FORUMS: list search recent posts

What makes X fast? Tom Knows.

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bill Davis
What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 12, 2016 at 4:50:01 pm
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Mar 12, 2016 at 4:52:58 pm

BVE Presentation on why X can be so fast to edit with.

Live editing with Thomas Grove Carter on FCP X.

https://vimeo.com/158641571

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


Return to posts index

Mathieu Ghekiere
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 12, 2016 at 6:12:51 pm

Nothing new but still a great demo for people who don't know X that well.

https://mathieughekiere.wordpress.com


Return to posts index

Claude Lyneis
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 12, 2016 at 7:16:47 pm

I think he is more amazing than FCPX. I have rarely seen an editor edit a full speed.


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 12, 2016 at 8:02:43 pm

Yes.

I think I can speak for Tom and quite a few other X editors I know in that what's really the greatest boost to personal productivity is when the software disappears and you're just thinking of nothing else but expressing your ideas and will on the content you're manipulating.

And, of course, it's not confined to X. Every editor in every NLE does the same thing. But the X way is still singular in how the facits of the system work in concert - first dynamic pre-trimming using Reject and Favorite alone with keywords as he demonstrate - and then how the magnetic timeline lets you work with that pre-trimmed material to group and connect visual and audio elements in persistent arrangements and the move/trim/manipulate them as units safely with collision avoidance - insuring that you never overwrite anything unless you specifically choose to do so.

Those things drive a LOT of the friction out of X editing when you're "in the zone" working.

FWIW.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 12, 2016 at 9:25:50 pm

[Bill Davis] "But the X way is still singular in how the facits of the system work in concert - first dynamic pre-trimming using Reject and Favorite alone with keywords as he demonstrate - and then how the magnetic timeline lets you work with that pre-trimmed material to group and connect visual and audio elements in persistent arrangements and the move/trim/manipulate them as units safely with collision avoidance - insuring that you never overwrite anything unless you specifically choose to do so.

Those things drive a LOT of the friction out of X editing when you're "in the zone" working.
"


I'd like to add something to this, Bill is a regular and very enthusiastic contributor here and is a great proponent of FCPX, so if you're reading this forum to get some ideas on whether to use FCPX then you might think that you have to adopt the structured workflow that Bill follows to get the best out of it and that ISN'T necessarily true.

Lots of us are more tactile Editors, we like to get the material into the NLE and immediately start shaping the edit on the timeline without all the prep work that some do, organisation comes later and if this is how you work then FCPX is GREAT for this. The skimmer gets you through all your material extremely quickly and the magnetic timeline works brilliantly for chunking sections around the timeline without worrying about losing sync or losing clip positions. The fact that every action DOESN'T stop playback means you can tweak on the fly really easily. I've been using X since the beginning and to be honest I rarely use keywording and I'm still faster and have more fun on FCPX.

No offence to Bill but I just wanted to add that in to the mix!


Return to posts index

Gabe Strong
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 1:44:24 am

Yeah, I'm one of those types of editors who does NOT use all the organizational keywording and
such. But it works great for the way I edit, which is exactly the style Steve mentioned.

Gabe Strong
G-Force Productions
http://www.gforcevideo.com


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 7:03:57 am

Look, it makes total sense to me that an editor who's been using string out techniques his or her whole career will carry that into X.
And if you never warm to the incredible power of keywording so what? You get to decide how to use your tools, nobody else. That's a given.
Tom Carter uses Rejects and Favorites somewhat differently than I do. Why? Because his his organizational goals are different than mine. And both of ours are likely different than somebody doing a documentary.

There is no "right way" in this.

But that said, there IS a danger, in my opinion, of mistaking the fact that you haven't explored how a system in X (whether it's keywording or, for example, the asset auto-renaming module tucked away in the info tab) that MIGHT prove a superb solution for a better X workflow in specific situations - but won't - merely because somebody hasn't had the occasion or curiosity to actually examine what it's potential is.

Again, nobody's saying any editor has to use the tools a particular way. That's up to the editor. But I also know I've learned techniques in my second year as an X editor that I thought were no better than the way I did things in year one - only to discover that I was very wrong and there were actually better and faster ways to do things if I studied them.

Nobody's going to make you use X a way you don't want.

But there's a reason so many people talk about the power of keywording and keyword collections. it may totally not be something that resonates for you and that's fine.

But the organizational power is still there and well worth talking about. That's all.

My 2 cents, anyway.

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

Steve Connor
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 10:33:52 am

[Bill Davis] "But that said, there IS a danger, in my opinion, of mistaking the fact that you haven't explored how a system in X (whether it's keywording or, for example, the asset auto-renaming module tucked away in the info tab) that MIGHT prove a superb solution for a better X workflow in specific situations - but won't - merely because somebody hasn't had the occasion or curiosity to actually examine what it's potential is.
"


Neither of us mentioned the fact we HADN'T explored it. I certainly HAVE but I've found for a lot of projects it's simply quicker to jump straight in.

I'm not saying you SHOULDN'T use or explore it, I've used it on long form projects and a feature I cut with X, but for me the irony is that I don't NEED to use it all the time because the other tools speed things up so much.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 12:55:06 pm

FWIW - Thomas did mention that string out sequences is how he used to work in FCP "legacy". I would suggest however, that X is not as suited to working this way than other NLEs. For example, its match-framing capabilities and sequence management is not as sophisticated as others. No tabbing or stacking features for sequences, for example.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 1:24:05 pm
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Mar 13, 2016 at 1:30:29 pm

Oliver, this is partly why it's so dependent on the type of jobs one is doing. I actually use stringouts a LOT, but not for my own organization, but rather as a client communication tools. I work a good bit on videos that have teams of content experts weighing in on topics that I know little to nothing about. So after my Reject and Favorite passes to narrow content focus - I use stringouts, along with bold graphics assigning sound bite IDs to help the far flung teams communicate in prepro content discussions. X is an absolutely amazing tool for this. But I wouldn't necessarily expect a commercial editor like Tom to need to do this at all.
That's part of the magic of the database. It's insanely customizable to allow you to organize the way that works best for your individual needs. Or yes, not use it at all, I suppose. But I still kinda see it as the high tech equivalent (supercharged!) of Walter Murchs "wall of cards" organizational process - just with my actual footage - and bolted directly inside X in a form that goes with me everywhere. And so generally flexible and useful that while I might not use it a lot on every project, it's so useful I find few projects where it won't improve things - even if ALL I do is a Reject pass to trim the obvious junk out of my field footage so I don't waste time visually dealing with it going forward.

FWIW

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


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 8:10:15 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I would suggest however, that X is not as suited to working this way than other NLEs."

Stringing out is the way many of us used to work in legacy. I always sort of used it as a way to deal with an editing program that didn't really operate the way I wanted it to. What I wanted was a horizontal map of video clips. The filmstrip view in FCP X is basically what I always wanted. And combined with keywording it really eliminates the need to string out. And actually works much faster and better than stringing out IMHO.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 10:09:01 am

[Oliver Peters] "I would suggest however, that X is not as suited to working this way than other NLEs. […] No tabbing or stacking features for sequences, for example."

Ironically... from the exact same show: http://bit.ly/1nNGS80

And of course: http://bit.ly/1YZksOR

So I guess the question is: why would I want to work that way instead? Because if others are doing it, somehow it's the best way to do it? For me, being "less suited" is clearly a very very GOOD thing.

- RK

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


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 11:59:07 am

[Robin S. Kurz] "So I guess the question is: why would I want to work that way instead? Because if others are doing it, somehow it's the best way to do it? For me, being "less suited" is clearly a very very GOOD thing.
"


In some cases, simply preference. However, in a more concrete example, let's say you cut a :60 commercial and from that you want to edit a :30 cut down version. In doing that you want to be able to easily compare the two versions. Stacking is a better way than X's forward-backward timeline navigation approach. Even FCP7's tabbed timeline, where a tab could be pulled off as a separate window, was better.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 1:10:44 pm

[Oliver Peters] "In doing that you want to be able to easily compare the two versions. Stacking is a better way than X's forward-backward timeline navigation approach. Even FCP7's tabbed timeline, where a tab could be pulled off as a separate window, was better.
"


Just playing back the project with the skimmer in the browser would be good


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 4:01:31 pm

[Steve Connor] "Just playing back the project with the skimmer in the browser would be good"

Not for me. In the Adobe and FCP7 approach you could drag-and-drop between them to make edits. It's very, very fast to work that way. As far as just previewing the project, there's a capability that was lost when 10.0.9 changed to 10.1. In the old version you could see a filmstrip of the whole sequence in the browser, which was quite useful. Now you just get a thumbnail.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 1:38:54 pm

[Oliver Peters] "However, in a more concrete example, let's say you cut a :60 commercial and from that you want to edit a :30 cut down version."

Do it all the time. I just don't see how the imho excessive visual clutter that all that brings with it aids me in that. Nor how that (due to the clutter) is any better or more helpful than e.g. simply copy pasting the 60 to the 30 project or making a compound of the 60 for quick and easy reference, which are two things that I would do. Stacking or "Pancaking" is great... if you have no other useful options and are accustomed to an overladen GUI to begin with. :D

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 4:06:41 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "simply copy pasting the 60 to the 30 project or making a compound of the 60 for quick and easy reference, which are two things that I would do"

In the eye of the beholder, I suppose. The compound approach seems like a lot of wasted effort. Plus compound clips can cause problems in roundtrips. And you don't see the clips based on timeline icons and clips separation on the timeline itself, only by skimming.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 4:08:09 pm

That's what "Break Apart Clip Items" is for, yes.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 4:10:28 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "That's what "Break Apart Clip Items" is for, yes."

Sure, but again, that's an extra step I don't need with the other approach. Pros and cons either way.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 4:21:30 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Sure, but again, that's an extra step I don't need with the other approach."

Two, maybe three shortcuts (i.e. about 10 sec. of "work") to avoid the continuous visual clutter. For me, worth it, yes.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 4:30:24 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "to avoid the continuous visual clutter."

One editor's clutter is another's useful visual information. :)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 4:36:43 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[Robin S. Kurz] "to avoid the continuous visual clutter."

One editor's clutter is another's useful visual information. :)
"


Just a reminder of the inflexibility of the FCPX interface. I'm hoping more customisation makes it's way into FCPX over the next few updates.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 4:44:48 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Mar 16, 2016 at 4:45:11 pm

[Oliver Peters] "One editor's clutter is another's useful visual information."
No more or less information that I can think of. And I personally most certainly wouldn't want that mess of interface juggling that others have, that so many people bizarrely consider "flexibility" either. I LOVE the fact that no matter when and where I open FCP X, I know exactly what I'm looking at and where to look for anything and everything else. ZERO surprises from someone that thought his jumbled version of the interface was somehow way mo' better. I'm simply not that much of a control freak I guess.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 7:23:20 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "And I personally most certainly wouldn't want that mess of interface juggling that others have, that so many people bizarrely consider "flexibility" either. I LOVE the fact that no matter when and where I open FCP X, I know exactly what I'm looking at and where to look for anything and everything else. ZERO surprises from someone that thought his jumbled version of the interface was somehow way mo' better. I'm simply not that much of a control freak I guess."

Yep, those customisable UIs are for control freaks


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 7:26:59 pm

[Steve Connor] "Yep, those customisable UIs are for control freaks"

That, and for GUIs that are an unusable mess to begin with. :-P

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 7:49:31 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "That, and for GUIs that are an unusable mess to begin with. :-P
"


Yes, been editing on PPro today, look at this unusable mess



Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 8:22:48 pm

[Steve Connor] "Yes, been editing on PPro today, look at this unusable mess "

lol... I kinda like the panels in Pr. However I do feel that when you get a lot of media and piles of bins, X is exponentially easier to navigate without lots of clicking/tabbing etc. Same media and timeline, Pr and X...



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

~ 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

Steve Connor
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 8:50:40 pm

[Charlie Austin] "lol... I kinda like the panels in Pr. However I do feel that when you get a lot of media and piles of bins, X is exponentially easier to navigate without lots of clicking/tabbing etc."

I agree, however the ability to expand any panel to full screen with a single keystroke is incredibly useful and certainly something I would like to see in FCPX


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 8:58:12 pm

[Steve Connor] "however the ability to expand any panel to full screen with a single keystroke is incredibly useful and certainly something I would like to see in FCPX"

Yep, or at least recallable window layouts...

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

~ 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: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 9:33:43 pm

In Premiere you can also hide unwanted clips and use the search field to reveal desired clips.





- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 10:01:48 pm

[Oliver Peters] "In Premiere you can also hide unwanted clips and use the search field to reveal desired clips."

On a related note, Search Bins function much better in CC2015 than they did in their CC2014 debut.


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 10:01:23 pm

[Steve Connor] "Yes, been editing on PPro today, look at this unusable mess "

Don't blame that mess on Premiere, you slovenly bastard. And tuck in your shirt. LOL

I'm not sure exactly when "customizability" became such a dirty word. Maybe because Apple de-prioritized it, which by default made anyone who wanted to re-prioritize it somehow anti-Apple? Or somehow operating contrary to the spirit of FCPX, as if you can't like X AND want at least FCP-level degrees of customizability?

Just wondering aloud, not making any statements, but the idea of anybody saying, "No thanks, I have all the options I need" for almost ANYTHING is incomprehensible to me.

But I'm a slob, no doubt about it. LOL


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 16, 2016 at 10:16:57 pm

Since this thread has veered a bit into style, this Walter Murch clip seems appropriate:







- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 17, 2016 at 9:02:21 pm

[Tim Wilson] "I'm not sure exactly when "customizability" became such a dirty word."

Well, you see Tim...


[Tim Wilson] "Maybe because Apple de-prioritized it, which by default made anyone who wanted to re-prioritize it somehow anti-Apple?"

Oh, never mind. You answered your own question.


In the immortal words of Henry Ford, ""Any customer can have the UI configured anyway they want so long as it is the factory default configuration." ;)


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 17, 2016 at 1:31:54 am

[Steve Connor] "It was a joke Robin, hence the smiley face"

Oh the irony.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 12, 2016 at 8:05:03 pm

I would tend to agree. He's clearly a fast editor regardless of the NLE. I'm sure he's faster on X because it lends itself to his style. Plus there are things you can do in X without stopping playback, which is a great feature. What's interesting is that of the 6 editors at Trim, 4 are FCPX, but 1 is still on FCP7 and 1 on Avid MC. So for whatever reason, X isn't the right tool for them (yet).

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 12, 2016 at 11:22:20 pm

[Oliver Peters] "So for whatever reason, X isn't the right tool for them (yet).
"


Absolutely.

Of course that view kinda ignores the room sitting elephant that in a high level shop with presumably free access to any tool required to get the work out - the majority of their editors (66.67%) HAVE elected to switch to X.

That's gotta raise a few eyebrows amongst those who have elected to tread perhaps a more traditional path.

Or not, I suppose.

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

Claude Lyneis
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 3:37:36 am

I edit lacrosse games from about 80 minutes to start with down to a highlight of about 5 minutes. The clips are usually a few minutes long and the interesting parts are only 10's of seconds. I have finally learned to use jkl and i and o and then keyword the interesting part as a goal, hit, score, etc. Then I use a smart collection of those key words and dump it into the time line. It is quite efficient compared to dumping everything into the time line as I did after using FCP7. Hardly revolutionary, but it works efficiently and makes doing a highlight reel at the end of the season easy.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 7:23:49 pm

There is no "right way" to edit in X, or anything really. Figure out what works for you, whatever gets you from A to B fastest/most efficiently, and then do that. ;-)

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

~ 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

Bob Woodhead
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 8:11:37 pm

There are those that disagree......



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 8:24:03 pm

OK THAT made me laugh.

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

Steve Connor
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 8:51:26 pm

That's not how I pictured Bill at all!!!


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 13, 2016 at 9:02:06 pm

No comment. ;-)


Return to posts index

Bob Woodhead
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 14, 2016 at 1:23:01 am

Make sure you click on the image to see the correct keywords to use.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 14, 2016 at 2:07:26 am
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Mar 14, 2016 at 2:09:33 am

[Steve Connor] "That's not how I pictured Bill at all!!!"

Not at all making light of gender re-assignment issues which are hugely sensitive for those who are compelled to face that: I've got to hope that if I ever found myself on the female side of the gender distinction line, I'd be even a 10th that attractive, edgy and bold.

Cool photo illustration - tho it kinda stings just looking at it.

Funniest keyword? NG - Producer Focused.

; )

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

Andre van Berlo
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 14, 2016 at 8:36:41 pm

Thanks for posting this Bill,

In the video I've found a couple of things that have sped up things considerably in my "workflow". I am not an editor by trade so these kinds of videos really give an insight in how things can be done. I am the leading "actor" in all my shots and I make quite a few mistakes. How he sorts the good from the bad works very good for me and helps a lot.


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 17, 2016 at 7:59:50 pm

Nice video. It still doesn't strike me as particularly faster than other NLE's though. He obviously did a lot of work organising his favorites, notes etc that he's not showing, but a lot of work has been done.

I kinda liked how he stopped stacking video layers as he did in FCP7. Since, in AVID, people generally don't stack a lot (is my experience).

I'm still looking for the edge that makes FCPX so much more interesting that makes it compensate for its bugginess and workaroundiness...


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 18, 2016 at 7:18:18 pm

At this point, we're going to hit a communications wall.
You keep trying to "discuss" X - while trying far too hard, IMO - to avoid actually gaining the practical experience to have a viable frame of reference.
Maybe it's a little bit like sex. Some things just can't be adequately understood if all you do is talk about them?


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 18, 2016 at 7:18:05 pm

[Bill Davis] "At this point, we're going to hit a communications wall.
You keep trying to "discuss" X - while trying far too hard, IMO - to avoid actually gaining the practical experience to have a viable frame of reference.
Maybe it's a little bit like sex. Some things just can't be adequately understood if all you do is talk about them?
"


It's helpful if you quote the poster you're trying to "burn"


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 18, 2016 at 8:06:05 pm

Wasn't trying to burn anyone. Just make an honest point. That being that the biggest questioners of X (with notable and valued exceptions) are typically those who know it least.
But now that you point out it can be read that way, I'll decline to note who I was thinking about. It was actually somebody I like.

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: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 18, 2016 at 8:22:47 pm

If it's me you're referring to... I cut on FCPX three to four days a week. An have been for well over a year, since one of my clients only uses FCPX. I am gaining experience, exchange experiences with a lot of editors, but for some reason I fail to see the greatness of FCPX.

Same with this video... it's a great way to organise stuff, and I use it extensively. But... to me it's only 'different' from organisational methods in other NLE's. Not necessarily faster.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 1:24:43 pm

[Mike Warmels] "I am gaining experience, exchange experiences with a lot of editors, but for some reason I fail to see the greatness of FCPX."

Charlie, as a highly experienced editor on all the major NLEs sitting in L.A., therefore having first hand knowledge of what he's talking about in actual context, has a few great pointers. Showing big, but, most importantly imho, even a few seemingly "trivial" things that are not on any feature list, but make your life SO much easier. "Little" things like the way audio is displayed, simply changing the position of multiple clips at a time, realtime preview of filters and so on and so on. A long list of things that in and of themselves are nothing impressive, but put together make that HUGE difference for me (and many others) in the ability to continue thinking about my WORK unobstructed and not constantly my APP.

Of course whether you see that, disagree or whether his points pose any tangible difference to YOU is a whole, as they very much do for him and myself, different story. YM, as always, MV. Oh well. Horses for courses.







And then there are things like THIS that, for me, are the epitome of what is so brilliant about X's overall approach, specifically the MT...








[Mike Warmels] "I just have a stand alone set on which I run AVID and FCPX"

That particular dual install, from my experience, being the root of all issues we've had in the past. May very well apply to you as well.


[Mike Warmels] "I can imagine certain situation where you don't want ripple effects on roles."

I wouldn't EVER want that. Certainly not by default. Do a multi-lingual, multi-national edit some day, and you'll quickly realize why. That would seriously mess things up. I find it obvious and logical how and why they did it the way they did. But if that OPTION was added for whoever needed it, sure, why not.


- RK

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 1:47:35 pm

Hey Robin, thanks for the input. However... and I don't mean any disrespect. This happens to me a lot. People say: you're not using it right, show or tell me how and then I see video's like that or their advice and... that's EXACTLY how I am using it.

And I see all the little niceties, like the swapping around (never had much trouble with that in FCP7 or AVID, I just used a different, faster trick than in that clip your posted)... but I also experience the downside of it.

Like the audio display. When it comes to audio only tracks (like music) the waveform in the browser doesn't match the music or sound when you get to the end of the track (in the single clip browser video). Or... levels on clips vary greatly in the display hone you zoom in or out. I find the graphics nice looking, but often a little dodgy when changing views.

Like when you are in browser with a single clip, which is quite long, I switch to the thumbnail view and... where is it? It's not directly visible, it's somewhere below or up. So I end up looking for it by scrolling.

And I certainly don't hope having two NLE's installed causes problems. Because I cannot afford another $6000 machine from Apple just to run another NLE. The authorised reseller says it's fine. Plus... I work with a lot FCPX users that only have FCPX installed on the same MacPro's in an editing bay, having the exact same issues. So I doubt it.

I like FCPX best when I start on a new project. Then it's fast and snappy. After a few days, as the Library grows, new cuts are made, graphics get added it gets worse and worse.

I said this before: I like a lot of things about FCPX. I think some things are very fast and clever (like swapping, the keywords, the direct way to add a clip to a second storyline ), some things are kinda stupid (like the constant opening and closing of clips (CTRL-S) before you make do a split edit, how features that work nice and fast on the main storyline don't work on the others, the Inspector interface where you constantly have to swap from menu to menu to check out the specs).

But, I keep saying this: I am disappointed in its performance. Now, I gathered a lot of work arounds this week from a lot of great posters here. But... they are still work arounds. And for me, that's what makes FCPX disappointing, gives it an unfinished feel, it promises a lot but when it comes down to it, it often doesn't deliver. Especially when suddenly my skimmer stops working, or clips on the browser suddenly stop displaying while the project still show picture. Then I know it's time to restart FCPX again... or even the entire computer. And that several times a day.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 2:55:15 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Mar 19, 2016 at 2:58:35 pm

[Mike Warmels] "People say: you're not using it right, show or tell me how and then I see video's like that or their advice and... that's EXACTLY how I am using it."

There is no way I or any other external person could possibly say what the issue could be, considering the near endless variables that play into something like that. But the mere fact that you say yourself that others can apparently easily show you that whatever it is you have an issue with ISN'T an issue (with them, hence their advice) kinda tells you that it clearly can't be FCP by itself, no? At least to me that seems pretty logical. And I don't see anyone claiming that you couldn't possibly be having any issues, but rather that it's not happening with them or someone they know. Do you not have competent local support? Correlation is not causation. Simply deducing that since it isn't happening with Avid, that somehow it clearly can only be FCP and nothing else, is picking very low hanging fruit. If what you describe WERE in fact some sort of typical, classic, FCP related issue(s), you'd see more people chiming in concurrence, no? (which somehow I know will now of course happen) At least I don't recall seeing any, as opposed to the opposite. So again... what is the logical, objective alternative for you going to be, other than "FCP is buggy" if those issues are apparently not reproducible elsewhere?


[Mike Warmels] "I just used a different, faster trick than in that clip"

Then you most definitely need to let me in on the secret. Because I not only used legacy FCP for 10 years, but also trained it for five and there is absolutely nothing that I can conjure up that could be even REMOTELY "faster". Feel free to use the clip as an example and tell us what you would have done differently to make the comparison even so much as a TIE. I'd really love to know, since I clearly missed something very essential for 10+ years!


[Mike Warmels] "the waveform in the browser doesn't match the music or sound when you get to the end of the track"

That's in fact a bug, yes. Or rather a result of how the waveforms are currently generated and then displayed. Just like in the timeline, one "resolution" of the waveform will be used to display it at certain zoom levels before it needs to be re-rendered for another zoom level to show the size and detail relative to that. If you happen to have scaled to somewhere right on the verge of two display sizes, you can get that discrepancy, yes. I've had that a few times, too. But aside from being a slight "cognitive dissonance" I hardly found it very problematic. And slightly resizing in the one or other direction, vertically or horizontally fixed it from there on in anyway. We'll see when and if they address that in a future update.


[Mike Warmels] "some things are kinda stupid (like the constant opening and closing of clips (CTRL-S) before you make do a split edit"

So I guess I can only assume you see little value in the concept of clips being collapsible as a whole? Since in that case you can simply choose "Expand all Clips" and leave it that way. Done. Of course if you DO see value in it, then I don't actually see how you can logically avoid having to do that one way or the other, since it serves an obvious and overall very helpful purpose. In which case you might simply try a DOUBLE-CLICK on the audio as opposed to the comparatively much more tedious and superfluous shortcut, yes. Unless of course you didn't even know of that option to begin with?

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 3:17:21 pm

The issues I mentioned ARE reproducible. I know a dozen editors who run into these issues.

And I'm not going to start up an ancient FCP7 project to show you how I used a trick in an NLE no one should be using anymore. That's just downright silly. And I never said that it was faster than FCPX, it could be done faster than it was in that clip. So FCPX wins. As it does on some other counts. Again, some of you think criticism is an attack on you as an editor. All I am saying is that not everything about FCPX is divine.

So, do I see value in the concept of collapsed clips? To be totally honest: I dunno. In FCPX it has value because if I work with several storylines (music, fx, voice over, graphics, secondary storylines etc etc) I prefer to see my timeline in one glance. So by using collapsed clips I can do that. And in fact, it's the only way, since I am very limited in determining the look of my timeline, when it comes to the sizes of the clips. (Yes, there are five presets, I know... that's what I call LIMITED).
It gets even more challenging when you add a dissolve or something to clips that are originally rather small, like titles: suddenly the clip in the timeline doubles in size!

So collapsed clips help to keep the timeline rather viewable. But... I find it rather tiresome to a) keep all of my timeline in view and b) open and close clips for very simple split edits. I could expand them all, but then I'd be scrolling up and down my timeline all the time. That doesn't help much. Plus, I'd like to keep the tracks together while making a split edit and not drag every individual track (sometimes 8) underneath a clip before or after that. It's just means more work.

And honestly, using CTRL-S or double click makes no difference at all. For one method you use one hand, for the other two... time wise it's just personal preference. You still have to open and close it. (at least, I like it closed to prevent the timeline from looking messy - my preference.)


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 4:42:16 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Like the audio display. When it comes to audio only tracks (like music) the waveform in the browser doesn't match the music or sound when you get to the end of the track (in the single clip browser video). Or... levels on clips vary greatly in the display hone you zoom in or out. I find the graphics nice looking, but often a little dodgy when changing views."

Yeah, the zoomed waveform thing is annoying, but they know about it. In practice it's not a big deal to me, and the ability to see all the waveforms without need to load and/or play every clip when hunting for SFX etc more than offsets the keystrokes to zoom in to see the correct waveform. Like, way more. :-)

[Mike Warmels] "Like when you are in browser with a single clip, which is quite long, I switch to the thumbnail view and... where is it? It's not directly visible, it's somewhere below or up. So I end up looking for it by scrolling."

This seems (for me anyway) to only be an issue on a large, second monitor if you have only the Library/Browser on it. In single window mode, the clip/playhed snaps to the center of the viewer as soon as you hit play. For the large second monitor situation, zooming all the way in usually "centers" it. It would be nice to have a "center selected clip" command or something for that scenario.

[Mike Warmels] "I like FCPX best when I start on a new project. Then it's fast and snappy. After a few days, as the Library grows, new cuts are made, graphics get added it gets worse and worse."

Size of the Library seems irrelevant for me... Sometimes it'll get a little laggy after a few hours, especially when using bunches of Motion templates or compositing titles/generators etc. A quick relaunch solves it, and X launches faster than anything else. Also, as it saves every keystroke as you go, if I ever need to force quit, or the power goes out... I just pick up where I left off. I've had to go to a backup exactly once in the last 3 years of using X. In other NLE's? I've lost track. That's a huge timesaver when it occurs, and it occurs using all NLE's. So a relaunch of X, for me, is a complete non-issue. YMMV of course. :-)

[Mike Warmels] " Especially when suddenly my skimmer stops working, or clips on the browser suddenly stop displaying while the project still show picture. Then I know it's time to restart FCPX again... or even the entire computer. And that several times a day."

That's weird, I honestly can't remember ever needing to reboot the computer because of X. My Libraries are generally huge, and my projects are not... uncomplicated. Seems like something else is going on? I mean, I have X, 7, PrCC, MC 8.5, R12, Motion, Logic, Reaper, Plugins from mObject, RG Universe, FxFactory, Coremelt, and tons of other random crap on my 2012 iMac at work. And that's just NLE/DAW related. The list of other system add-ons/background utilities etc is too long to list. And I've "never" done a clean install. If anything, I've done the opposite. I install so much stuff it'd make your hair curl. :-) I do stay on top of regular maintenance though. So far so good. :knocking wood:

Point being... there's nothing wrong with preferring one NLE over another, and you make some valid critiques, but as to the stability/usability of X our experiences seem vastly different. There certainly are things in MC/Pr etc that I miss when in X, but honestly, I feel like I'm constantly doing more workarounds in other NLE's to do things that are dead simple in X. Matter of perspective I guess..

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

~ 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: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 2:18:07 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] ""Little" things like the way audio is displayed,"

Except that the display isn't inaccurate. As you zoom in or out of the timeline, the height of the waveform changes. Zoomed out, the waveform show peaks that aren't there when you zoom into that section of the timeline. A bug?

[Robin S. Kurz] "That particular dual install, from my experience, being the root of all issues we've had in the past. May very well apply to you as well.
"


I hope you are joking, because that's not my experience. I run multiple machines with multiple NLEs installed and there's no difference. Some with Media Composer, some without. It's quite common these days to have machines with 4 and even 5 NLEs installed (FCPX, Premiere, FCP 7, MC, Resolve) with no impact on the performance of any of them.

What I do see is that the more plug-ins you have installed on X, the worse the performance gets, at least in initial load time and in accessing the effect palette.

There are also plenty of performance issues and quirks that result in successive OS installations without the occasional clean install. If you're on an older machine (like a 2010 MP tower, for example) and migrated all the way up to EC without a clean install somewhere along the line, you are asking for trouble.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 2:30:44 pm

Oh wow... thanks Oliver. It's not just me then.... about the graphics... or about the running of two NLE's on one machine. I've always had that, for well over ten years. With no problems whatsoever. So glad to hear it's not me thinking that would be weird.

I am on a late 2013 MacPro. I would expect that to run FCPX properly. I have just a very few plugins installed from FX Factory.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 2:48:30 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[Robin S. Kurz] ""Little" things like the way audio is displayed,"

Except that the display isn't inaccurate."


If you actually watched the video, then we could be talking about the same thing. His example, the one I was referencing, had nothing to do with the timeline.


[Oliver Peters] "I hope you are joking…"

Nope. I described it elsewhere. And never mind that I wrote MAY. If your experience differs, great.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 4:26:12 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Mar 19, 2016 at 4:27:40 pm

I would literally love to see anyone do what Tom does at the 30:00 mark the way he does it and at even vaguely the same speed, in any other NLE. Where he doesn't even waste so much as a second on thinking about his audio/audio design whilst madly whittling down his timeline, but STILL it's all exactly the way it should be in the end. Certainly in FCP 7... not a snowball's chance.

And once again, at 34:25... perfect AAF export via X2Pro. With him getting an email later from the audio guy saying had never gotten such a clean audio layout (AAF) before. Go figure.

So if isn't workin' for you… hmmm.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 5:40:30 pm

IF I'd know how to add a picture in here, I'd show what our AAF's look like from X2Pro...


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 5:39:04 pm

Plus... he sends it to Logic.

I don't know any sound editors that work on Logic. It's either ProTools or Nuendo.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:07:15 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:08:09 pm

[Mike Warmels] "I'd show what our AAF's look like from X2Pro..."

No one is doubting that it's not working for you. The question is, why is it demonstrably working brilliantly for everyone else?


[Mike Warmels] "I don't know any sound editors that work on Logic. It's either ProTools or Nuendo."

Oh please. That's a completely irrelevant straw man. The AAF is an AAF and It will be structured and look exactly the same in either.

And I'm still eagerly waiting for that faster i.e. at least equally efficient swapping of two clips plus audio in FCP 7 you spoke of. No? I'm always up to discovering something new.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:13:07 pm

Well, I don't make the AAF's myself. All I get is the complaints from the sound editors (when I come in to check the mix or direct narrative work) and the FCPX editors. I'd really like to help them out and figure out what the trick is to make them work so neatly. Because what Tom is showing is exactly how the AAF's look if we make them from AVID (without third party software).

And if you want to discover something new, try FCPX. Or AVID. Or Premiere... Or... iMovie on the iPhone (that's pretty neat, in fact). FCP7 is over and done with.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:23:11 pm

[Mike Warmels] "All I get is the complaints from the sound editors (when I come in to check the mix or direct narrative work) and the FCPX editors"

In order to get the AAF to come out right, you have to properly assign the roles and subroles for audio channels in FCPX before exporting. Ideally this should be done at the front end when the media is ingested before you edit the clip into the project/sequence.

And contrary to what Robin said, AAFs are not equal. They can carry different data spending on the originating software and that is different at the receiving end as well, depending on what the DAW expects. For example, going from Premiere to Logic is complete gibberish, while Premiere to Pro Tools seems fine.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:30:41 pm

Well, there may be the problem right there.

Of course they assign all the roles. And Nuendo and Protools can read them allright, but often they don't match the roles they have in FCPX. Music tracks are assigned as "Dialogue" all of a sudden. Or left and right tracks are very far apart (one on track 2 and the other on track 46). Plus they have the trouble of LOTS of tracks. Tracks you don't use in editing or even switch off, but it gets sent to the sound editing suite anyway. Often caused by split edits (and working with 8 tracks per audio clip, the stack gets pretty high very quickly).

Now, I am just relaying stuff here I see editors and sound editors struggling with. I don't make AAF's in FCPX (or X2Pro) to be accurate. But I do see what ends up in the sound editing software.

That being said... I do think FCPX would benefit greatly if you could make the AFF IN FCPX, where only the actual audio used gets exported.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:34:02 pm

[Mike Warmels] "where only the actual audio used gets exported."

You can choose what does and doesn't get included from X2Pr. Specific Roles/SubRoles, disabled or muted tracks, whatever. Very granular. Sounds as though omething isn't being done properly somewhere...

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

~ 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

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:36:51 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:40:24 pm

[Oliver Peters] "And contrary to what Robin said, AAFs are not equal. "

Oh, so you're saying that said AAF's would not import identically in either? Because whilst trying so terribly hard to trip me up all the time, Oliver, you might at least try to actually read what I wrote and not what you apparently want me to have written to save yourself some typing. Because I said "The AAF" not "An AAF"... there's that little difference. Oops. Referring to the AAF that comes out of X2Pro. I'm quite aware that there are variations on the format as a whole, yes, thanks.

Better luck next time.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:50:40 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Because whilst trying so terribly hard to trip me up all the time,"

Why is it that you can never engage in a discussion without thinking it's all about you? No one is trying to trip you up. We all seem to be helping Mike work through a problem. Or so I thought.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 3:41:47 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Mar 20, 2016 at 3:42:31 pm

[Oliver Peters] "… without thinking it's all about you?"

Damn. You're right. My bad.

Just so my egomaniacal self doesn't make the same blunder again, for future reference: exactly which Robin are you talking about when you say "contrary to what Robin said"? Would hate to make the same obvious mistake twice. :-/

[/s]


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:28:30 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Well, I don't make the AAF's myself."

Sorry, but then how exactly can you go so far and "confidently" point the finger at X2Pro or FCP for that matter, with a straight face, when you can't even know if it's even being used correctly? Very odd to say the least. But I think I get it now.


[Mike Warmels] "And if you want to discover something new, try FCPX. Or AVID. Or Premiere... "

Right. Like I said, now I'm getting it. More and more with each post.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:42:55 pm

Well, only that 15+ FCPX editors, a bunch of media managers and a couple of sound engineers have been trying to figure out how to get a clean timeline for months. Obviously it's not so clear cut. These are not stupid people.

But maybe there are some particular things they fail to see, I dunno. What we do see is that a lot of tracks that are not actually used in the cuts do get transferred to the sound edit stations and that role name don't always match with the content as they are in FCPX.

And it's so nice, that you're acting a little condescending. I don't think I gave any cause for that. I know you love FCPX and everything. All I'm trying to get to is feel the same love for it. I don't expect you to love AVID, even though I often hear people complain about AVID about things that can be done a lot simpler or faster than they make it out to be. Maybe it's all about getting to know the intricacies of these NLE's. And in case of FCPX, that's why I am here: to learn, to understand why things are not working well (while it's apparently all perfect with others) and what I can do to make it better. But to act like FCPX is God's gift to mankind is overstating the value of this NLE. It has bugs, it's not really finished and you need to learn a lot of workarounds.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:47:42 pm

[Mike Warmels] "And it's so nice, that you're acting a little condescending. I don't think I gave any cause for that."

Yeah, some people get a little crazy on these forums. Not everybody is so... strident. ;-) I'd be interested to see an fcpxml from something that's getting screwed up. Because it shouldn't end up as you describe.

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

~ 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

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:30:48 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Well, I don't make the AAF's myself. All I get is the complaints from the sound editors (when I come in to check the mix or direct narrative work) and the FCPX editors. I'd really like to help them out and figure out what the trick is to make them work so neatly. Because what Tom is showing is exactly how the AAF's look if we make them from AVID (without third party software)."

What kind of media are you guys working with? Red or something? Because my experience (going to ProTools) is the same as Tom's. Clean splits, with tracks all labeled, without manually arranging everything beforehand as with other NLE's. If you're one of the folks that has the luxury of carefully arranging tracks in your NLE as you cut, then god bless you. :-) For me, I just need to fit stuff in the window while I madly cut for a deadline and then I, or an assistant, has to to spend a bunch of time figuring out what every clips is and splitting it properly. No need to do that from X.

X2Pro is a way better workflow than any internal output for that reason alone. You may not agree, but snarking about "3'rd parties" is disingenuous at best. I have a sh*tload of 3rd party apps/plugins for X. Some work in other NLE's, some are X workflow specific. All of that costs less than my MC perpetual or Pr subs And the latter 2 just keep costing me more $$. Not the X stuff. I also get better support from the 3'rd party devs than I get from Apple, Adobe, or Avid.

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

~ 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

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:35:36 pm

XD-Cam mostly. Or audio recorded separately on the audio mixer (up to eight tracks usually). Depending on the project.

Yeah, it's not rocket science or anything. But for some reason 15 FCPX editors and a bunch of media managers can't figure out how to get clean and simple AAF's out of the door.

We did them for years in AVID and the AFF just gets exported with what you actually use in the cut, with handle lengths. And what you see in Protools or Nuendo looks identical to what the editors made in AVID.

I just wish I'd know how to include a pic in here and I could show you.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:41:50 pm

[Mike Warmels] "I just wish I'd know how to include a pic in here and I could show you."

I can kind of picture it... I was a post mixer for years before becoming an editor. it sounds like what you get when you directly import fcpxml into Logic. Works fine if all you have is stereo clips, but multichannel stuff ends up a horrific mess.

However, that's not the case with X2Pro, it all comes across just as you'd expect... assuming you've set your Roles correctly on the multichannel clips, and actually set the preferences in X2Pro. If you just hit Export without checking whats getting included, I can imagine it could come out pretty screwy...

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

~ 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

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:57:24 pm

Superb demo at fcpxchange btw Charlie. Very entertaining and concise. A couple of nice little things I hadn't noticed before, such as the moving-multiple-clips-at-once thing. Always fun to know. :-)

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 8:18:44 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Very entertaining and concise."

Thanks... :-) Doing another one at NAB... no idea what I'l say, but I didn't for this one either really. :-)

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

~ 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

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 3:47:14 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Doing another one at NAB..."

Bummers. Won't make it this time around. Would have loved to see it. In what context? Is there some sort of X-centric event going on somewhere?

Maybe take a few pointers from Tom. :) He really shows the gamut of X... at lightning speed, too! Day-um. :D Otherwise anything off your blog. You have some great little gems there! Depending on the audience, really (experienced or inexperienced).

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 4:36:32 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] " Is there some sort of X-centric event going on somewhere?"

Yep, this :-) fcpexchange

[Robin S. Kurz] "Maybe take a few pointers from Tom. :) "

He's got his own little thing pre recorded presentation happening I think, mine will be different. :-)

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

~ 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

Robin S. Kurz
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 7:08:19 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Mar 19, 2016 at 7:59:36 pm

[Charlie Austin] "it sounds like what you get when you directly import fcpxml into Logic."

Agreed. Just about the only time I have ever seen anything that looked even vaguely like what was described. But with X2Pro... never once. Not even amongst the hundreds of teenagers that I teach that had a mere five minute intro to the X2Pro workflow years ago. Unless maybe they only got the LE version that doesn't allow for (nearly) any of the roles management.

I also don't see what isn't covered in here







that couldn't provide supposed 15+ people more than enough information to figure out such a painfully simple app. Sorry for having a really hard time buying that. Oh well.

- RK


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 10:03:09 pm

Nice video. But again, this isn't really representative for the shows I do. It's like 30 minutes with lot of different audio mike tracks, music, SFX etc etc. Now the source material for the dialogue is sometime between 4 and 8 tracks. Once you overlap audio to make a nice seamless cut, I'd imagine that would be at least 2x 8 tracks stacked.

In this video I can't really see how you can switch off particular tracks from the clip in X2Prp. Someone told me that's possible, but I can't see it here. The editors do switch it off in Inspector, but apparently X2Pro still exports all 8 tracks. Now again: I haven't done this myself, but this is how I imagine sound editors end up with an exuberant amount of audio tracks: stacks and stacks of 8 tracks of the source material. While often you end up using three or four if you'd be selecting them.

But I'll look up some more extensive X2Pro tutorials, not the ones with very simple sequences. The problem is not that it's not exporting, it's that exporting way too much.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 6:46:46 pm

[Mike Warmels] "XD-Cam mostly. Or audio recorded separately on the audio mixer (up to eight tracks usually). Depending on the project. "

OK, so in that case, there is no such thing as left and right. The XDCAM and the separate recorder have multiple mono channels. So these can all be dialogue or they can be individual mics and you can assign roles accordingly.

If you just generically assign all 8 channels as Dialogue, then they will fall hierarchically wherever the free space is in the track sheet. That's how you are getting a large separation between "left" and "right". The exception should be if these are edited together and embedded into the video (not detached).

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 7:08:18 pm

Mike,

Is this on a shared storage system? If so, that could be the cause of your system's performance issues. Before, in another thread, I believe, you said one machine and an attached Promise array, but a few posts up you mentioned 15 FCPX editors. So, I'm a bit confused.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 10:13:38 pm

I work for a client who has chosen to work exclusively on FCPX. They have an editing bay with 10 suits working with SAN. That's quite the adventure itself.

I myself work on my own system, on a MacPro Trashcan I bought to be able to work properly on FCPX. (Avid still runs excellently on my old MacPro as well as on the new one). So we exchange libraries and I work on copies of media they have on their SAN. So when I start finishing rough cuts into final cuts we go into one of their suits. And after that, they export the cuts for audio mixing and broadcast masters.

And then there's a group of editors that get hired to work there, also work for a post-production facility that works on FCPX. With about five or six suits, on MAcPro trashcans and SAN.

But... the issues I run into, they also run into. Even a lot of fellow directors of mine working on all kinds of Apple machines (MBP, iMac etc) experience sluggishness etc. Even though my cuts are much closer to a finished product than theirs. So I do try to cut everything as well as I can, including split edits, overshoots, graphics, preliminary color correction, music pre-mix, SFX, the lot... So I use a lot of the tools. But... it's nothing uber complicated. I've done this collaborative process for years, on AVID and FCP7. But it's never felt so hard as with FCPX.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 11:28:00 pm

[Mike Warmels] "I work for a client who has chosen to work exclusively on FCPX. They have an editing bay with 10 suits working with SAN. That's quite the adventure itself.
I myself work on my own system, on a MacPro Trashcan...
... But... the issues I run into, they also run into."


OK, thanks. That make more sense. The network could indeed be the issue; however, if you are getting similar performance in a standalone configuration, it's hard to say.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 10:04:17 pm

Actually, I was referring to a music track where left and right ended up separated. But in the clip Robin just displayed there seems to be something you can do to prevent that.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 19, 2016 at 11:15:55 pm
Last Edited By Charlie Austin on Mar 19, 2016 at 11:46:28 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Actually, I was referring to a music track where left and right ended up separated. But in the clip Robin just displayed there seems to be something you can do to prevent that."

There is... You can set "track" order quite easily by just dragging Roles to re-order before export.



Also, a bunch of pretty important options are found in the preferences, not just in the window you're presented with. My guess is this is where something is mis-set. Particularly disabled Roles vs. muted Roles.

You can set it so that anything you really don't want to transfer doesn't, and you can include tracks you might want (alt mics etc) by leaving 'em enabled and muting them. FWIW, muting clips in the timeline (V key) does not disable/exclude them for X2Pro. You must explicitly deselect them in the inspector. If you can see it in the timeline, it's gonna be included, muted or no. Maybe that's what's happening?

For posterity, there are 3 different ways to "disable" clips and/or components, all of which have different results:

-Turning off the Role in the Timeline Index mutes it for playback, but it will still play if you export the Project with a comp mix. You can of course exclude Roles if you export a multitrack Quicktime (for stems, mix minus etc).

-Disabling (Muting) an audio clip or component (multichannel track) in the Timeline (V key) will do what you'd expect, you won't hear it, and it won't play in an export. However, it will be shown as enabled in an fcpxml export, and will appear in anything that uses that xml for translation. The pref in X2Pro lets you choose to exclude or include it in the AAF.

-Disabling a clip or component in the Inspector makes it inaudible during Playback and export, it will not be shown in the timeline, and the fcpxml will indicate that it is disabled and it shouldn't be included in any translations

With multichannel clips, the only way to not have all the components appear in an AAF, is to disable individual components in the Inspector. If you only want CH-1 & 3, you need to uncheck all the others. Even if you tell X2Pro not to include "disabled" clips, disabling multichannel components in the timeline won't work, as the clip enclosing the components is still enabled.

Saying FCP X is simple is... not entirely accurate. lol Same with setting up a network. People think it's easy so they read some online info, or just wing it. It often won't work well, the network needs tuning just like you would for Avid or anything else.



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

~ 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

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 10:43:12 am

Oh wow... yeah, pretty complex. Maybe I can help these guys out with this info.

But yeah, it's not really simple. Plus, to me this feels like you have to do a lot of things twice. And when you forget to do something (and FCPX will allow you to forget things) you're in a big mess.

If I just add up from import in FCPX to AAF export:

1. Make sure all the codecs, frame rates, frequencies are the same, if not convert
2. Create Library en check settings
3. Import
4. Add roles to audio
5. Order everything in events, folder, keywords etc.
6. Edit and turn off audio you don't need (disable, deselect or detach and remove)
7. Export to X2Pro
8. Work on settings for audio tracks you want discarded, bundled etc...
9. Export.

Again... it's quite a bit of work. That's one of the things of AVID I prefer, because this workflow is much easier.

1. Create project with project settings
2. Import media (which gets converted to project settings if necessary)
3. Order media in bins
4. Edit
5. Create AFF settings (and save as profile for future use)
6. Export to AAF

The next time you cut you can leave step 5 out of it. I do think in this workflow AVID is doing much more of the heavy lifting than FCPX and gives less room for mistakes.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 3:44:33 pm

[Mike Warmels] "And when you forget to do something (and FCPX will allow you to forget things) you're in a big mess."

Not really... the biggie is setting Roles when you import media, but that effectively negates all the work you need to do with tracks in Avid or Pr. Meaning no track patching, setting up different sequences for multitrack export etc. Do it on import and you're done. And X generally assigns correct Roles on it's own, but for multichannel sources you need to do it.

[Mike Warmels] "If I just add up from import in FCPX to AAF export:"

No, it's actually much more like what you describe for Avid, Couple extra steps up front, but it saves a lot of time later...

1. Create Library
2. Import media
3. Check Roles and Set Roles on Multichannel Audio
4. Disable unwanted tracks in the Master Clips (you can always re-eanble at any time if you need them)
5. Order media in Events using KW Collections
5. Create Project with project settings (or let project settings be set by the first clip cut in)
6. Edit (enable/disable stuff here too, but it really is less "work" than track management)
7. Export to AAF, Check settings and Save.

Obviously not the same, but it's pretty easy. X is certainly not all skittles and unicorns, but it's not brain surgery either, just a different way of doing things. You need to pay attention to them, but Roles are an enormous time saver for a lot of reasons///

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

~ 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

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 10:51:44 am

Oh wait...

This bit I don't get:

"With multichannel clips, the only way to not have all the components appear in an AAF, is to disable individual components in the Inspector. If you only want CH-1 & 3, you need to uncheck all the others. Even if you tell X2Pro not to include "disabled" clips, disabling multichannel components in the timeline won't work, as the clip enclosing the components is still enabled."

So does this mean if I have an 8 track audio track from recording on location (or a four track audio included in XD-Cam video), I can disable tracks in FCPX but it will still all go into the export and end up in Protools?


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 3:22:24 pm

[Mike Warmels] "So does this mean if I have an 8 track audio track from recording on location (or a four track audio included in XD-Cam video), I can disable tracks in FCPX but it will still all go into the export and end up in Protools?"

I believe you need to disable components in the inspector or they just come across muted. I've been wrong before though. :-) I'll run an experiment and see...

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

~ 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

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 3:39:28 pm

Please do, because this may be exactly the problem of the huge stacks of audio tracks in the exports. I know the editors disable all the unused (and sometimes muted ) channels in Inspector. And yet, they do turn up in the export.

My thinking was always that X2Pro exports the clips. And all those multiple tracks are IN the clips. But I am not sure if that's how it really works.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 4:06:47 pm

[Mike Warmels] " I know the editors disable all the unused (and sometimes muted ) channels in Inspector. And yet, they do turn up in the export."

Experiment done, and that is what happens...



If the channels are still being include, they either didn't set the X2Pro pref shown below, or something is buggy somewhere. You guys on the latest versions of everything?



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

~ 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

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 4:05:21 pm

[Charlie Austin] "I believe you need to disable components in the inspector or they just come across muted. I've been wrong before though. :-) I'll run an experiment and see..."

Yep, to ensure it's not included, ya need to "turn it off" in Inspector. (example is Logic, but it's the same for PT, Nuendo etc



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

~ 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

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 4:11:39 pm

Okay, well, that's kinda strange that for some reason it didn't happen last time...

Thanks for all the efforts!


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 4:16:54 pm

[Mike Warmels] "Okay, well, that's kinda strange that for some reason it didn't happen last time...

Thanks for all the efforts!"


Yeah, it is odd... And no problem... I often worry when I say stuff without double-checking that I'm totally wrong, lol In this case I lucked out! :-)

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

~ 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

Mike Warmels
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 4:18:16 pm

I doubt it's luck.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: What makes X fast? Tom Knows.
on Mar 20, 2016 at 4:29:51 pm

[Mike Warmels] "I doubt it's luck."

Well, Sometimes it is... ;-)

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

~ 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

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