcpx you can export all flavors of ProRes, AVC-I MXF, MP4, h264 mov, uncompressed, xdcam mov or MXF. What else do you need and how hard is it to setup a Compressor preset that is available in fcpx?

4) in the bottom left corner of the browser, there's a little gear icon. Click it and choose Group Clips > None. This is super basic fcpx knowledge.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 2:28:17 pm

I often export in lower resolutions to send off to commissioning editors or producers. No need to send them X GB sized files.
And sometimes people need it in particular specs for internet, animation or particular SD purposes. And I fin it bothersome to go to a different program...well, bothersome. Let's just say I find it totally Unprofessional. FCP7 used to be able to do it, so why not FCPX.

About the native stuff. It works natively, I know, you can use it. But that's not the point. As I said: with native MXF you're only using ONE core... Not the SIX Apple gave me. And MXF is a pretty big compression. So now you have to work with that compression and NOT use the 64 bit technology. So why can't FCPX just import and convert the stuff to Apple Pro Res? It's just silly.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 2:57:25 pm

[Mike Warmels] "And I fin it bothersome to go to a different program...well, bothersome. Let's just say I find it totally Unprofessional. FCP7 used to be able to do it, so why not FCPX."

I assume you are being forced to use FCPX as you seem to find so much of it "unprofessional"?


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 3:08:21 pm
Last Edited By Mike Warmels on Jun 3, 2015 at 3:11:36 pm

I find it "not finished". It's just a tool. I have several clients who work with various NLE's. So I just adapt and work with what they prefer.

It's just that after a few months intensively working with it, although I've had it and used it a few times before in the past few years, I don't get the "best and fastest NLE EVAH!!" praise it's been getting for quite a while now. I don't think it's the best, and I seriously question that it's the fastest.

And yes, there are things very unprofessional about it. It's not great in working with other systems, it needs a lot of space (Libraries reaching sizes of well into the double digit GB's), it needs a LOT of memory... and it's not downward compatible. Something that FCP7 had already, except at that time using XML to go 'down' to previous versions worked well. In FCPX you lose a lot of crucial data by doing that.

So it's a serious tool, but to be honest, it's just not finished IMHO. I think they threw it on the market too soon and it's being reworked, refined etc ever since. I'm sure one day it'll be a fine working NLE.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 3:21:09 pm

Yes, and I just explained how that works if my MAJOR client uses it for the projects I do for them and they CAN'T update.

Now, AVID isn't perfect, I'll give you that, but it certainly doesn't give a hoot in what version people work with. You have to understand that larger companies, editing facilities work in huge server based environments that are for instance still based on Mavericks. They cannot "just" upgrade to FCPX 2. (which ONLY works under Yosemite) because that would have huge and pricey ramifications for the ENTIRE set-up. If FCPX would be upward and downward compatible, there would be no issue.

I hope you can understand that. That being said, you act as if these options you refer to are the basic elements FCPX has to offer as in "always". FCPX 10.2 has JUST been released a few weeks ago.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 4:39:54 pm

[Mike Warmels] "And yes, there are things very unprofessional about it. It's not great in working with other systems, it needs a lot of space (Libraries reaching sizes of well into the double digit GB's"

With every post it is more and more obvious that you haven't discovered the basics of FCPX. If you have been using FCPX extensively for the past few months, you woudl know that having a large library is a choice, not a mandate. You have a choice where to store your media and cache.

These are issues that are easily solved with even a rudimentary knowledge of FCPX, including how to sort media.

You call FCPX immature, yet refuse to update to the most recent version which contains improvements including to the cache and waveform drawing (which will help with your playback issues, too).

Sorry to be so defensive, but it's very tiring to hear about how crappy FCPX is from people who don't really use it. I know, I know, you use it, but...your libraries are many GBs which seems to make think that you've haven't even really scratched the surface.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 5:37:29 pm

Read before you post please. I explained clearly why I CANNOT update yet. It has to do with a client who can't update.

And then we run into the downward compatibility issue (something I've been dealing with for many many years of FCP (ANY version). It's these things that never gets solved, simply because Apple doesn't want different stuf around: they want you to continually update and buy new stuff as you go along.

And I know you can move your render files etc. But I work WITH other people who also work with my libraries. So we have to keep things simple (ideally I'd only exchange libraries but sometimes we run into relinking issues if we have copies of the same media).

I sometimes get the idea that people who worship FCPX work alone... not in larger workgroups with different locations, different set ups, audio mixers, color graders, broadcasters and their broadcast requirements (I can't even make a broadcast master for my country from FCPX - you always have to go third party, but not even Compressor helps out there).

Let me put it very simply then: FCPX is NOT perfect. AVID is not perfect. Premiere is NOT perfect. They all have issues, that's why we discuss them.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 5:56:47 pm

[Mike Warmels] "simply because Apple doesn't want different stuf around: they want you to continually update and buy new stuff as you go along. "

Wow. That's just plain obtuse. The FCP team/Apple are jerks, because they introduce new features, therefore have to update the XML code, therefore older version can't understand it! LOL... you're just plain brilliant.


[Mike Warmels] "(ideally I'd only exchange libraries but sometimes we run into relinking issues if we have copies of the same media). "

You clearly haven't understood even the most basic concepts of FCP's media management.


[Mike Warmels] "not in larger workgroups with different locations, different set ups, audio mixers, color graders, broadcasters and their broadcast requirements (I can't even make a broadcast master for my country from FCPX - you always have to go third party, but not even Compressor helps out there)."

Right. You have completely obscure, vastly different output requirements than the plethora of broadcast companies around the world that work with FCP X 24/7. They can't actually get anything useable out, and being blind and (unlike you of course) unprofessional "FCPX worshippers" they keep their mouth shut, so as not to taint the good name.

Bravo.

- RK


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:02:35 pm

Why are so aggressive about it? Did you give birth to FCPX or something?

Tell me then how to make an MXF broadcast mate from FCPX? I said 'my country' because i have no idea how it works in other countries. I think having MXF masters a little outdated.Yet a lot of camera's work with it, so it's not a totally alien choice.

And my point remains: why did FCP5/6/7 and why do AVID and Premiereall these export possibilities IN the programme and FCPX not? You still haven't answered that. Wouldn't you LIKE to have these sharing possibilities that you can just select codec, size, bit rate etc etc? Would that be such a nasty option to have? It used to be quite natural.

But fine. Since you're the expert, explain to me the basics of FCPX Mediamanagement? Because I'd really like to learn.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:13:47 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Did you give birth to FCPX or something? "

Thanks for making so many things clear.


[Mike Warmels] "Tell me then how to make an MXF broadcast mate from FCPX? "

Well gee, I would... IF ONLY YOU HAD THE MOST CURRENT VERSION. Oh right... please, continue the endless circle, won't you? Remind us why FCP is clearly the problem here, not anything else. We keep forgetting.

This is a seriously cringeworthy waste of everyone's time. Thanks. I'm out.

- RK


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:18:08 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "[Mike Warmels] "Tell me then how to make an MXF broadcast mate from FCPX? "

Well gee, I would... IF ONLY YOU HAD THE MOST CURRENT VERSION. Oh right... please, continue the endless circle, won't you? Remind us why FCP is clearly the problem here, not anything else. We keep forgetting."


It is a little odd moaning about problems that have already been fixed.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:19:11 pm

You don't have to respond. But hey...let's be honest here. 10.2 has only been out for SIX WEEKS!!! It's not like that's the one that has always been around.

So I guess 10.2.1, the current version, is the PERFECT NLE... all debates can now be closed. I'll download it today! Perfection has been achieved. NLE heaven is here. Close down all the rest.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:26:25 pm

[Mike Warmels] "So I guess 10.2.1, the current version, is the PERFECT NLE... all debates can now be closed. I'll download it today! Perfection has been achieved. NLE heaven is here. Close down all the rest.
"


No-one is saying that, we're just pointing out it fixes many of the things that you are actually moaning about. Still LOTS of development to be done - it is the newest NLE out there!


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:33:03 pm

Oh so it isn't perfect.

I find it somewhat discouraging you seem to have no understanding of the fact that I work with clients that don't make the upgrade. You could also say: "yeah, those are issues in 10.1.4. 10.2 has many of them solved.Would be great of you could upgrade". I mean...come on... 10.2 has only been out for SIX WEEKS...and has already had its first upgrade... You know... even 10.2 had issues that had to be fixed within days.

And personnally I thin the "newest NLE out there" is a weak argument. Apple's had years and YEARS of experience with an NLE: FCP1-7.... What I find odd that they seem to be reinventing themselves entirely (and slowly but surely they're putting a lot of the old version back...)


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:33:16 pm

[Steve Connor] "No-one is saying that, we're just pointing out it fixes many of the things that you are actually moaning about. Still LOTS of development to be done - it is the newest NLE out there!"

Yes.

In no way is FCPX perfect, Mike. There are many mechanics that could use some improvement, anyone who is honest with themselves and uses FCPX on a daily basis will tell you that.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:30:48 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:48:28 pm

[Mike Warmels] "So I guess 10.2.1, the current version, is the PERFECT NLE... all debates can now be closed. I'll download it today! Perfection has been achieved. NLE heaven is here. Close down all the rest."

As absolutely troll-tastic as could be expected. The consumate professional we should all look to as our true guide to NLE bliss. Clearly. As proven over and over by his superior and precise knowledge of all.

*facepalm*


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:36:26 pm

Troll tactic... ha!

Some of you have been quite condescending in a thread called "FCPX or Not". You don't like the lesser points of FCPX. Everything I address (and have addressed in the past about previous version (like the pre-Library Events and Projects system) is always answered by "get the new version, everything has been resolved"...

Within four weeks after 10.2 was released, there was the first update. FCPX is an NLE in development. I think we can all agree on that. No version is perfect!


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:39:01 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Troll tactic... ha!"

Certainly starting to sound like it


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:46:25 pm

Maybe I should use the Tactic of Condescending Attitude like some people have been directing at me... I guess that is the better way to have a conversation. I don't I have to take any behaviour.

It's just software that I and you all trying to make a living with. It's not some damn religion...


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:51:15 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:52:14 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Maybe I should use the Tactic"

It's actually TASTIC. But never mind. It's not like we expect you to actually get anything factually right.

- RK


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:07:17 pm

How constructive of you. You're really the go-to-guy if I want to know how to do stuff in FCPX.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:23:11 pm

[Mike Warmels] "It's just software that I and you all trying to make a living with. It's not some damn religion..."

Don't kid yourself Mike... The church of Apple may not gather to hold hands every Sunday, but it still exists nonetheless. It's been compared to Scientolgy on this very forum, and I think you know why. :)

BTW, to counter some of the banter, just clone your boot drive to a FireWire drive, boot to the clone and update X to give it a whirl. It's completely non-destructive. (***FYI, this only works to counter the banter of those legitimately interested in the furthering the debate, nothing ever soothes the true fanboys.)

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:28:07 pm

Cloning can be dangerous if you are a SAN. Be careful.

I much prefer to simply zip up the old apps, X, Motion and Compressor. Then update.

If you need to walk it back, export a v1.4 XML of the entire library and then delete the new apps, and unzip the old apps. It also good to keep an old version of the 10.1 library by duplicating it before opening 10.2


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:33:37 pm

Hahaha... I know it's like Scientology. I used to be like that ten years ago when I started out on Apple... ;-)
I still love their OS system and everything, but not the way they try to dictate HOW you have to work. These bloody updates can render your computer slow and useless if you update to quickly. Ruined my perfectly working iPad2 that way. So yeah... Apple... .;-)

There's another trick though: just copy the 10.1.4 version from the Application Folder - save it somewhere with a different name. Upgrade tot 10.2.1 and then just put 10.1.4 back in the Applications Folder.
So I will certainly give a whirl sometime soon... I want to use the full power of my new MacPro.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:36:40 pm
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:42:40 pm

Please stop here. You're embarrassing yourselves. Accept the simple truth that you stumbled in here, Mike, full of half baked outdated and incorrect assumptions about this software. You exposed your ignorance about it and we're robustly called out. Leave it there. If you want to explore and learn the actual nature of the program and debate its merits and flaws, fine. But you have homework to do.
David Roth Wise, I'm deeply disappointed in you. This is at least the second time you have tried to paint X users as cultists on par with Scientologists. That is insulting, extremely rude and you should apologize to everyone here.

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

David Roth Weiss
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:52:16 pm

[Bill Davis] "David Roth Wise, I'm deeply disappointed in you. This is at least the second time you have tried to paint X users as cultists on par with Scientologists. That is insulting, extremely rude and you should apologize to everyone here."

Excuse me Billy Boy, but an apology is in order, because you're sorely mistaken, if you go back in time you'll see that someone else here brought up the Scientology analogy about two weeks ago, not me...

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 1:03:33 am

Perhaps David, but YOU brought it up this time.

So that makes your defense "hey, the other kid did it first!"

Something I taught my son was utterly lame when he was in 5th grade.

I thought you had come back to re-engage this community as an adult.

I see I was mistaken.

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

David Roth Weiss
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 1:54:57 am

Bill, anyone with even a modicum of integrity would have apologized and offered a retraction.

Look, let's face it, whether you're like Scientologist, or just a plain old Apple can do no wrong Fanboy, is there really enough difference between the two that we should be splitting hairs here?

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 5, 2015 at 1:13:59 am

[David Roth Weiss] "let's face it, whether you're like Scientologist, or just a plain old Apple can do no wrong Fanboy, is there really enough difference between the two that we should be splitting hairs here?"

It's a strong question, a good question, and a question only those involved can answer.

[James Culbertson] "Time to take personal responsibility and move on, or accept that you personally cannot or do not want to change."

these here are the very words of faith. It is good faith, James' own faith and a faith many might not accept, but he holds this faith in his heart. Some here might view this as a discussion of software - others might not. They may see a greater yardmark and a further enlightened shore. Let us open our eyes to their contact lenses but for a moment.

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


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 5, 2015 at 1:49:24 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "[James Culbertson] "Time to take personal responsibility and move on, or accept that you personally cannot or do not want to change."

these here are the very words of faith. It is good faith, James' own faith..."


Since I actually edit in FCPX everyday (and many weekends too) on tight deadline documentary-style corporate videos (amongst other things) working with teams of production and post-production folk, I would say that my words are those born out of empirical experience and are as real world based as any on this discussion board. (I was a neurobiologist in an early life and know the difference between empirical observation and religious faith.)

On the other hand, I think anyone who does not use FCPX (or only very infrequently) could be described as speaking out of faith when they talk about FCPX. Does that describe you Aindreas? Are you a member of the evangelical church of the Anti-FCPX? Nothing wrong with that; I fully support Freedom of Religion.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 5, 2015 at 6:44:21 am

[James Culbertson] "Are you a member of the evangelical church of the Anti-FCPX?"

He's not just a member, he's the Pope of it!


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:54:18 pm

[Bill Davis] "Please stop here. You're embarrassing yourselves. Accept the simple truth that you stumbled in here, Mike, full of half baked outdated and incorrect assumptions about this software. You exposed your ignorance about it and we're robustly called out. Leave it there. If you want to explore and learn the actual nature of the program and debate its merits and flaws, fine. But you have homework to do.
David Roth Wise, I'm deeply disappointed in you. This is at least the second time you have tried to paint X users as cultists on par with Scientologists. That is insulting, extremely rude and you should apologize to everyone here."


Yep. Lot's of projection. Perhaps the name of this forum should be changed to "Fundamentalist Church of the Anti-FCPX."


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:48:35 pm

[Mike Warmels] "And my point remains: why did FCP5/6/7 and why do AVID and Premiereall these export possibilities IN the programme and FCPX not?"

If you're interested, I believe the answer to this is that FCPX is a purely 64 bit application and as such only 64 bit codecs are supported for export. As I understand it, Compressor is still straddling the line between 64 and 32 because it maintains support for legacy codecs. That's how I've understood it anyway.

Andy

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:52:06 pm

Hmm... Could be.

Still, AVID went 64bit with MC6. (We're on MC 8.3 now, a couple of years later) and it can do all that. And always has.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 9:04:24 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Hmm... Could be.

Still, AVID went 64bit with MC6. (We're on MC 8.3 now, a couple of years later) and it can do all that. And always has."


Just so we can compare apples to apples, can you tell us what this magical MXF format is you're making?

Is it IMX 50?


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 9:07:35 pm

No need. Everything I address is outdated.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 9:13:35 pm

I'm just curious. You have said it's not possible, but MXF has been possible in FCPX even in 10.1.4, so it might be inaccurate, not outdated.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 9:17:50 pm

I never tried making then myself, but about 10 professional editors who work on FCPX said there was an issue. I think it's the XD-Cam format: MPEG2-HD422.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 9:31:06 pm

[Mike Warmels] "I never tried making then myself, but about 10 professional editors who work on FCPX said there was an issue. I think it's the XD-Cam format: MPEG2-HD422."


Hmm. I'd be curious to know what happens when you try it out.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 9:43:18 pm

Try it! Lol


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 9:11:01 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Still, AVID went 64bit with MC6. (We're on MC 8.3 now, a couple of years later) and it can do all that. And always has.
"


Not entirely. Avid and other programs that maintain compatibility with 32 bit codecs have to have 32 bit code in the program to handle it. Apple decided to keep FCPX completely free of legacy code and let's face it, it was probably the smart idea since they were writing a brand new application from the ground up, and probably didn't want to hunt for that code when it finally goes away in the near future. In the case of Premiere and Avid, you have a program that was 32 bit to begin with, upgraded to 64 bit except where it was necessary to maintain 32bit code.

As I said, this was how it was explained to me. Since Compressor handles legacy codecs and is well-integrated into FCPX and is only $50, I've not found it a particular hardship to use Compressor in concert with FCPX. After all, Adobe has Media Encoder and Avid has Squeeze bundled with it so all the major NLEs include programs to supplement their export capabilities. In the case of Premiere and FCPX, the integration is deep. In the case of Avid, it's not really integration at all.

Andy

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 9:14:55 pm

Ah right that makes sense. Still, operational I don't experience the non-integration.

The new Compressor gets extremely bad response in the App Store. Is that justified?


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 9:27:06 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Still, operationally I don't experience the non-integration."

It seems to me if I can hijack your statement for a more global point. That we are all speaking from personal operational experience which can sometimes feel like it is absolute in the heat of the debate; but there is no absolute objective stance in this discussion though some may try to imply otherwise. There may have been a time when a majority of the group called editors could agree on a set of definitions for what and how we do what we do, but that time has passed. Our preferences all come from our personal operational history with any particular NLE. I don't operationally experience any cognitive dissonance with differing nomenclature whereas others on this discussion board do.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 9:42:18 pm

Me neither in a strict sense. It is what it is.

However there seems to be a tendency to consider everything that's been around for many years as old, old fashioned, obsolete. That's just as insulting as some people feel when FCPX gets criticism. Renaming things with words with meanings that makes no sense * coughprojectcough * may be part of that feeling.

I mean, all this agressive behaviour in this thread started with me remarking that I could not see wat FCPX is really faster, as was always one of the Major claims. Also that it was easy to learn an intuitive. Now an FCPX got angry suggesting it takes a long time to really know how to use FCPX. Wasn't that always the criticism directed at AVID??


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 10:31:27 pm

[Mike Warmels] "However there seems to be a tendency to consider everything that's been around for many years as old, old fashioned, obsolete. That's just as insulting as some people feel when FCPX gets criticism. Renaming things with words with meanings that makes no sense * coughprojectcough * may be part of that feeling."

But I assume you would agree that what makes sense or what makes no sense varies from person to person. And the problem is mainly that we sometimes take each other too seriously, rather than seeing that each of us has a different perspective and a different set of expectations for how we work and interact as professionals.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 5:39:33 am

Of course I agree. That's why I don't get it why people get so condescending and annoyed. Especially in a thread where people discuss why vertaling things do or do not work for them.

If you can't dislike things or see the shortcomings of stuff you like, then you are deluding yourself. I could rant about a lot of stuff in AVID, but at this stage I do prefer to use that one over FCPX. Overview, directness, mediamanagement... It just works well.

I just wonder now of 10.1.4 just doesn't run smoothly because I run it under Yosemite... Because it was sluggish before the release of 10.2, and it still is.


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 9:43:09 pm

[Mike Warmels] "The new Compressor gets extremely bad response in the App Store. Is that justified?"

I'm not sure what they're saying about it, but it's probably for the most part unjustified. It's a pretty good app although since it went through it's makeover, I've found some of the features are tucked away so they're difficult to find, and there are certainly things it can't do.

Media Encoder is probably more comprehensive of the conversion programs although I find it a bit clunky to use. Compressor is pretty easy, but as I said, comes with the price where some of the advanced features are more hidden than they used to be.

Andy

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


Return to posts index

Dean Neal
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 8, 2015 at 8:26:32 am

[Mike Warmels] "Tell me then how to make an MXF broadcast mate from FCPX?"

I have delivered personally over 30 Television shows here in Australia as XDCAM HD422 25i MXF Masters as digital files and/or on XDCAM Optical Disc.

Its never been easier with FCP X.

Some masters I have sent have required Multiple Audio Stems (M&E etc) and some just a straight stereo out.

This software is more than up to the task on a MXF Front.

You will need to use Compressor however if you need multi-track audio.

Dean Neal...


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:18:50 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Read before you post please. I explained clearly why I CANNOT update yet. It has to do with a client who can't update. "

Well, I guess that we could all sit around and bash Pr CS6 because it doesn't have all of the new features that CC 2014, then?

[Mike Warmels] "And then we run into the downward compatibility issue "

As has been mentioned, FCPX 10.2 allows you to export the older version of FCPXML not only for FCPX itself, but for other helper apps. I use it almost every day (v 1.4) and nothing has stopped me from working.

[Mike Warmels] "And I know you can move your render files etc. But I work WITH other people who also work with my libraries. So we have to keep things simple (ideally I'd only exchange libraries but sometimes we run into relinking issues if we have copies of the same media). "

I work on a shared environment (SAN) on Yosemite, and haven't had any problems. We send libraries or timelines, media, whatever, around and don't have any relinking issues when using original media. Any NLE requires certain workflows and best practices, FCPX is no different.

[Mike Warmels] "I sometimes get the idea that people who worship FCPX work alone... not in larger workgroups with different locations, different set ups, audio mixers, color graders, broadcasters and their broadcast requirements (I can't even make a broadcast master for my country from FCPX - you always have to go third party, but not even Compressor helps out there).
"


Again, I routinely send out *cough* projects to graders and audio, graphics and effects, and share my edits to other systems that don't understand FCPXML. I have had one complaint, and that was because I missed a file once that had 16 channels of audio, and it was my fault for missing it. Otherwise, everything is much more organized and labeled. The audio post guys comment that I am the only person that labels their tracks/audio channels, and it helps them out when they receive a program they aren't familiar with.

I don't know what kind of broadcast master you need to make, but if it isn't covered with Compressor, surely Adobe Media Encoder, or Telestream Episode will cover it? I couldn't make an HD master on a UVW-1800 no matter how hard I tried. Or are you saying there's a board cast master than can be made using Quicktime 7, but not FCPX?


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:29:23 pm

Normally I don't have to make them. We do the final stuff at the broadcaster who makes the broadcast master (MXF). But working in AVID I can make them in my own editing set. Sometimes it's just faster that way, just upload them to an ftp server. So it's not a real issue, I just find it odd. (Because FCP7 could...and can. ;-) )

So tell me, this is something I'd really like to know: you can actually make fcpxml's in FCPX 10.2.1 that WORK in FCPX 10.1.4? Including all the audio data, audio selection, audio levels, fx etc. in tact? Because if that is the case, I'm going to upgrade this week.

One thing that I am very excited about about the latest update is the fact that it uses GPU power for rendering. Something I have been looking forward to for ages in any NLE. So if it were up to me, I'd upgrade six weeks ago. But I don't want to do all kinds of tricks and stuff in my spare time to make it downward compatible.

There's an editing facility house that has three of four versions of FCPX running on their systems, because some of their client runs various older versions. And upgrading from 10.0.9 (yes, some companies still work with that old thing) is apparanly quite hard. But that also causes issues, having the various systems running....


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:47:05 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Normally I don't have to make them. We do the final stuff at the broadcaster who makes the broadcast master (MXF). But working in AVID I can make them in my own editing set. Sometimes it's just faster that way, just upload them to an ftp server. So it's not a real issue, I just find it odd. (Because FCP7 could...and can. ;-) )"

I am very confused. FCP7 could not make MXFs without third party help. What recipe of MXF are you trying to make? There are 71 available presets that come preinstalled in FCPX. None of these will work for you?

Here's the categories:



And here's the available 25 fps settings:



[Mike Warmels] "So tell me, this is something I'd really like to know: you can actually make fcpxml's in FCPX 10.2.1 that WORK in FCPX 10.1.4? Including all the audio data, audio selection, audio levels, fx etc. in tact? Because if that is the case, I'm going to upgrade this week. "

You will need to be more specific as I don't know what you mean by "audio data" or "selection".


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 6:56:44 pm

Well, I have to go on what editors tell me here. They said that in 10.1.4 you could make fcpxml's, but it would just be very basic data. You know, you switch of audio channels in particular clips in the timeline/project (I often get XD-CAM stuff unwrapped to an HD422 Quicktime with all four channels duplicated), I often fade music in, or lower their levels. It just the kind of stuff you do as I work along, sort of premixing for viewings. So it would be helpful if the project in 10.1.4 would look exactly like the one you make in 10.2.1. Because otherwise, you'd have to do all that work again.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:12:44 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Well, I have to go on what editors tell me here."

(!)


I use XML v1.4 to send to audio post a lot. In it, is all of my channel assignment, and level control if I choose to send that information. In this case, effects are not sent over as there's no need.

Here's an anecdotal example:

Very simple timeline in FCPX 10.2.1:




The same timeline imported via XML v1.4 export to FCPX 10.1.4 (this partition is not on the SAN, that's why everything is offline, otherwise it would be online):



All levels and text are in place.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:18:05 pm

Oh right, well that looks very good.

Now another thing, if you don't mind. Would that work moving back and forth between 10.1.4 and 10.2.1?

Sounds maybe like a silly question but I'm doing a series where we partly edit in my own editing suite and one at the broadcaster. And we do move back and forth (part of the reason why I can't just upgrade like that)... Or would I be making it very hard for me that way?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:22:37 pm

If going the other way, I would simply make a transfer library from the 10.1.4 system.

So, 10.1.4 system makes a new library and drags the current Project in to the new library. You will get a waning about copying optimized and poxy media, uncheck those.

Close that library, zip it, and email it to you on 10.2.1. You open that library and say yes to the warning about updating it. Then you drag that Project to your current 10.2.1 library.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:27:16 pm

Yes, that would certainly work... hmm... Well, I have to think about, because going upward is not the issue, going downward is more the issue.

I just hope they hurry upgrading their SAN system Yosemite.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:40:23 pm

[Mike Warmels] " Well, I have to think about, because going upward is not the issue, going downward is more the issue. "

Well, Apple provides a dialog to export an XML in the previous version. This is a very welcome and new functionality that allows a version of backwards compatibility, but apparently I am now a scientologist for pointing these types of things out?


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:41:22 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I am now a scientologist for pointing these types of things out?"

Time for an audit?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:01:32 pm

[Steve Connor] "Time for an audit?"

Only by the bust of LRH.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:45:17 pm

HAHAHA!

I don't think he was referring to you.

Well, my MacBook Pro is coming back this weekend, I loaned it to a friend in dire need of a scientologist's apparatus. I'm first going to upgrade it on there and test it out in my own hemisphere before causing potential problems with my client. So thanks!

I do like a lot of things on the new version. Does it finally have an audio crossfade? Decent audiometers? A mixer?? ;-)


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:52:25 pm

[Mike Warmels] "I do like a lot of things on the new version. Does it finally have an audio crossfade? Decent audiometers? A mixer?? ;-)
"


No mixer or one touch cross fade on audio components that are attached to video. There is a lot of room for improvement in many areas.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 7:55:24 pm

Yeah, I figured as much.

I do wonder though how a mixer would work on FCPX. I imagine it needs some role dedicated mixer, and not track based. And that would require some (welcomed) discipline on assigning roles to the different types of audio. I'd certainly like that, especially if you can also custom color the different roles.


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 6:18:36 am

Hi Mike,

Why not update to latest version of FC on a test drive or partition and experiment with the work flow that you need on your own gear. Sounds too important to hope it works.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 6:26:03 am

Because with the projects (Two televisies series) I am doing, I have to go back and forth between my suite and The client's. I have an editor who finalised each episode. Sometimes in my suite but he needs to sble to finish or continue at the client's. It's their set up that limits mine, but well... They pay the bills.


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:41:20 pm

[Mike Warmels] "I sometimes get the idea that people who worship FCPX work alone... not in larger workgroups with different locations, different set ups, audio mixers, color graders, broadcasters and their broadcast requirements..."

Another incorrect idea. Keep them coming. And no, we don't worship FCPX; but we do like to correcting mistaken ideas about FCPX.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:48:33 pm

Okay, I guess I don't have to ask about to orher basic stuff like audio fades, audio meter and a mixer. Outdated I'm sure by now. I'll just continue for a while with 10.1.4 which so totally outdated a long six weeks ago.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 5:00:39 pm

[Mike Warmels] "So it's a serious tool, but to be honest, it's just not finished IMHO. I think they threw it on the market too soon and it's being reworked, refined etc ever since. I'm sure one day it'll be a fine working NLE."

Wow.

A few times over the years, and a deeper dive over a couple of MONTHS?

I wonder how you would feel if a Guy (lets assume he's a very qualified inDesign type), but just had exactly as much experience with Photoshop as you've had with X, applied for a gig and started expounding about how lacking Photoshop is as a image tool - I wonder how much credence you'd give his opinion?

Or would you just assume he just didn't know Photoshop deeply enough to have very qualified knowledge of the subject?

But I guess that with X, it's different. After all, so many folks with your level of experience have said these same things that it MUST be true, hun?

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

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 5:31:35 pm

No need to be so hostile, dude. Or condescending.

I said I have been working alone AND with FCPX experienced editors. Guys who have been working with it professionally for over two years. And I even see them run into these problems.

The idea has always been that FCPX is quick, intuitive, easy to learn, new paradigm, etc etc. So I have cut six 25 minute shows in the fast two months weeks from start to finish on FCPX. It's not like I'm a novice in editing. I have been doing this kind of work for well over 20 years and I have done all kinds of editing systems lineair, non-linear FCP7, AVID etc. If I run into weird things with a new system and ask editors who have been working with FCPX for over two years and even they run into them but found ways to work with or around it, then it's just part of the system.

So there's a lot of boasting about FCPX going on, and people like you who seem to find a need to go condescending people who have issues with then, fine... have your fun.

I thought this was the "FCPX or NOT" thread, not the "FCPX is God's Gift to Editors' thread.

Feel offended by anyone who points out things that don't work well. It critics that make these systems better, you know.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:21:00 pm

Where am I condescending? I pointed out your clear lack of experience with the program. What's wrong with that? So you have friends who know X better? Let them come here and make criticism. But they aren't doing that. You are. Like everyone else you are welcome to the debate. But your lack of first hand experience is completely relevant when you do so. Everyone gets to judge how much of your opinions spring from knowledge, and how much from ignorance, or a mix of the two. That's all. Fixing stuff exclusively to " make this work like I'm used to working!!!" is something that bores many of us. Most X editors I know (and that's a lot, internationally!) do not want to go back to the old days. Learn the software properly as it is - and then bitch about it. I'll be more ready to listen. My opinion and my 2 cents only.

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

David Roth Weiss
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 8:42:26 pm

[Bill Davis] "Where am I condescending?"

May I suggest a new forum to handle the traffic for that discussion?

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 5:15:18 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jun 4, 2015 at 5:19:10 pm

Na... I think I'll retract my feeding trough after all. It's clearly hopeless anyway...


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 4:26:16 pm

[Mike Warmels] "I often export in lower resolutions to send off to commissioning editors or producers. No need to send them X GB sized files."

So you can't send an mp4 that will allow you do go all the ay down to SD resolution from 4k (or higher)?

[Mike Warmels] "And sometimes people need it in particular specs for internet, animation or particular SD purposes. And I fin it bothersome to go to a different program...well, bothersome. Let's just say I find it totally Unprofessional. FCP7 used to be able to do it, so why not FCPX."

So setting up a preset in another program like compressor, and then having that preset available directly in to FCPX is bothersome and unprofessional, and Quicktime 7s old 8 bit pipeline is somehow more professional?

[Mike Warmels] "About the native stuff. It works natively, I know, you can use it. But that's not the point. As I said: with native MXF you're only using ONE core... Not the SIX Apple gave me. And MXF is a pretty big compression. So now you have to work with that compression and NOT use the 64 bit technology. So why can't FCPX just import and convert the stuff to Apple Pro Res? It's just silly."

Because certain codecs are already optimized in the eyes of FCPX. There would be zero gain to convert 50Mb XDCam to ProRes unless you just want to waste more disk space.

I don't understand what you men by one core, but some codecs are still 32 bit, a lot of them actually, so it may be a limitation of the codec, not FCPX.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 1:12:25 pm

[Mike Warmels] "My biggest issue is: is FCPX really better or faster. I have grave doubt about the latter."

Faster or slower are always a function of the task at hand. For example, for one client, I frequently cut spots that require a lot of versioning. Custom 800 numbers and end tags and then batch exports in a variety of formats. At this site, I'm on Adobe and hands down that process would be significantly slower using FCP 7/X or MC.

It's also about end-to-end workflow. Roundtripping using FCPXML or even standard XML can be less than satisfactory, compared with other options, like AAF.

But in general, given 4 years of experience with X, I've got to say that for me it's a draw. The front end is faster, the back end is often faster, the middle isn't. Most of this for me relates to X's poor performance on nearly any machine when I really want to be in the groove and editing quickly.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 10:22:34 pm

Yes, I gotta agree with you. I could deal with the sometimes more elaborate ways, if FCPX would't slow down so often as it does. It seems to devour memory... After about an hour the thing gets so slow...

And I wonder: why does my external hard drive start rattling like crazy every hour or so, slowing the FCPOX down? Is that OS indexing (and if so, what then) or FCPX doing stuff?


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 8:07:24 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Honestly, I don't care very much about all that. Apple decided to create a new paradigm and with that comes a different jargon. Silly? Yes, but hey, it's what it is.
"


You're missing the point Mike, the issue is not about the new paradigm, it's about the needless and unnecessary renaming of terms in the lexicon that have are the universal standards of the industry.

As I've said before, the terminology most everyone uses in the industry has been standardized for a reason, it's done so that the vast majority of people can understand precisely what you're talking about without explanation - taking time to explain things unnecessarily is inefficient. Think Merriam Webster Dictionary - they don't make sudden changes or replace words with new terms willy nilly, they wait until they become established in the lexicon.

Think of it this way, if Apple suddenly began calling audio by another name, such as ear-candy, how many times do you think that term would stop all progress just for you while you explain that to your clients? Then extrapolate over the entire population of editors using X and figure out how great the inefficiency would be.

And, for the record, one of the primary reasons the learning curve for X is longer than most other NLEs is because, not only did Apple change the paradigm, they also changed the lexicon, making the learning curve exponentially longer and more complicated, especially for those with the most experience.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 8:20:43 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "And, for the record, one of the primary reasons the learning curve for X is longer than most other NLEs is because, not only did Apple change the paradigm, they also changed the lexicon, making the learning curve exponentially longer and more complicated, especially for those with the most experience."

It probably did take me an extra 5 minutes to absorb the different terminology, and a day or two to understand the new interface and some of the major workflow changes. It took me awhile to get up to speed, but no more than when I started editing on AVID after working tape to tape, or FCP legacy after working on AVID. But I only have 20 years experience editing, perhaps if I had 30 or 40 years of experience I might feel different. I totally understand the irritation with the changed terminology, but this really feels like it is being dragged out of proportion.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 8:49:08 pm

[James Culbertson] "t probably did take me an extra 5 minutes to absorb the different terminology, and a day or two to understand the new interface and some of the major workflow changes. It took me awhile to get up to speed, but no more than when I started editing on AVID after working tape to tape, or FCP legacy after working on AVID. But I only have 20 years experience editing, perhaps if I had 30 or 40 years of experience I might feel different. I totally understand the irritation with the changed terminology, but this really feels like it is being dragged out of proportion."

For you maybe but it is a pretty major issue for many of us you might agree?


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:02:57 pm

[James Ewart] "For you maybe but it is a pretty major issue for many of us you might agree?"

Timelines being called projects is a major issue for you?


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:10:59 pm

[Steve Connor] "Timelines being called projects is a major issue for you?"

Yes. I have to communicate with people audio, colourists, finishers.

One language is simpler. Pointless inventing another. Immature.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:20:41 pm

[James Ewart] "Yes. I have to communicate with people audio, colourists, finishers.
"


So give us an example of how confusion may arise when communicating with say a Colourist?


[James Ewart] "One language is simpler. Pointless inventing another. Immature."

I agree, it does seem stupid to change the name, I'm just finding it difficult to see how it's a major problem.


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:49:40 pm

exactly. its almost a non issue while editing. but once you need to communicate, it's a nuisance. i would't bother with the thread on the techniques forum but on the debate forum it remains relevant. As does Apple's decision to EOL Aperture but the new PHOTOS is missing features that most Aperture users can't live without. Hopefully the same outcome where the features get put back in.

I also think as a teacher that the terminology is particular poor for students and consumer level editors because it does not help them learn the standards which includes vocabulary.

I do like the concept that an application can be tiered to all levels. So what you used as a child can grow with you as an adult and as a professional if that becomes your calling or serious hobby.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:03:10 pm

[James Ewart] "For you maybe but it is a pretty major issue for many of us you might agree?"

On this list yes. But all editors I know outside of this discussion board (even those who were intellectually resistant initially) found it to be a non-issue once they started to learn how to use FCPX.

It would be interesting to quantify what percentage of editors find FCPX (and its terminology) hard to grok and what percentage do not.

My guess is most editors don't care one way or the other. They are either using it or not.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:17:56 pm

[James Culbertson] "My guess is most editors don't care one way or the other. They are either using it or not."

My guess is your guess is wrong.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:23:04 pm

[James Ewart] "[James Culbertson] "My guess is most editors don't care one way or the other. They are either using it or not."

My guess is your guess is wrong.
"


My guess is that a lot of Editors aren't using it partially because of the name change, however I think most Editors who are using it don't care very much


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:01:45 pm

[James Culbertson] "It probably did take me an extra 5 minutes to absorb the different terminology, and a day or two to understand the new interface and some of the major workflow changes. It took me awhile to get up to speed, but no more than when I started editing on AVID after working tape to tape, or FCP legacy after working on AVID. But I only have 20 years experience editing, perhaps if I had 30 or 40 years of experience I might feel different. I totally understand the irritation with the changed terminology, but this really feels like it is being dragged out of proportion."

Agree with this entirely.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 8:47:32 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "And, for the record, one of the primary reasons the learning curve for X is longer than most other NLEs is because, not only did Apple change the paradigm, they also changed the lexicon, making the learning curve exponentially longer and more complicated, especially for those with the most experience."

And that is precisely why I call it immature.

i think these people are young and ignorant and half of them have never heard of Walter Murch or Sergei Eisenstein.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 10:14:40 pm

Yes, I agree completely. That's why I said it was silly they changed the lexicon. It's one of the first things I hated because I couldn't find how to do certain things: because they were named completely different. Why? I don't get it. It certainly is made for a new generation, not taking into account that the stuff we do also has history.

But what I also meant to say was: they're not gonna change it. This is what they came up with and they're gonna stick with it. We have to deal with it one way or another.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 1:39:37 pm

[Bill Davis] "The reason they have Storylines and call Projects Projects instead of calling timelines projects isn't an accident, IMO. It's a calculated decision to construct a new set of ideas and adapt the existing the language to reflect that. "

I'm not sure this is true. Storylines, I agree. But a "project" is the same as a "timeline" or "sequence". Why would Apple call it a Timeline window or a Timeline Index or the magnetic timeline concept? Why not a "Project" window, "Project Index", or "magnetic project" concept?

The reason Apple called sequences "Projects" has nothing to do with innovation. It's purely a naming convention that put X in sync with other Apple software. They really could care less whether it's consistent with standard naming practices within the industry.

The way you work within a Project is different than the way you work within a track-based Sequence. But what the two are - and the end result of each - is still the same.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 8:18:45 pm

I think it happened cause in FCP X 10.0, the library held all your projects. You had access to all your media. Therefore you'd create a new project that had access to all your media but was a new project. Stupid for technical reasons but that's the way they envisioned it. Worked for iPhoto.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

Dean Neal
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 8, 2015 at 8:08:28 am

[Bill Davis] "The reason they have Storylines and call Projects Projects instead of calling timelines projects isn't an accident, IMO. It's a calculated decision to construct a new set of ideas and adapt the existing the language to reflect that. "

Bill is correct, IMHO.

Getting hung up on the nomenclature for the sake of comfort to me is missing the premise of X.

To suggest editors can't collaborate because you refer to your edit as a 'project' instead of a sequence is just rubbish.

"Here is my project of string-outs for you to manipulate."

"Project? Whats that?"

"Oh, sorry its a Sequence or Timeline."

"Ok, thanks...."

End issue. For some in here that the naming of Projects is the end of meaningful collaborations in post production using FCPX is just... funny.

I used to chuckle in the days of FCP 7 etc. when editors I worked with would Name a BIN 'ZEQUENCES' in the list. Why do you ask? Because they wanted to find the Timeline Lists quickly and easily... and naming it with a 'Z' ensured it would always be at the bottom of the list in the Browser window. I know some renamed it '_Sequences' etc.

So, here we are in FCPX 10.2 and the new in-build Smart Collections do that for you, by grouping projects for you.

With the Keyword control and Metadata foundations in the software, life has never been easier.

But as is usual in this forum, we tend to get hung up on things that simply don't matter. Yet the big incremental workflow improvements are selectively ignored by some...

Final Cut X's premise was to be a superior content management system in the digital age.

I agree, the editing elements were thin at the start but content management was always its strong suit. The other elements seem to be developing well.

Now we are seeing major Film releases that aren't actually shot on film, the strong embrace of digital theories and nomenclature.

I am not saying the X is the golden goose, however in the words of H.G. Wells:

"Adapt or perish, now as ever, is nature's inexorable imperative."

Dean Neal...


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 8, 2015 at 4:42:46 pm

[Dean Neal] "Getting hung up on the nomenclature for the sake of comfort to me is missing the premise of X.
"


I seriously doubt anyone's really getting hung up so much on the nomenclature that they're unable to work. However, it's not unreasonable to acknowledge that changing the name of sequences to that of "project" which already had an existing definition within the editing community was needlessly confusing. The mere fact that you might have to have a clarifying conversation with a person about whether you meant ENTIRE PROJECT (all assets, sequences, video, etc) or just the PROJECT (sequence) is strong evidence that they probably could have chosen a better name.

And if you're making the argument that the names were meant to be clear within the program itself, a way to distinguish the various containers X uses, let's look at the name Event. Personally, I've never had a problem with the word Event being used to mean a container holding clips and sequences and other assets. But the name Event implies a specific workflow. You shoot an "event" and all the files for that "event" go in that container. Bin, on the other hand, is completely generic. It implies nothing about the workflow and as such is used in varying ways.

Of course, just because Apple calls a container, an "event" doesn't mean we have to use the container the way it's implied. I'm merely pointing out that the nomenclature they've created isn't always the most clever or improved way of handling it.

Upon reflection, I don't necessarily think they should've kept the name "bin" to mean events or collections. They work quite different from Avid or Premiere bins and should have a different name. I also don't have an issue with Library or Event or Collection as a naming convention either. You have to call them something, and at least those names don't have a pre-existing meaning in the editing world. But in my opinion, there was never a good reason to change timeline or sequence to Project. Particularly when many people work on single projects that require multiple sequences in the final output. It was a bad decision.

Will they change it? No. I don't expect them too. But I can love editing and working on FCPX (and I do) and still acknowledge that calling a sequence a "project" was dumb.

Andy

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 10, 2015 at 8:41:54 pm

I keep wanting to write more about this, but here's one of the reasons why I think a Project is an apt name.

Here's a Project:




Simple, right?


Well, here's what's in it after breaking most of the clips apart. I had to make a gif as I couldn't fit it in to one screen grab:




In that what seems to be simple timeline, it holds a multitude of capability. Since I have pre organized (and this type of scene/take program allows for it) all of the takes and banded them together, as well as all of the sync sound, and potential music options, I can store a lot of decisions in one single Project. When editing in this style, I rarely have to hit the Library, and mostly stay in the (ahem) Project I am working on. I then Snapshot any different versions, and I don't even need to move to another windows, I simply keep working on the current...Project....and if I need to go back to a previous cut, I go back to the appropriate snapshot.

Personally, I think this was a conscious decision by Apple to think about all of the capabilities that are available to you in FCPX. It could very well be that Apple wanted to match names of other Apple applications (photos has Projects, for instance), but I also think that Apple re-thought what a timeline can be, and therefore needed to give it another name. I can have multiple Projects (like different timelines of different content) in one Library, and it all makes sense as the Projects are different, but also related to the same media. It's not simply another timeline or sequence, the Project is it's own entity, and if your particular jobs allow for it, once everything is setup and organized, you can add a whole lot of media to your Project without having to go back to the Library very often. When you add the magnetic timeline capabilities in to this, where you can adjust timing on the fly to allow for time discrepancies between takes, or putting something in a secondary storyline outside of the primary to keep the primary timing place, it becomes a very capable system. But (and it's a big but) you have to like how it works. If none of this is important to you, then perhaps, Apple made a colossal blunder in the eyes of the edit deities.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 10, 2015 at 9:20:48 pm

Jeremy, this is very helpful, thank you.

I get where you're coming from but as you might expect still disagree. ;)

[Jeremy Garchow] "Simple, right?


Well, here's what's in it after breaking most of the clips apart. I had to make a gif as I couldn't fit it in to one screen grab:"


OK, but even though you get some nice new features like snapshots and auditions, I can still do pretty much the same thing on an open timeline with nests.

Compound clips are basically fancy nests, and as far as nests go, I only use nests when I absolutely have to. I don't like nests because they make the timeline unreadable, just as your first screen grab doesn't give any visual indication of the complexity buried inside.


[Jeremy Garchow] "I can store a lot of decisions in one single Project. When editing in this style, I rarely have to hit the Library, and mostly stay in the (ahem) Project I am working on."

I do this all the time with sequences. If I string out five different versions of a scene or piece on a timeline and use I/O marks to export each, is that sequence by your definition now a project?


[Jeremy Garchow] "it becomes a very capable system. But (and it's a big but) you have to like how it works. If none of this is important to you, then perhaps, Apple made a colossal blunder in the eyes of the edit deities."

Yep, the latter would still be me. But thank you for taking the time to explain your thinking. From your perspective it does make sense.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 10, 2015 at 11:29:59 pm

[David Lawrence] "Jeremy, this is very helpful, thank you.

I get where you're coming from but as you might expect still disagree. ;)"


I also get where Jeremy is coming from, but I too disagree... I'm prepping a brief "diatribe" on the whole nomenclature discussion now and hope to post it here in a few days.

FYI David, I'm again using a keyboard analogy, kin of like the one you quoted in your last article, but different.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 11, 2015 at 12:54:40 am

[David Lawrence] "
Compound clips are basically fancy nests, and as far as nests go, I only use nests when I absolutely have to. I don't like nests because they make the timeline unreadable, just as your first screen grab doesn't give any visual indication of the complexity buried inside.
"


These aren't nests, though, they are Auditions and they work completely different than nests.

When a client asks, "can I see a different take?" I can hit a keystroke, which selects the next take and moves everything else around to fit to time. Even if I adjust time, that time adjustment is saved with that instance. Auditions don't work like nests at all. My exploded Project gif is all the Audirins and relevant audio. There are no compounds used.

[David Lawrence] "I do this all the time with sequences. If I string out five different versions of a scene or piece on a timeline and use I/O marks to export each, is that sequence by your definition now a project?
"


I guess it could be if those five sequences contained every single take of every scene, and all the relevant synced audio. Sure. But with X you don't have to make five versions on a timeline, you work on your project, and the other options are stored right there, easily accessed without having to create a new version of everything.

[David Lawrence] " From your perspective it does make sense."

It only started to make sense after Libraries and Snapshots came to be. Before Libraries, the organization definitely made less sense, but those were just foundational building blocks.


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 11, 2015 at 1:10:57 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "It only started to make sense after Libraries and Snapshots came to be. Before Libraries, the organization definitely made less sense, but those were just foundational building blocks."

You mean back when FCP X only had one library per root level of a drive?

Huge improvement to allow each ahem "project" to be stored in its own library.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 11, 2015 at 1:35:44 am

[Craig Alan] "You mean back when FCP X only had one library per root level of a drive? "

When it was a sneeze of Event files and you had to use Event Manager X to keep them and the Projects all sorted.

It seems like so long ago, but it wasn't all that long ago.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 11, 2015 at 11:49:08 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "These aren't nests, though, they are Auditions and they work completely different than nests. "

Aha, thank you. I read your post too quickly and didn't catch that.

I haven't used Auditions in FCPX but I have used them in Logic Pro, where they work basically the same way. Logic Pro has a timeline of course, but typically with music and DAW software, there's a single timeline per "project".

If I understand your argument correctly, perhaps a better analogy is that FCPX treats timelines like projects the same way music or DAW software treats timelines like projects?

I think that's an interesting way to think about the use of the term. In that light, it makes a lot of sense actually.

I still think industry standards matter and they would have been better off with standard terminology. Especially now that the library organization structure is more standard. But based on how things were organized when they launched, I can see how it might have made sense at the time.

Thanks Jeremy!

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 12, 2015 at 1:13:31 am

Mac App Programming Guide explains how libraries should be organized and they’ve been used in many Apple applications.
And remember FCP X when it first came out: the library was designed by default to hold your entire media collection so that an editor had access to every video ever created at his/her beck and call.
More than any other design element, I think that was the one that most suggested to many that it was not ready for prime time.
When you import your photos into iPhoto, you can choose to have iPhoto automatically organize the photos into a single Event or several. And where are the events stored -- why in a library.
That leaves "project"

You can read a tutorial for past versions of iMovie and see all these terms and their very similar structure.
I actually preferred one variation where within an event in a library you created a new "movie" (timeline) and then imported your media. They didn't make this stuff up based on professional NLEs or starting from scratch and giving it heavy thought. They based it on iMovie and consumer media apps they had developed. I don’ think the name of a folder in a library container is too annoying though it shouldn’t then surprise anyone that by default the sub-levels of an event are based on dates. After all, an event took place on a certain date/time. Same concept in iCAL. But still it’s just a container within a container in the browser. I’d call it a folder or a container or a collection, really doesn’t matter much. But “project” is incommodious

That does not make FCP X less than a professional app. And personally, I like the idea that an app can scale from beginner to pro. But I would use pro vocab/concepts for beginners not the other way around.

Personally I find consumer level features often are much harder to use than pro features. Many consumer level devices seem to reinvent the wheel and add features for the sake of advertising rather than ergonomics.

Ever try to set the white balance on many consumer level camcorders? Some are three levels deep in the menu system and must be reset from every use. As opposed to zoom in on a white card and hit the freaking WB button.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 1:32:20 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "When you start to make the kinds of changes to long-standing universal terms as Apple has chosen to do in X, all you get is confussion, misunderstanding, and inaccuracy, which are antithetical to good communication."

Apple doesn't have a great track record with standards, unless they are de facto "standards" created by Apple. I've been personally told by Apple managers that it doesn't go into standards like AAF, because most of the IP was developed and contributed by Avid and, therefore, in Apple's opinion, the standard favors Avid. OTOH, FCPXML is tailored for FCP X. Never mind the fact that FCPXML is incompatible within Apple's own software with XML - something they first championed.

So standards, best practices and terminology are very important and something Apple too easily casts aside. Speaking of which, how long do you think you can count on Thunderbolt being around?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 5:06:38 am

[Oliver Peters] "
So standards, best practices and terminology are very important and something Apple too easily casts aside. Speaking of which, how long do you think you can count on Thunderbolt being around?

- Oliver

"




Actually, since Intel announced that USB 3 and Thunderbolt will be connector and protocol compatible going forward, likely a very, very long time.

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

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 7:08:21 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Sorry, but that's pure BS James. Nomenclature in this business, like standards, was designed so that individuals all over the world can communicate accurately, period, end of story."

David, I think we can both agree to disagree without referencing bovine ordure.

I've always adapted to what I personally consider is a better tool of the trade if it allows me to work faster, better and more creatively. Nomenclature is important, but not really relevant in this case as I just translate for those few who need it, and the rest (the majority) don't care. I can't speak for anyone else in this business, but part of my job has always been to translate; it's just not that big a deal.


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 7:16:43 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Sorry, but that's pure BS James. Nomenclature in this business, like standards, was designed so that individuals all over the world can communicate accurately, period, end of story."

David, I think we can both agree to disagree without referencing bovine ordure.

I've always adapted to what I personally consider is a better tool of the trade if it allows me to work faster, better and more creatively. Nomenclature is important, but not really relevant in this case as I just translate for those few who need it, and the rest (the majority) don't care. I can't speak for anyone else in this business, but part of my job has always been to translate; it's just not that big a deal.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 10:09:37 am

[James Culbertson] "This has nothing to do with Apple and everything to do with personal linguistic stuckness. Time to take personal responsibility and move on, or accept that you personally cannot or do not want to change."

jesus christ please.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 2:35:21 pm

Good grief, it's just a name, there are many things to think about in this business, what Apple decided to call a timeline isn't really one of them.


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 6:12:36 pm

Alright, here is how I describe stuff:

1. Library -- Name of show, feature or commercial
2. Events -- Bins which will be based on scene, not just just scene number but a brief description of scene as well
3. Project -- Spot, reel or part of show. Example would be, night at the diner

Keywords are exactly that, smart collections used to find clips faster and easier.

Now, my head will stop spinning.

Back to other things like watching Jerry Springer, a great show. ;-)


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 6:49:55 pm

[Steve Connor] "Good grief, it's just a name, there are many things to think about in this business, what Apple decided to call a timeline isn't really one of them."

Bingo. I just don't understand why folks are so bothered by names. Let's see, I could use FCPX because (for me) it is faster and more efficient, or I could go back to using AVID because it uses all the names I learned long ago... because names are more important than making money.


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 6:56:48 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "
jesus christ please."


Sorry Aindreas, I can't help you there.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 2, 2015 at 9:57:22 pm

I bet you guys were a hoot to be around in the 90's when everyone was discussing what the definition of the word 'is' was. ;)


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 2:49:09 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jun 3, 2015 at 2:52:23 pm

[James Ewart] "Call it a timeline. "

So... who's keeping you from doing it?

In all of four years, I have never said "timeline" to an FCP X User and not had them understand exactly what I mean.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 4:50:27 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "So... who's keeping you from doing it?

In all of four years, I have never said "timeline" to an FCP X User and not had them understand exactly what I mean."


Do you come here to get your rocks off arguing and point scoring with people or to try and contribute and engage in a mutually enlightening debate?

Don't answer that I already know the answer.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 3, 2015 at 5:33:59 pm

[James Ewart] "Do you come here to get your rocks off arguing and point scoring with people or to try and contribute and engage in a mutually enlightening debate?"

Certainly something I clearly don't need to ask you either. Don't bother "engage[ing] in a mutually enlightening debate" and actually answering the question. But I guess that in itself is the answer.

I know... what an amazingly provocative question is was, right? Completely justifies such a abstruse, rabid response. Very engaging, very enlightening.

- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 12:15:27 am

Man! This thread certainly went off the rails!!

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 3:06:09 am

Or you could say "Off the Tracks"!

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1, Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Pro X 10.2.1, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.6, Premiere Pro CS 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Blackmagic Ultrastudio 4K, Blackmagic Teranex, Avid MC, 2013 Mac Pro Hexacore, 1 TB SSD, 64GB RAM, 2-D500: 2012 Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-680 960GB SSD: Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 16GB RAM 250GB SSD


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 3:49:08 am

[Jim Wiseman] "Or you could say "Off the Tracks"!
"


Boo... go back to the Media100 thread, Jim. ;)


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 3:01:13 pm

What tracks? ;-)


Return to posts index

Doug Metz
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 4:22:01 pm

There you go, changing the name of the thing! Now I'm confused. :D

Doug Metz

Anode


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 5:44:47 pm

Well, after watching a couple of videos the jargon (language) makes sense. While this new jargon is a bit silly, it makes sense. I have decided to go with the flow and go about editing.

Perhaps bringing someone in to watch a demonstration might help clear the air and end any confusion. I have since removed the pebble from my shoe. On to more important things.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 4, 2015 at 5:47:50 pm

[David Mathis] "I have since removed the pebble from my shoe. On to more important things."

Your words in Maud's ear that many will follow.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 5, 2015 at 8:05:40 am

Can anyone tell me what FCPX is doing all the time? After about an hour of editing, my external hard drive (which has all my media) starts rattling like crazy for 10-15 minutes or so, slowing the program down.(it does this a couple of times a day)

The background tasks window doesn't show any activity, but the Activity Monitor tells me FCPX is very busy. Even when I stop doing anything on FCPX for a couple of minutes, the disc is hammering away, CPU activity by FCPX is way up...

It's probably something that has been fixed in FCPX 10.2... but can anyone tell me what it's doing and how I can stop it?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 5, 2015 at 3:12:50 pm

I can't tell you what it's doing exactly, but you have your library, media, and cache all on that external drive, right?

What kind of drive is it?


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 5, 2015 at 5:22:19 pm

Some editors advised me to keep the library on my internal harddrive. Apparently that helps with the speed. But the rest is on a USB3 Western Digital 3T harddrive.

But I've had this issue with several variations (like library ON mediadisk) and several types of hard drives (like a 4T USB3 G-Raid). I obviously has to do a lot of stuff.


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 5, 2015 at 5:33:17 pm
Last Edited By Andy Neil on Jun 5, 2015 at 5:33:55 pm

What computer are you cutting on? If you're on a Mac Pro (pre-trashcan), then you don't have USB3 so your drive will be USB2 only.

Unless you're using a newer MacBook Pro or iMac?

Also, when you were complaining about Library size, I thought that meant that you were using managed media (clips stored in the library). Is that not the case?

Andy

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 5, 2015 at 6:08:01 pm

I have a trashcan MacPro, 6core, D700, 48GB RAM, only a few months old, WITH USB3. So I'm using USB3.

And no, I am not using media IN the library. Library on internal hard drive media, cache etc on external.


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 2:36:20 pm

Have you checked the contents of the library to make sure all the media in the library are aliases and not actual media. I've been surprised with older versions of FCP X when it was populated with huge files even though I set it up as otherwise in the inspector. Also what is your overhead on all your drives. Hit 80% full and all bets are off.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 2:46:57 pm

All aliases. I'm not a complete novice, even though you might think I am.

Yes, you could just buy more stuff, more more 3rd party apps and buy and buy and buy.... It seems that is exactly what Apple want: buy buy buy... But that isn't fair to people who invest in this stuff. And Apple know I invest a lot. Even AVID supports people who work on older versions. Sometimes even provide patches for serious problems. Why is the answer if you have a problem with FCP: get the lastest version, the latest computers and buy more stuff? I don't get it... that's not very professional

And it simply doesn't answer my question: why does FCPX need such an extraordinary amount of power and speed? What's it doing that it needs so much more than the other NLE's? What's it doing when the Background Processes window is idle and you quit FCPX, it remarks that it's closing down all 'background processes". Obviously FCPX is doing stuff no one knows about and no one knows how to shut it off.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 2:57:30 pm

[Mike Warmels] "What's it doing when the Background Processes window is idle and you quit FCPX, it remarks that it's closing down all 'background processes". Obviously FCPX is doing stuff no one knows about and no one knows how to shut it off."

If you have just imported media, it's building the waveforms and thumbnails.

If that's already built, it's doing a final backup of all open libraries. The more libraries open, the more it need to backup, which means that this process should be stored on the fastest drive you have available, which is your boot drive. Backups take up very little space.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 3:03:15 pm

It does it too after some time just editing without importing. I dunno why? Why doesn't to SHOW me what it's doing?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 3:09:14 pm

Isn't the very warning you are talking about showing you what it's doing?


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 3:19:22 pm

Nope. It's the 'Cancelling Background tasks" thing every one gets once in a while.

It's not a warning really. It's cancelling them so I don't have to wait for it to shut down. So fine. But it shows it doing something, while the Background processes window is idle... So to me that shows FCPX is doing stuff... stuff maybe that could be slowing my NLE down. But since I don't know what it's doing, there's not a sensible thing to be said about it.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 3:32:27 pm

I swear you are not reading any of these posts.

Every good boy deserves fudge.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 3:38:28 pm

I am. But I don't feel any sympathy for the issues I'm addressing. The answer to every problem I run into is: use the fastest drives you have, update to the lastest versions.

FCPX10.2.1 better be the Messiah some of you claim it to be. ;-)


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 3:53:05 pm

i don't think anyone said fcpx is a savior, it's just that 10.2 is noticeably better. It's not going to save all the suffering of all humanity. I think should should have that in mind when updating.

Here's some recent real world feedback:

https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/81235

https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/80377

http://fcpxpert.net/2015/04/13/fcp-x-10-2-first-look/

https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/344/36762


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 3:58:55 pm

Nah, I figured as much. But as I said a long time before, I can live with the sometimes awkward handling of clips, opening and closing of audio and all that stuff, as long as it's fast. At least then you can get a rhythm going and build speed from there.

As with all modern computer software: as long as everything goes fast no one notices how bad the programming is. ;-)

Unfortunately, 10.1.4 is not offering that possibility. Here's hoping to an opportunity of updating soon!


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: still driving me nuts
on Jun 7, 2015 at 6:13:04 pm

So are you using the "better quality" setting as opposed to "better performance"?


Return to posts index