FORUMS: list search recent posts

Serious X Editing for Speed

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bill Davis
Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 2:09:31 pm

We argued for months over my contention that so many X editors claim to be significantly more productive when they become highly skilled at FCP X. Many asked how that can be - cuz cutting is cutting, right. Seams my overseas friend Thomas Grove Carter has just released 4 short tutorials explaining a bit about why he feels that way. The first two are pretty basic if you know anything at all about how X works (tho probably quite interesting if you don't) but the last two are pretty powerful examples of why X editors are pretty loyal to the X approach. Enjoy.
http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/tutorials/1759-four-final-cut-pro-x-tutoria...

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 3:24:22 pm

[Bill Davis] "We argued for months over my contention that so many X editors claim to be significantly more productive when they become highly skilled at FCP X."

Actually we've argued for years over the contention that X makes you "twice as fast" or "50%" faster, or some other numerical abstraction that has no correlate in reality. I watched the first 3 videos and they are all very nice demonstrations of how to go about things within X, but nothing shown demonstrates "revolutionary" speed enhancements to most editing work flows.

Tutorial 1 - key words are nice but so are multiple timelines that reflect the various stages of selection. The assembly timeline, the cleaned assembly timeline, the favorites timeline. Using "edit clip in-point or out-point to playhead" makes creating them a snap. The advantage of the timeline approach is that you get a sense of relative length that is totally missing in the browser view. But I do get the flexibility and speed advantages of X at this stage of editing. This is why David Lawrence organizes his footage in X before exporting XMLs to other NLes for actual editing.

Tutorial 2 - Did you notice, as he was moving the combined video + audio efx, that the audio often preceded the video. What do you think he's gonna have to do once he moves it - why he's going to have to trim and rearrange those audio efx so they live happily in their new spots, all of which is going to take a lot more time than the simple rearranging shown on screen. Which is to say that the initial re-arranging of shots connected to audio effects is the least time consuming part of the operation. Also you might be interested to learn that you can group and move locked shots in ripple mode in most NLEs - this is not an exclusive idea to X.

Tutorial 3 - Oh wow you can keep cutting as the timeline is moving - which means you are no longer watching what the client is watching because your busy twiddling around elsewhere in the timeline instead of focusing on what's happening in front of your face. Fantastic. Remind me to fire the first editor who tries that in front of me.

All of which is to say FCPX has some truly elegant ways of cutting, as do most NLEs, and I'm sure it's faster in some ways that any other system, and in other ways not so much, and nowhere do I see the speed claims often mentioned as justified.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 4:31:53 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Tutorial 3 - Oh wow you can keep cutting as the timeline is moving
"


I think you missed the fact that you can do this in PPro CC 2015 as well


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 4:38:40 pm
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Nov 30, 2015 at 4:51:30 pm

Herb,

Sorry you wasted your time on 1 and 2. Those are for people who are interested in X and know nothing about it. It helps them grasp some of the underlying concepts. That's all.

In 3 - you keep looking SO HARD for reasons it's flawed. Must be exhausting. Look, you'll NEVER have to use it. Really. No FCP X police will ever come to bother you. Ever. So relax. Again, you don't use it. So sorry, but you remain unqualified to tell those of us who do how difficult it is to make it work properly.

Tom, who has cut top of the market work at the bleeding edge of commercial television globally is telling you it's his preferred NLE because it's much faster to get his projects done. If you like I'll ask him if he's ever used a stopwatch and as a result saved precisely 50% of his time cutting something with X compared to AVID (which he used before) but I think it's silly.

There's a growing cadre of editors now using it worldwide. Generally, depending on how much prior conditioning they have, they start out either uncomfortable or downright hostile. Some of them LIVID at the required change in thinking. Then they settle down. And usually, start picking it for all kinds of projects as soon as they see the huge benefits of it's approach.

All I can say is that X has cut MY "editing" time to final in half quite regularly. Not my time to actual final, because I now use a large part of that time savings trying alternate ideas and thinking about how to make the work better - a luxury I greatly enjoy.

So as to proof of whether or not a 50% time savings is possible you have to make a choice... Believe that I'm honest and that I'm reporting actual personal experience. Or believe that I'm so besotted with X that I have lost track of how to use a calendar, clock, or read the start and stop timestamps on my FCP X projects.

Hint: Projects of the same scope and duration for me today typically have SIGNIFICANTLY smaller start to stop actual "time in editing" stamps.

I'm still puzzled as to why you're so hostile to the idea. You're not going to use it. That's clear.

So why bother with those of us who enjoy doing so? All we're doing is spreading the word. There are a LOT of editors out there who would LOVE LOVE LOVE to transfer even 10 or 15% of their editing energy from mechanics to creativity. If someday, like me, they find it a whole lot more than that - why not let us do that in peace?

I thought the big idea these days is that if you need something that only Premeier Pro offers, you pop out your credit card - subscribe away - and use THAT tool to get the job done.

And if X can make you more efficient on something else, you pop for the $300 one time stick it in your toolbox launch IT and get the job done that way. No need to stress so much.

You and I. We have the luxury to stick with what's comfortable. Many don't.

And so it goes.

Oh and before I forget. Season's greetings of the appropriate type for your personal traditions. Hope the year ends strong and happy for you and yours. Really.

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 5:06:10 pm

[Bill Davis] "What's it to you?"

Just went back and re-read your original post and now I have to apologize and say that I read stuff into it that you didn't actually say. It read into it that you were making claims when you were actually discussing the subjective experience. My bad. I have a lot of long exports today and too much time on my hands.

[Bill Davis] "Oh and before I forget. Season's greetings of the appropriate type for your personal traditions. Hope the year ends strong and happy for you and yours. Really."

Same here.

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 8:33:31 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Just went back and re-read your original post and now I have to apologize and say that I read stuff into it that you didn't actually say. It read into it that you were making claims when you were actually discussing the subjective experience. My bad. I have a lot of long exports today and too much time on my hands."

Absolutely no problem at all. I've done the very same thing in the past.

All is good.

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


Alex Hawkins
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 1:01:03 am
Last Edited By Alex Hawkins on Dec 1, 2015 at 1:03:38 am

[Bill Davis] "Believe that I'm honest and that I'm reporting actual personal experience. Or believe that I'm so besotted with X that I have lost track of how to use a calendar, clock, or read the start and stop timestamps on my FCP X projects. "

I choose the latter. . .

. . . just kidding.

Right.


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 8:49:39 pm

[Bill Davis] "whether or not a 50% time savings is possible"

It's interesting most of these discussions center around alleged speed advantages during timeline-oriented editing operations -- as if that was all delivering a video product consisted of. Maybe that's understandable since historically that's all editing software could do.

With broader capability this evaluation becomes more complex. E.g, what if an FCP X editor needed to do spectral audio correction? If he spends lots of time tweaking with the EQ when a Premiere user can use Audition, does that make FCP X slower? Or is that just saving cost not time because the FCP X guy can buy SoundSoap or Izotope?

OTOH what if you have a big documentary with 50 hrs of material. I have personally seen cases where Premiere editors spent weeks viewing the material before importing, copying favorite clips into folders and making hand-written timecode notes. They are technically not editing since it hasn't been imported, but it is nonetheless time expended. That task is often performed by the assistant editor, so maybe it should be counted.

With FCP X you could import the whole thing and do the initial pass in skimmer marking range-based favorites, rejects, keywords and even notes. That is a gigantic improvement; I'm tempted to say 10:1 depending on complexity. Or do we just say the Premiere guy can go buy CatDV so it's only saving cost not time?

In this PBS interview, documentary editor Colin Nusbaum stressed that "a piece of footage... is always more useful when it is categorized and can be found in more ways or places than one": http://www.pbs.org/pov/blog/news/2014/05/how-to-survive-as-an-assistant-edi...

How broad -- functionally -- is the scope of the performance comparison, and how does it vary based on project size and complexity?


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 9:55:45 pm

[Joe Marler] "How broad -- functionally -- is the scope of the performance comparison, and how does it vary based on project size and complexity?
"


I think this is an argument that begs to be quantified, but is in fact broadly unquantifiable.


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 9:57:35 pm

[Steve Connor] "I think this is an argument that begs to be quantified, but is in fact broadly unquantifiable.
"


Just don't call it asymmetrical quantification. Then everything goes mad.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 10:15:41 pm

[Joe Marler] "Maybe that's understandable since historically that's all editing software could do."

I don't understand that statement. NLEs have been able to do advanced effects, audio editing/mixing and color correction for many years.

[Joe Marler] " I have personally seen cases where Premiere editors spent weeks viewing the material before importing, copying favorite clips into folders and making hand-written timecode notes. ....
With FCP X you could import the whole thing and do the initial pass in skimmer marking range-based favorites, rejects, keywords and even notes."


That's kind of irrelevant. It goes to personal style. Many people learn the material better this way, so Finder-level organization is quite common. In fact X actually encourages it because these folders are supported as keywords on import. same as they become bins in Premiere Pro. Creation of favorites/rejects with show/hide functions have existed in Premiere and Media Composer for quite awhile. Range-based favorite is unique to X, but not the rest. People like tangible items, like scene boards, transcripts and written notes, regardless of the software they use. It has nothing to do with speed or lack of functionality.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 10:36:57 pm

[Joe Marler] "With broader capability this evaluation becomes more complex. E.g, what if an FCP X editor needed to do spectral audio correction? If he spends lots of time tweaking with the EQ when a Premiere user can use Audition, does that make FCP X slower? Or is that just saving cost not time because the FCP X guy can buy SoundSoap or Izotope?"

The Premiere Pro editor can also use Sound Soap or iZotope. Maybe 3D text is a better example?

Shawn



Return to posts index


Charlie Austin
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 4:41:21 pm

Valid points Herb. I won't make any percentage speed claims here but, as I do work in both tracked and trackless NLE's I just want to point out a couple things:

[Herb Sevush] "The advantage of the timeline approach is that you get a sense of relative length that is totally missing in the browser view"

Not true, you can adjust the zoom level in the browser to see relative timings if you want.

[Herb Sevush] "Also you might be interested to learn that you can group and move locked shots in ripple mode in most NLEs - this is not an exclusive idea to X."

True, but what is unique to X is that when you move a group of clips nothing overwrites anything else. This is not true at all with tracks and makes doing this in X a whole lot more useful in practice.

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

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 5:19:29 pm

These are nice tips in the tutorials, but I have to say that any claims of "faster" should be taken with a grain of salt for every NLE. Of course, I don't see TGC making any generalizations about speed, other than improvements in how he works.

It all boils down to your personal style of working, the cutting demands the project imposes, and how the NLE fits into that workflow. For example, there are plenty of things that FCPX does in quite superior ways. However, there are also some in which PPro blows its socks off. It just comes down to whether those specific features are something you need in how you work.

Take film editors for example. I've interviewed a lot of them. Across the board there are probably at least 6 different distinctive ways in which they work. Some of these workflows are actually quite the opposite of each other. So it's great to see how people are using X, but you can only extrapolate those experiences to yourself, if you do what they do and you work in a similar fashion to them.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 6:30:05 pm

[Oliver Peters] "It all boils down to your personal style of working, the cutting demands the project imposes, and how the NLE fits into that workflow."

Exactly. For us freelancers, it also may depend on what a post house may have to use.

I am working on Premiere today and I surprised myself in finding some things I really like over X. On the other hand, there are some things in Premiere that just kill the good feelings. Nothing's perfect.

To each their own and it's best to know as many as you have to to keep working!

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


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 6:32:38 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "I am working on Premiere today and I surprised myself in finding some things I really like over X."

Tilde key expanding the currently focussed panel to full screen is awesome, great to be able to get a full screen timeline immediately. I've already sent that as a feature request to Apple


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 6:36:59 pm

[Steve Connor] "I've already sent that as a feature request to Apple"

I do like the fact that in Premiere, you can simply grab a dissolve and move it where it works best at the transition point. Pssst. Hey Apple, take a look at that.

On the other hand, there's the Premiere title tool...gak.

Nothing is perfect.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 7:37:27 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "you can simply grab a dissolve and move it where it works best at the transition point."

just don't call it an asymmetrical dissolve whatever you do. Then everything goes mad.

http://ogallchoir.prosite.com/
producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 5:55:56 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Not true, you can adjust the zoom level in the browser to see relative timings if you want."

What I was talking about was looking at a timeline and seeing how long the entire grouping is ( my first assembly is 1:40:00, my cleaned assembly is :55:00, my selects are :22:30) and how any one clips length differed from the other clips in that group. Can you get that info out of your keyword bin without clicking anything?

[Charlie Austin] "True, but what is unique to X is that when you move a group of clips nothing overwrites anything else."

True, but only in the case of overwrite edits - with ripple/insert in a traditional timeline nothing overwrites either.

As for overwrite edits -- once you move the audio to it's new home, it doesn't overwrite anything and now you have clashing audio elements where the new and the old are fighting each other. So at some point you have to make a decision as to what is to stay and what is to go - with Ppro I tend to do it before I move anything, with X you do it after the move.

I do understand the X way is a little bit quicker, but in order to accomplish this you have to live with storylines, secondary storylines, attached clips, 2 different playheads and all the varieties of rules that govern their movements, to say nothing of a, to me, visually incoherent timeline. As is often the case on this forum, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 7:04:18 pm

[Herb Sevush] "So at some point you have to make a decision as to what is to stay and what is to go - with Ppro I tend to do it before I move anything, with X you do it after the move."

A lot of times I don't have to do it at all after. The audio becomes a cross fade leading in from whatever new position I placed it in.

His examples are great but they are only dealing with one video clip and sound below.

I'm often moving multiple video elements also. Like the b-roll that goes with the person talking and the font that is over the person talking.

I might have 10 layers of video along with all of that audio that I am moving at once. It's a snap because you are only grabbing one clip that everything else is connected to. Not having to select all of those elements before you move them.

I just prefer to grab one thing and move 20 at a time, than selecting 20 and then moving them.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 7:20:44 pm

The issues I have with moving clips around with a lot of dependent connected clips are these.

1) Often you spend more time moving the connecting points to attach them to the desired clip before a move is viable, than simply moving them the PPro way, or using copy/delete/past insert on any system.

2) There is no "move to" function. For example, if you want to move a clip 10 min. down on a long-form timeline, managing the timeline movement while dragging the clip is quite unwieldy.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 10:15:45 pm

[Oliver Peters] "2) There is no "move to" function. For example, if you want to move a clip 10 min. down on a long-form timeline, managing the timeline movement while dragging the clip is quite unwieldy."

Select clip(s).

Type "+10 period period enter"


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 12:40:29 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Type "+10 period period enter""

Nope. Doesn't work at all and in fact that function seems to be broken. When I just now tried that on a test project, instead of shifting an exact 1 min. (the value entered) it only shifted it 1 sec. And it did this as a trim, by overwriting the clip afterwards and extending the preceding clip. Not "magnetically" by swapping clip order.

In any case, that's not what I want it to do. I'm not trying to move the clip an exact 10 min. I was only using the example to say I'm moving it into a slot about 10 min. later. It's irrelevant what the exact interval is. I'm trying to use the magnetic function to move the position of a clip or clip with connected clips, which I find valuable at short distances and useless at long distances.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 1:43:36 am

[Oliver Peters] "Nope. Doesn't work at all and in fact that function seems to be broken. "

Weird. Works here.

Plus-One-Zero-Period-period-Enter which translates to plus 10 minutes.

The HUD turns blue and once you hit the periods it adds the zeros to frames and seconds.

Adding Control-p before that moves just the play head the entered amount (plus or minus) or to an exact sequence tc without the plus or minus.

I'm working on a 30 min show and use this function a lot along with the TL index.

I find editing longer form to be really easy in X, but as we all know, I'm a weirdo.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 1:52:58 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Plus-One-Zero-Period-period-Enter which translates to plus 10 minutes.
The HUD turns blue and once you hit the periods it adds the zeros to frames and seconds. "


Yep, that's exactly what I'm doing, but I don't get the same results. It is a 25fps project and migrated from FCP7, though, so let me retest with a different frame rate and a fresh project.

[Jeremy Garchow] "I find editing longer form to be really easy in X, but as we all know, I'm a weirdo."

I like editing long-form in X as well, but definitely NOT because of the mag TL. ;-) OTOH, I find long-form performance with X on a MP tower (as opposed to MBP or nMP) to be very tedious at anything other than ProRes Proxy. With mixed formats and older machines, I find Premiere/FCP7/MC to be waaaaaaay more responsive.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 2:22:42 am

[Oliver Peters] "so let me retest with a different frame rate and a fresh project."

Yep, doesn't work magnetically at all for me. Does work in position mode, but that's an overwrite, of course.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 2:42:01 am

[Oliver Peters] "I find Premiere/FCP7/MC to be waaaaaaay more responsive."

I find the magnetic timeline to be of great help, but you do have to work it and yes, sometimes that involves modifying connection points, and even anticipating the modification of those points.

UI speed has never been a selling point of X, but I'm willing to deal with a bit of slowness in exchange for overall workflow gains.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 2:49:29 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "UI speed has never been a selling point of X"

Edit with X ... it feels so good when you stop. ;-)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 2:50:21 pm
Last Edited By Scott Witthaus on Dec 1, 2015 at 3:10:37 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] " I'm willing to deal with a bit of slowness in exchange for overall workflow gains"

I know. I don't even acknowledge the UI "slowness" because I know overall I am working faster. And have more creative tools easily at hand. Then again, Pr CC2015 has come a long way for the better since CS6.

Maybe we should ask Murch? ;-)

While we are on the topic of speed, I posted this on the Premiere Basics forum with no responses. Maybe someone here would know:

"Please note I don't use Premiere very often, only when required to, so I am no expert.

I have a late 2013 MacPro, 3.5 ghz 6-core Xeon E5, 32 gig ram, AMD FirePro g-card

A while back, I commented on a weird visual "echo" I was seeing when using PrP CS6. Basically if I scrub around in the source viewer and let go, the playhead mimics my movements before settling to the spot I am currently parked. Same thing happens in program viewer. If I scrub in the timeline however, that acts normal, but I get the "visual echo" in the program monitor. Very odd.

Some folks advised me to upgrade to CC as that might solve the issue, and it hasn't. Is this a computer setup issue? A bug? Feature? Not a show-stopper but rather annoying."


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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 5:13:18 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "Then again, Pr CC2015 has come a long way for the better since CS6."

No question about it, Pr certainly has come a very long way in a relatively short time.

But the fundamentals still remain in Pr. I hop in and out of it (I have to use it for a finishing/translation conduit sometimes) but for most editing, I try and stick with FCPX. I really love how you can very easily "section" off areas of the timeline and move them freely without harming other sections of the timeline. Much more care needs to be taken in track based programs because the track is the governor, at least that's they way I interact with it. My timeline usually falls in to more vertical sections, with loose horizontal boundaries (different chapters/scenes). Rarely do I need a horizontal line drawn through every clip.

Unfortunately, I can't help you with your Pr CS6 issue, apologies.


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 6:17:28 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Unfortunately, I can't help you with your Pr CS6 issue, apologies."

No worries, it's now a CC2015 problem which makes me think it's a computer set-up problem.

[Jeremy Garchow] "But the fundamentals still remain in Pr"

Yeah. And today I am editing in both for different clients. There are certainly some things in PrCC that have gotten better and some things I would love to see in X. But nothing that makes me seriously pause and consider a switch. I simply prefer X as a better, faster and more creative way to meet my client's goals. YMMV.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 6:33:14 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I really love how you can very easily "section" off areas of the timeline and move them freely without harming other sections of the timeline. "

Funny. I know you mean FCPX, but I would have actually used that exact same description in talking about Premiere Pro.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 6:36:58 pm

[Oliver Peters] "
Funny. I know you mean FCPX, but I would have actually used that exact same description in talking about Premiere Pro."


I find it much easier in X.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 6:44:14 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I find it much easier in X."

I found it much easier in the EMC2over 15 years ago. The worlds first digital NLE had a feature called a "ripple wall." This was a blue line that cut thru the timeline wherever you set it and any ripple operation to the left of the wall had no effect on anything to the right of the wall. If the ripple operations shortened the left side, empty space would appear in front of the ripple wall. A ripple that extended the left side would push the blue line with it. You could only have one wall at a time, but it was just a keyboard shortcut to toggle off and on and put it where the playhead was. It was a lovely feature I've never seen since. Back to the future.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 7:17:24 pm

[Herb Sevush] "I found it much easier in the EMC2over 15 years ago. The worlds first digital NLE had a feature called a "ripple wall.""

That's interesting. I never knew that. Walter Murch actually suggested something akin to this to Apple in the pre-FCPX days. His idea was in terms of collaboration. You'd mark off certain areas of the timeline and one editor could be working on one area only, while another editor on another workstation could work on a different section of the exact same timeline. Something like that exists in the current iteration of Lightworks.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 8:41:10 pm

[Oliver Peters] "You'd mark off certain areas of the timeline and one editor could be working on one area only, while another editor on another workstation could work on a different section of the exact same timeline. Something like that exists in the current iteration of Lightworks."

Something like that, or at least the idea, used to exist buried in the FCP X code. "Guards". It's been removed. Will it return? who knows...

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

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


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 10:49:20 pm

[Oliver Peters] "You'd mark off certain areas of the timeline and one editor could be working on one area only, while another editor on another workstation could work on a different section of the exact same timeline."

We had that over 15 years ago with the dSP DAW. It was fully networked off shared SCSI RAID drives and multiple users could access and work on specific tracks and when saved the other users would get an update message. Obviously track rather than region based is not ideal but we were sound posting locked duration fine cuts so it worked well.

I still am amazed at how slow the NLE world is to catch up with features we have taken for granted with DAWs for 20 years.


Return to posts index

David Cherniack
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 2, 2015 at 12:06:42 am

[Herb Sevush] " found it much easier in the EMC2over 15 years ago. The worlds first digital NLE had a feature called a "ripple wall." This was a blue line that cut thru the timeline wherever you set it and any ripple operation to the left of the wall had no effect on anything to the right of the wall."

Although I can't be certain that the credit for Ripple Wall belongs to me, I did suggest the idea to Bill Ferster over the phone one day. He liked it and called it a wall for ripple. It was in the next update.

This got me scurrying to Google to look up Bill who is one of the great pioneers of the NLE. Happy to report:

He is currently a research professor at the University of Virginia with a joint faculty appointment with the Curry School of Education and the Sciences, Humanities and Arts Network Initiative (SHANTI). He directs of a number of projects there including: VisualEyes, a web-based authoring tool to weave images, maps, charts, video and data into highly interactive and compelling dynamic visualizations; PrimaryAccess which enables middle and high school students to create digital documentaries using primary source documents online; and dscourse which is a new generation online discussion tool.

David
http://AllinOneFilms.com


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 2, 2015 at 12:12:44 am

[David Cherniack] "Although I can't be certain that the credit for Ripple Wall belongs to me, I did suggest the idea to Bill Ferster over the phone one day. He liked it and called it a wall for ripple. It was in the next update."

I loved the way he used to credit editors for ideas he used in the documentation for each upgrade. Everyone likes to see his name in print. The EMC had a bunch of innovative features I've never seen elsewhere.

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


Return to posts index

David Cherniack
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 2, 2015 at 12:21:32 am

Being basically a one man band Bill was both the Development and Marketing manager and could listen to users in ways that are impossible today. Many features of the EMC2 were way ahead of its time. The one major flaw was no undo :)

David
http://AllinOneFilms.com


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 11:29:02 am

[Oliver Peters] "With mixed formats and older machines, I find Premiere/FCP7/MC to be waaaaaaay more responsive."

I am currently testing 4k H264 on Premiere CC and FCP X on a variety of machines. In general FCP X is much more responsive, although it depends how you define that.

Premiere JKL response to user input in a 4k H264 timeline is very sluggish, even on a top-spec 2015 iMac. It's likewise on a 4Ghz Windows machine, so it's not the OS. Also the program monitor update rate in fast forward or reverse is very laggy, often several seconds. By contrast JKL response on FCP using identical media and hardware is much faster -- by about 10x.

OTOH in Premiere when the playhead starts moving at any FF speed, it moves very consistently and smoothly. They are apparently running that on a separate high-priority thread. Even though the program monitor lags severely, the playhead keeps moving. By contrast FCP X on the same material has a jerky playhead, but the lags are much smaller -- 1/2 sec or less vs up to 4-5 sec for Premiere -- and the viewer stays in sync with the playhead. That is with Premiere on 1/4 res and FCP X viewer on "performance". I personally prefer a higher viewer update rate than a smoothly-moving playhead.

In Premiere if you give up on JKL and just drag the playhead it's somewhat better. The playhead response is very smooth and lag-free and you can hear the audio. However program monitor update is sluggish, with up to 1 sec delays. In FCP X dragging the skimmer across the timeline has much faster updates on the viewer -- about 10Hz or 10x faster than Premiere.

Multicam H264 4k is similar but with magnified effects. In general it's borderline unusable on Premiere and sluggish but usable on FCP X. That is with both on a 4Ghz i7 Skylake CPU with 32GB RAM and 1TB SSD. With FCP there is built-in seamless proxy mode, so it's easy to just use that, which makes editing 4k lightning fast. With Premiere you'd have to manually transcode before import, copy around files by hand and deal with re-sync issues.

However the general UI responsiveness of Premiere is very good. E.g, I don't recollect it lagging severely when dragging an effect to the timeline. FCP X can get in states (apparently when running a compute-intensive plugin) where the UI itself becomes quite choppy when dragging an effect to the timeline. It's as if the UI thread is not decoupled from the background processing, like in the old days of cooperative multitasking.


Return to posts index

Mathieu Ghekiere
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 12:04:56 pm

Great post, Joe, thanks for your comparison.

https://mathieughekiere.wordpress.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 10:21:24 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Often you spend more time moving the connecting points to attach them to the desired clip before a move is viable"

I don't really find this the case for me. I would say that anyone having problems with connected clips in X should avoid X all together IMHO The entire TL is based on connected clips.

[Oliver Peters] "managing the timeline movement while dragging the clip is quite unwieldy.
"


I don't really have trouble with this either. I like how that blue line pops up in the timeline as if to say "are you trying to put that here?" As soon as that line come up I just release the group of clips and they pop right in. I don't even have to be that close to it.

It's funny, the entire timeline is based on you being able to swap clips around easily. That's the whole point of it. It's almost like saying, the thing about a school bus is it's too hard to load kids on it : )

I guess it's in the eye of each editor. It's the whole reason I started really looking at X

In my first project with it I wasn't really sold. The client wanted a lot of shots swaped around and after doing that, I started really liking it.


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 8:14:18 pm

I made the switch from FCP 7 to X a while back. I am a generalist and do not look for free lance gigs as an editor nor do I devote the majority of my time to editing. I like being in production more than editing.

I find that X, after the initial learning curve, is a joy for rough cuts. I like having connection points and find I can experiment on the timeline faster than I was able to do in 7 without getting things out of sync or results which were not my intent. In 7, I needed to concentrate harder on each individual edit.
But once I have my rough cut finished, I find the opposite is true. I start thinking about X's interface and overlapping connected clips and the different rules for the secondary vs the primary timelines and what should I compound and is that the best option. ETC. What I did for the previous project doesn't necessarily work for the this one.

That said: I liked the 3 way color in 7 but am now very comfortable with color in X. Love the transform tool in FCP X. Gotten used to X's key framing ability with audio and visual. A bit tough ergonomically but the auto key frames are cool but at times feel hit or miss.

Now I've worked with editors that were full time pro editors and watched them touch type there way through edits at will, whatever they imagined they created quickly both in 7 and AVID. I'm sure there are X editors who are like that.

In my mind, I would love a marriage of these two approaches: magnetism, connection points but (like the position tool) have the option to organize elements in tracks.

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

Michael Gissing
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Nov 30, 2015 at 11:21:21 pm

With any edit software I find the greatest speed difference is the operator not the software. Familiarity, learned shortcuts and technique seem more important but software does make a difference but I think less significant from my observations. These very forums so often remind me that complaints about how inefficient software is usually results in someone saying do this, hit this key combo etc so often it is the operator who just hasn't found the best way to drive it.

Sometimes I don't want to go fast but as long as the software can and will when I want to then fine. I do hate repetitive or redundant keystrokes so all I will say is that all NLEs that I have seen using mouse & keyboards are inherently less ergonomic and slower than using a dedicated controller.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 12:46:58 am

[Michael Gissing] "With any edit software I find the greatest speed difference is the operator not the software."

That's not universally true when one application has specific features that greatly improve productivity of a given task over another application. For example, let's say I have a 30 min. informercial program with a "call to action" phone number graphic that appears periodically through out the program. Let's say 20 times. Now let's assume that I have to make alternative versions of the program, each with a different phone number. In Premiere, once I've created the phone number variations, to change the number is a simple as selecting the title clip in the bin, selecting all the phone number clips in the sequence and choose "replace from bin". All 20 instances are instantly updated. That sort of feature is a significant time savings and has nothing to do with the operator.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 1:45:05 am

[Oliver Peters]"That's not universally true"

I agree but my observations have been that it is generally true. Speed differences have so many components but in order of importance we rarely acknowledge that the operator can be the problem or the hardware rather than assuming the software is the most important.

I still stand by the idea that dedicated controllers and skilled operators are the greater contributors to the ability to work fast, comfortably and get a creative result in the minimum time.


Return to posts index

Nick Toth
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 9:34:39 pm

I think Michael's point is most valid and the example that Oliver used can be done in FCP X as well (to get back to the original issue).

I prefer FCP X. I feel that I can edit faster with it. I also have edited in Premier Pro and finished 2/3 of a project in the time it took another editor to do 1/3 of the project. Big deal! Tools are tools. I can swing a hammer but I doubt I could approach the ability of even an apprentice carpenter.

The anti-FCP X debate is tiresome.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 10:06:54 pm

[Nick Toth] "and the example that Oliver used can be done in FCP X as well"

Do you mean the replace function? If so, I'd love to see how it could be done in X as well as in PPro. IMHO, replace in X is quite possibly the worst implementation of this function in any NLE.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 10:16:18 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Do you mean the replace function? If so, I'd love to see how it could be done in X as well as in PPro. IMHO, replace in X is quite possibly the worst implementation of this function in any NLE."

If you mean the fact that there is no Match Frame replace function in X, I agree. It's maddening that it hasn't been put in at this point. However, I'd have to disagree strongly regarding the Replace functions that do exist (Replace, Replace from Start, Replace from End, Retime Replace, and Audition replace). I find them to be as good or better (meaning easier to use, obviously they mostly do the same thing) than other NLE's.

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

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 10:25:59 pm

[Charlie Austin] "If you mean the fact that there is no Match Frame replace function in X, I agree. It's maddening that it hasn't been put in at this point. However, I'd have to disagree strongly regarding the Replace functions that do exist (Replace, Replace from Start, Replace from End, Retime Replace, and Audition replace). I find them to be as good or better (meaning easier to use, obviously they mostly do the same thing) than other NLE's.
"


+1


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 10:32:38 pm

[Charlie Austin] "I find them to be as good or better (meaning easier to use, obviously they mostly do the same thing) than other NLE's."

So then explain how you'd achieve the same example I mentioned in the least number of keystrokes in FCPX. Premiere Pro: 20 phone number titles on a timeline. Select all. Replace with bin selection in a single step.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 10:45:50 pm

[Oliver Peters] "So then explain how you'd achieve the same example I mentioned in the least number of keystrokes in FCPX. Premiere Pro: 20 phone number titles on a timeline. Select all. Replace with bin selection in a single step."

Easy if they're generated titles. Select Edit>Find and Replace Title text.



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

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 11:03:08 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Easy if they're generated titles. Select Edit>Find and Replace Title text."

Good tip, but then you have to retype the phone number change each time you use a different number. How do you do this best when you are constantly doing this with a stock set of number variations? Like an infomercial that goes to different markets and gets refreshed monthly? Or if they are PNGs and animations?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 11:23:25 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Good tip, but then you have to retype the phone number change each time you use a different number. How do you do this best when you are constantly doing this with a stock set of number variations? Like an infomercial that goes to different markets and gets refreshed monthly? Or if they are PNGs and animations?"

Oh, like you knew the numbers, and knew they would be changing? Honestly I'd just build 'em as Compounds in that case. That way even if they were .png's or whatever you'd just change the master. I like the Pr replace from bin selection though for GFX clips, I could be wrong but I think in X you'd have to use the index and then just hit keystrokes a zillion times for those. But the replace text thing in X is really useful for generated titles.

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

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 11:54:21 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Oh, like you knew the numbers, and knew they would be changing?"

Well, or if they are supplied as a finished graphic file or animation customized with each number.

[Charlie Austin] " I like the Pr replace from bin selection though for GFX clips, I could be wrong but I think in X you'd have to use the index and then just hit keystrokes a zillion times for those"

That's the function I'm talking about.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 2, 2015 at 12:00:31 am

[Oliver Peters] "[Charlie Austin] " I like the Pr replace from bin selection though for GFX clips, I could be wrong but I think in X you'd have to use the index and then just hit keystrokes a zillion times for those"

That's the function I'm talking about."


Yes, and if you don't know in advance that you'd be changing them and they're flat GFX files done externally then yes, this would be welcome in X, if they're isn't a way to do this already. i'll poke around. ;-)

But if you know in advance that the GFX will change, compounds (or nests in Pr) would be the easiest way to do it IMO.

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

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


Return to posts index

Nick Toth
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 2, 2015 at 9:36:37 pm
Last Edited By Nick Toth on Dec 2, 2015 at 9:38:28 pm

@ Oliver

Not using the replace function. Using compound clips. Update the parent and all children follow.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Serious X Editing for Speed
on Dec 1, 2015 at 10:58:28 pm

[Nick Toth]"The anti-FCP X debate is tiresome."

Discussions like these also don't help except when little gems of productive shortcuts or better workflows emerge. If the best argument for software is just who's the fastest then it just brings out preconceptions and biases. I am more interested in hearing editors talk about what software is fun and can do all that they want in their area of work without needing an osteopath to keep them working.


Return to posts index

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