FORUMS: list search recent posts

"Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Mark Raudonis
"Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 29, 2016 at 12:05:20 am

So if you call it a "lane" it's NOT a "track". I see what they did there!

In other news... pretty solid upgrade.

mark



Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 29, 2016 at 1:39:31 am

[Mark Raudonis] "So if you call it a "lane" it's NOT a "track". I see what they did there!
"


At the risk of being shouted down... it's not a track. 'Cuz in Pr today, I can't turn the damn things off! ? Maybe a uh... maglev rail? lol

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

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 29, 2016 at 2:59:11 am

[Mark Raudonis] "So if you call it a "lane" it's NOT a "track". I see what they did there!"
I agree with Charlie it's not a Track but for a different reason. What it really is is a Group. If it were a Track, every audio clip would be in a separate lane but they don't behave that way.

For example, if you have 3 "dialog" audio clips stacked on top of each other, in a track based NLE you would have 3 tracks. In FCP X you would have 1 lane called "dialog" with the 3 clips still stacked within it.

So they are not like Tracks at all. They are Horizontal Groupings by Role and can be moved as a group and manipulated as a group. Tracks don't behave that way. More like audio buses than tracks. It's a rather brilliant when you think about it.

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index


Charlie Austin
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 29, 2016 at 4:44:37 am

[John Rofrano] "More like audio buses than tracks. It's a rather brilliant when you think about it."

Yep. And think about the possibilities that opens up. The CC Role mixing seems like just a start, but who knows. Very cool though. You can have different combos Lanes or not, reorder 'em like layers in Affinity Photo or whatever, and make a vomit rainbow just like Pr and MC now! And best of all? You can turn 'em off! lol Really nice.

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

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 29, 2016 at 7:48:27 pm

This will be controversial and I'm not saying it's true or accurate or even important, But it's interesting thinking. Steve Martin in his session this morning said as a tossoff line "each clip is now a mini mixer"

Again, it's just a gross observation and I don't see it as a literal rallying cry - but it sure made me think about the deeper implications of the changes we've just had.

FWIW.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Don Cobble
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 2:25:45 am

Sure would like to see video lanes


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 2:44:07 am

[Don Cobble] "Sure would like to see video lanes"

But they couldn't work the same as it would screw up compositing order.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 3:03:26 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "But they couldn't work the same as it would screw up compositing order."

Yep... don't think that's in the cards. Secondaries work great if you need everything in a line...

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

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 1:01:21 pm
Last Edited By John Rofrano on Oct 31, 2016 at 1:09:31 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Secondaries work great if you need everything in a line..."
Yea, the whole notion of a Primary storyline with Secondary storylines is a very natural way of telling a story.

Tracks are such a foreign concept to telling a story. Tracks make sense for audio because that's how you physically worked with audio in the studio. You have a 16 track recorder and you record everything on it's own track. You have a 16 track audio mixer and it has both tracks and summing busses. This is how we've always worked with audio. Now we have something similar to an audio bus in FCP X.

Video has no notion of "tracks" in real life so introducing them was a "forced" approach that always seemed unnatural to me. I guess that's why I love FCP X. (free from tracks at last) ;-)

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 1:17:02 pm

[John Rofrano] "Tracks are such a foreign concept to telling a story. Tracks make sense for audio because that's how you physically worked with audio in the studio. You have a 16 track recorder and you record everything on it's own track. You have a 16 track audio mixer and it has both tracks and summing busses. This is how we've always worked with audio. Now we have something similar to an audio bus in FCP X.

Video has no notion of "tracks" in real life so introducing them was a "forced" approach that always seemed unnatural to me. I guess that's why I love FCP X. (free from tracks at last) ;-)"


I broadly agree, the only time I missed tracks when working in FCPX was for audio, now with this latest update to Roles I don't think I'll miss them at all!


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 1:41:01 pm

[John Rofrano] "Video has no notion of "tracks" in real life so introducing them was a "forced" approach that always seemed unnatural to me. I guess that's why I love FCP X. (free from tracks at last) ;-)"

There are video tracks in real life. Look at a news broadcast - anytime you have video with graphic overlay, or picture-in-picture, or split screens, or any type of video composite, you're merging multiple tracks of video together into one output, like you do when you have 16 channels of audio output to stereo.

Audio lanes are a good step to not caring about audio tracks. But for my day to day editing, I really miss video tracks. Example:

In a tracked NLE (mostly Avid), I preferred to keep all lower thirds to one track. If I use overlay elements (film grains, light leaks, textures, etc...) those go on another track. My edit was confined to V1 and V2, with additional tracks added if necessary for split screens/video composites. Then send the final video (minus graphics) to color, bring the master color file back in and it goes directly above the main edit.

Because my graphic elements are always on higher tracks it's a simple Insert Track, overwrite edit and my master timeline is updated with the color file, overlays, graphics, etc... all in place, with the original edit still in the timeline as a reference.

In FCPX I have to make multiple secondary storylines to group my graphics, then connect my master color file and manually shift stuff around to restack graphics/overlays, etc... I've found it's more work than it is with tracks, because of the lack of a fixed vertical organization.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 2:41:55 pm

Is your master color a single file?


Return to posts index


Michael Hancock
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 3:17:34 pm

[Steve Connor] "Is your master color a single file?"

Depends on the project, but usually no. Usually it's an FCPX XML with 24 frame handles, so any last minute tweaks can be made, or transitions can be reapplied, without having to bake in the transitions or go back to color for a two frame trim.

My workflow is to import the FCPX XML, lift it to a secondary storyline, apply the role COLOR to all the clips, copy/paste that as a connected clip to my master edit and start reshuffling stuff to put all the graphics/overlays on top (plus time grouping graphics into secondary storylines). In a track based system I import an AAF (Avid) and edit it directly onto the video track above my main edit (and below my graphics).

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


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 7:53:56 pm

[John Rofrano] "how you physically worked with audio in the studio. You have a 16 track recorder and you record everything on it's own track. You have a 16 track audio mixer and it has both tracks and summing busses. "

Well not exactly because in real life, we also have monitor mix, sends, fx loops, and a drummer who keeps yelling at us that she doesn't want to hear the guitar, only only the bass and vox -- and d a m n it, it should be a dry mix. ?

(Video tracks matter because of compositing order -- but that can be handled via nodes.)


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 8:48:39 pm

[Richard Herd] "Well not exactly because in real life, we also have monitor mix, sends, fx loops, and a drummer who keeps yelling at us that she doesn't want to hear the guitar, only only the bass and vox -- and d a m n it, it should be a dry mix. ?"
Who listens to drummers anyway (except for the bass player). They are always taping on things while you're trying to talk. lol ?

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index


Shawn Miller
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 9:05:04 pm

[Richard Herd] "(Video tracks matter because of compositing order -- but that can be handled via nodes.)"

So, what problem would nodes solve? Stack order would still be of the same level of importance - I think layers/tracks are easier to deal with on simple composites.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 10:09:21 pm

[Shawn Miller] "So, what problem would nodes solve? Stack order would still be of the same level of importance - I think layers/tracks are easier to deal with on simple composites.
"


Unfortunately, I don't have a ready-built GUI.

When I think of all the various details in compositing, layers/tracks are a convention. It kind of arises naturally out of "film on top of film" and shining lights through it onto an interpositive.

But also think of additional parameters in the composite that are not actually doing the compositing algorithms -- scale, position, rotation, opacity etc.

This means we have some kind of widget interface (usually on the track layer) to set keyframes and move it. Out all those keyframes and parameters. Why not have a widget for stack order? This goes back a bit, but I really liked Apple Color, for example; and also, I prefer the Cinema 4D Xpresso compared to AE's JavaScript Expression.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 11:42:14 pm

[Richard Herd] "[Shawn Miller] "So, what problem would nodes solve? Stack order would still be of the same level of importance - I think layers/tracks are easier to deal with on simple composites.
"

Unfortunately, I don't have a ready-built GUI."


Actually, I would like to see what you're envisioning. I think I'm having a hard time seeing nodes in the context of a trackless NLE with a magnetic timeline. ?

[Richard Herd] "
But also think of additional parameters in the composite that are not actually doing the compositing algorithms -- scale, position, rotation, opacity etc.

This means we have some kind of widget interface (usually on the track layer) to set keyframes and move it. Out all those keyframes and parameters."


That's one of the advantages of the layer/track paradigm though, isn't it? Multiple keyframes are much easier to see and manipulate in the context of a timeline compared to a node tree. It seems like they're usually separate modes in 3D and VFX software; the graph/timeline view is for manipulating temporal parameters, while the node view is for non-temporal stuff like composite operations and expressions... usually. ?

[Richard Herd] "Why not have a widget for stack order?."

Isn't that what an NLE already does though? 15 graphics stacked over a video clip already has a stack order, the relationships between them is intrinsic - in a node based paradigm, you have to explicitly create those relationships. That's why I asked what problem we're trying to solve.

[Richard Herd] "This goes back a bit, but I really liked Apple Color, for example; and also, I prefer the Cinema 4D Xpresso compared to AE's JavaScript Expression."

I like C4D's node based expressions too - though, I do wish we had access to the code behind the nodes sometimes. It would be nice if you could just double tap on a node and change certain parameters by typing instead of having to click on a parameters page, find the thing you want, then click to change it by typing. I also think JavaScript based expressions are easier to share.

Shawn



Return to posts index


Richard Herd
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Nov 1, 2016 at 12:20:42 am

[Shawn Miller] "Actually, I would like to see what you're envisioning."

I guess it's more akin to an adjustment layer (thinking track mattes) that could "point" (node) to particular clip. X is powerful enough database that the Node could point to Roles, not just stacked clips. Track mattes, green screen keys, etc. might be useful. But I'll continue to stack them :)


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Oct 31, 2016 at 7:50:07 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "screw up compositing order"

We can now begin to consider nodes and what we are looking at on screen and how we choose to organize it is just the GUI.


Return to posts index

Don Cobble
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Nov 3, 2016 at 3:43:08 am

[But they couldn't work the same as it would screw up compositing order.]

I was not so much wanting to randomly shift the lanes all around as much as work in a group of clips that are a layer above the next group of clips below that are independent of each other. It may be my deficient knowledge of FCP but you get a couple hundred clips each being connected to another and then want to change a particular group them, that are not inter connected with each-other, it seems like you have do a lot of manual fixing to adjust. I do 7 camera Multicam (1hour program) with a lot of Pic in Pic. Lot of manual labor getting it all correct. It may just be in my mind but it is easier to handle all that in tracks or (fixed Lanes) maybe we will see Fixed Lanes!


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Nov 3, 2016 at 12:17:37 pm

[Don Cobble] "I was not so much wanting to randomly shift the lanes all around as much as work in a group of clips that are a layer above the next group of clips below that are independent of each other."
Do you use Secondary Story Lines? It seems that would be the grouping you are looking for. Just select all of the connected clips that you want to group together, right-click on one and choose Create Storyline ⌘G. That will give you a new connected storyline that you still edit in while maintaining a grouping.

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index

Don Cobble
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Nov 4, 2016 at 4:38:27 pm

John,I am still learning FCP then they changed on me 10.3. I got ripples 10.3 training. But no I did not even know of that I will check it out and see if thats what I am looking for.
Thank U
Don


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: "Lanes" vs. "tracks"... potato-poTAHto
on Nov 4, 2016 at 7:48:25 pm

[Don Cobble] "But no I did not even know of that I will check it out and see if thats what I am looking for. "
Yea, look up Secondary Storylines and Compound Clips. Two different grouping mechanisms and I'm pretty sure that Secondary Storylines is what you're after but it's also good to know that you can make Compound Clips to tie multiple clips together as if they were one (e.g., video and external audio, or complex stacked composites).

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com



Return to posts index

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