FORUMS: list search recent posts

Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bill Davis
Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 13, 2016 at 11:34:33 pm

Watch “Thomas Grove Carter Final Cut Pro X - Editing at the speed of thought.” on Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/194855528?ref=em-share

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 12:17:27 am

You have to remember that he has done that edit probably a million times. That being said, FCP X kills it.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 2:56:29 am

Now if you could only add the equivalent of an audio cross-fade with one keystroke. Sigh. ☺

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 3:38:20 am

Yeah, Tom's audio work in the demo seemed so badly hobbled and slow...🙄

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 2:04:33 pm

[Bill Davis] "Yeah, Tom's audio work in the demo seemed so badly hobbled and slow..."

It's a nice demo by a talented editor, but you only saw a reduction of an already edited commercial. Some time-consuming items were skipped, like re-editing the music track. There was a separate :30 cut to be used. And connected clips were always pinned to the appropriate primary, which isn't always the case, unless you consciously move the connecting point. This had already been done. But I wasn't really commenting on the presentation, which was indeed slick. I have no intention of criticizing his work.

I am reacting to the notion of speed, which relates to keystrokes. For instance, if I create an audio cross-fade in FCPX, then I have to select the clip edge, extend it and add a fade. For both clips, that's a total of 6 keystrokes. In Premiere Pro, I select the cut and add a transition - 2 keystrokes. 3x faster for this function in Premiere Pro. Now to expand this scenario. Let's say I have an edited interview with 10 audio edits. In FCPX, that would be 60 keystrokes. In Premiere Pro, I would lasso the range, which automatically selects all the cuts, and then apply a transition. 2 keystrokes. So now, the difference is 30x faster in Premiere.

The bottom line is that any comparison of speed is relative to the function being performed. You can set up any given scenario that showcases the advantages of one app over the other as well as the other way around.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 4:09:15 pm

Can you show me an example of this in FCP X? I don't see it. For one you don't have to select the clip's edges. You can just select the clip(s) or lasso the clip(s) you want to add the cross fade and add crossfade.


Return to posts index


Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 6:02:04 am

Do you mean selecting the audio clip or the end of one and selecting "command + t" ? Is this not a cross dissolve?


Return to posts index

Claude Lyneis
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 7:22:44 am

That was mind blowing. Just the fluidity of his editing and command of the tools in FCPX is hard to grasp, but it demonstrates the potential of FCPX.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 1:47:36 pm

[Brian Seegmiller] "Do you mean selecting the audio clip or the end of one and selecting "command + t" ? Is this not a cross dissolve?"

This only works when audio and video edits are straight across. Once you expand and/or offset the audio cut from the video cut, that commands no longer works.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 3:38:53 pm

Even though it does not look like a cross fade is there it is. I just did an experiment. I put a cross dissolve one two clips, expanded the audio and the audio clips overlapped each other. When I played it back it was not abrupt and each clip faded in or out like a cross fade.



Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 5:58:44 pm

[Brian Seegmiller] "Even though it does not look like a cross fade is there it is. I just did an experiment. I put a cross dissolve one two clips, expanded the audio and the audio clips overlapped each other. When I played it back it was not abrupt and each clip faded in or out like a cross fade.
"


I think they're talking about audio ONLY crossfades


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 7:05:46 pm

[Steve Connor] "[Brian Seegmiller] "Even though it does not look like a cross fade is there it is. I just did an experiment. I put a cross dissolve one two clips, expanded the audio and the audio clips overlapped each other. When I played it back it was not abrupt and each clip faded in or out like a cross fade.
"

I think they're talking about audio ONLY crossfades
"


The way X's timeline is set up it pretty much eliminates the need for and audio only crossfade.

Go back and look at his timeline. He has a lot of audio there but by overlapping the clips in that trackless timeline it creates a nature crossfade. He is just putting clips over other clips to produce the sound that he wants.

I work exactly the same way in X with sound. I bet if you asked him he might say he doesn't want to have his clips "glued together" with a crossfade transition. He would just break that apart anyway when he starts to move things around and cut them down.




Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 2:48:53 am

[Tony West] "Go back and look at his timeline. He has a lot of audio there but by overlapping the clips in that trackless timeline it creates a nature crossfade. He is just putting clips over other clips to produce the sound that he wants."

That's because these are SFX connected clips. No sync dialogue. Completely different scenario.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 7:26:23 pm

I can do audio only crossfades like I mentioned before. If your clips are butted together select both clips and then add a fade. if your clips are not butted together, select both clips and add a fade. I really don't understand the scenario Oliver is talking about. I may be missing something. Help me understand your method.



It took me up to two clicks to add fades on these examples. In fact the same as it would take in PP.





Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 14, 2016 at 7:39:55 pm

Lasso audio, add fade. One click and add fade using keyboard shortcut. Not 6, 23, or 51





Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 2:16:44 am

[Brian Seegmiller] "Lasso audio, add fade."

AFTER you already extended the clip lengths to create an overlap and AFTER you've put them all into storylines.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 2:47:12 am

Correct. Except, I don't want a picture dissolve nor a dissolve icon of 0 picture duration. I want a straight cut on the picture and an audio overlap. So, to do that, you have to expand the audio and then manually extend the length of the audio portion of the clips to create an overlap. Then add fades.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 3:26:50 am

Now I understand. I would detach audio and then add a fade. But you still don't need to make all those clicks.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 3:34:52 am

[Brian Seegmiller] "Now I understand. I would detach audio and then add a fade. But you still don't need to make all those clicks."

OK. Detach (or expand) two clips. Extend the length of each clip to create an overlap between the two. Add fade to each. I'm trying to understand how that would be fewer clicks.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Claude Lyneis
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 4:17:17 am

As amazing as his demonstration was, I am just now reading Walter Murch's book In the Blink of an Eye and I am struck by the contrast of the thoughtful approach he takes to editing, compared the hyperspeed editing illustrated in the video above. I certainly feel I spend more time viewing and thinking than mechanically making cuts.

Maybe what is more important than how fast you can cut with a editing program is how logical and easy (not frustrating) it is. I recently had to learn Pro Tools for sound editing after using FCP7 and FCPX and Pro Tools seemed very frustrating. Although the teacher, who uses it professionally, can make it fly.

Another thought about the video, this is a short montage and the need for cuts to emphasize a narrative are not there.


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 6:08:27 am

In a high pressure business editing commercials with deadlines you need to be fast. Yes he took the time to organize his footage and FCP X helps you work faster. Time is money. Try making a shorter cut with traditional tracks. What a mess that would be. Same with a feature. The way FCP X organizes media makes way for you to have more time to be creative and edit with a Blink of an Eye. No pun intended.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 9:50:11 pm

Since I know Tom a bit I think I can make this observation.

I don't think he sees editorial speed as an end in itself as this discussion seems to imply.

What he's doing is using the speed to get the mechanics of assembly done properly as quickly as possible - so that he can THEN more efficiently switch from mechanical to creative thinking mode.

Editors at his level aren't paid for assembly skills - they are paid for conceptual skills. Basically for knowing when you have the best possible assembly of images and narrative flow to tell the story.

The whole concept of magnetic editing drives friction out of refinement and revision - probably even more than out of actual assembly.

So I suspect the reason he likes X so much isn't because he wants to do more editing, faster. But because getting the basic editing done faster leaves more time to REFINE the edit.

Big difference.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 10:37:13 pm

[Bill Davis] "What he's doing is using the speed to get the mechanics of assembly done properly as quickly as possible - so that he can THEN more efficiently switch from mechanical to creative thinking mode. "

I would certainly agree with that 1000%.

[Bill Davis] "The whole concept of magnetic editing drives friction out of refinement and revision - probably even more than out of actual assembly."

When I made my first comment about fades, it was an offhanded remark that - like so many things on the COW - has taken on its own life. However, after working with X for 5 years now, I agree that the magnetic timeline reduces friction in some areas. But I also strongly feel that it adds new friction in others. For me, audio handling is one of those. But, nothing's perfect.

No matter what, Bill, thanks for drawing attention to the video here.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 4:25:46 am

No problem, Oliver.

I value ALL the opinions in a discussion like this.

X certainly isn't ideal at everything it tries to do.

And it can't get better if people don't bring up things that bug them about it.
: )

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


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 17, 2016 at 12:49:33 am

[Brian Seegmiller] "In a high pressure business editing commercials with deadlines you need to be fast. Yes he took the time to organize his footage and FCP X helps you work faster. Time is money. Try making a shorter cut with traditional tracks. What a mess that would be. Same with a feature. The way FCP X organizes media makes way for you to have more time to be creative and edit with a Blink of an Eye. No pun intended.
"


High end commercials are pretty lax as far as deadlines with what Ive seen at least compared to tv/trailer deadlines.

A very high end commercial editor I know gets about two weeks to come up his V1 for a :30 spot. Then the notes and revisions begin.

In contrast - Alot of movie trailers V1's happen in just a few days - and thats 2:30 in length. Hell, Ive seen some come together in a day total hail mary style.


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 4:52:29 am

Sorry Oliver I just don't know why you need to extend and overlap audio clips to create a fade. In your example of a video cut with audio fade only, after detaching audio they are butted together. Select one of the clips and then add fade, FCP X will automatically add the handles needed for the fade. No need to overlap or extend. Of course this is your scenario of a cut on a video with a fade on audio only. Yes you have one extra step in FCP X, but not all the clicks you mentioned. Lets say you have 5 interviews and you want to fade the audio only between them. Select all video clips and choose detach audio. Select all audio clips and then add fade to add to all audio clips. I think you can do all this with keystrokes.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 5:03:42 am

[Oliver Peters] "OK. Detach (or expand) two clips. Extend the length of each clip to create an overlap between the two. Add fade to each. I'm trying to understand how that would be fewer clicks.
"


I wouldn't "detach" the audio. I prefer break apart clip items

1. select both clips or as many as you like

2. break apart clips items

3. select audio

4. hit dissolve

That's only 4 clicks


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 6:11:30 am

Sorry Oliver I just don't know why you need to extend and overlap audio clips to create a fade. In your example of a video cut with audio fade only, after detaching audio they are butted together. Select one of the clips and then add fade, FCP X will automatically add the handles needed for the fade. No need to overlap or extend. Of course this is your scenario of a cut on a video with a fade on audio only. Yes you have one extra step in FCP X, but not all the clicks you mentioned. Lets say you have 5 interviews and you want to fade the audio only between them. Select all video clips and choose detach audio. Select all audio clips and then add fade to add to all audio clips. I think you can do all this with keystrokes.


Return to posts index

Nick Toth
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 12:59:48 pm

Use Alex 4D's Sound Only transition to get a cut with an audio crossfade. Expand audio with Control S if you want to adjust the audio i/o points. Select the clips and use Command Option F to apply fades. Or create your own command for Toggle Audio Fade In or Out if that's what you need. It's not that difficult nor does it take any significant amount of keystrokes or time.

What Thomas has done is to REALLY LEARN how FCPX works and he leverages that knowledge in everything he does. Anyone can do that if they want to make the commitment to learning the tool as Thomas has instead of focusing on the fact that it doesn't work exactly as they think it should.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 9:21:02 pm

[Nick Toth] "Use Alex 4D's Sound Only transition to get a cut with an audio crossfade."

I have it. I don't like the fact that it gunks up the picture part of the timeline with icons for non-existant dissolves (0-frame dissolves). So I don't find it useful and would really like to find a proper solution.

[Nick Toth] "What Thomas has done is to REALLY LEARN how FCPX works and he leverages that knowledge in everything he does. "

I think that's beside the point. He's talented, good and fast. I'm sure he would demonstrate this same ability on any system that he chose as his primary tool. I've seen plenty of similar impressive demos by seasoned Avid editors, too.

[Nick Toth] " instead of focusing on the fact that it doesn't work exactly as they think it should"

It's important to know the strengths and weaknesses of any application.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 2:45:02 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[Nick Toth] "Use Alex 4D's Sound Only transition to get a cut with an audio crossfade."

I have it. I don't like the fact that it gunks up the picture part of the timeline with icons for non-existant dissolves (0-frame dissolves). So I don't find it useful and would really like to find a proper solution.
"


OK, you would rather do those extra steps because you don't like the way the transition looks in the timeline?

So now we are no longer talking about speed at this point, we are talking about "aesthetics".

It looks like you are slowing yourself down and not the program.

I'm sure it's OK as long as you are to charging someone by the hour ; )


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 3:26:29 pm

[Tony West] "So now we are no longer talking about speed at this point, we are talking about "aesthetics"."

Not at all. I want the timeline to be an accurate visual representation of what I've created. Those visual cues in a graphical interface are critical. To junk up the timeline with no-existent effects is not a good idea from a UI design point-of-view. I want to be able to look at a dissolve icon and know that there's actually a dissolve there, otherwise having any transition icon on the timeline is useless.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 3:41:10 pm

[Tony West] "It looks like you are slowing yourself down and not the program."

PS: Then please explain to me a faster way with an L-cut (sync dialogue) to achieve a 15-frame video dissolve with a 4-frame audio crossfade?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 4:43:30 pm

[Oliver Peters] "PS: Then please explain to me a faster way with an L-cut (sync dialogue) to achieve a 15-frame video dissolve with a 4-frame audio crossfade? "

You are jumping topics a bit. Your original point was

"Now if you could only add the equivalent of an audio cross-fade with one keystroke. Sigh"

So that point is settle now right?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 4:49:04 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Dec 16, 2016 at 4:51:58 pm

[Tony West] "So that point is settle now right?"

No. Adding something which is essentially a programming hack - or even a mistake - is not a viable solution. Plus it only works in a very limited situation.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 5:05:45 pm

[Oliver Peters] "No. Adding something which is essentially a programming hack - or even a mistake - is not a viable solution. Plus it only works in a very limited situation.
"


It's not a viable situation for "you"

Because you said it looked "gunky"

You first said that you couldn't do it "Now if you could only add the equivalent of an audio cross-fade with one keystroke. Sigh"

Then when Nick pointed out that you could do it by using the app

You tried to move the goal post a little.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 9:11:59 pm

[Brian Seegmiller] "Sorry Oliver I just don't know why you need to extend and overlap audio clips to create a fade."

I'm sure this is an exercise in futility ☺ , but here are the steps. See image below. Starting with a series of dialogue-based edits on a storyline (e.g. interview clips), make straight-cut, L or J-cut edits. Expand to reveal audio.

Next you have to extend the audio clips in both directions at each cut. This is a keystroke for each edge, plus a few keystrokes to extend these to create the overlap.

Lastly, lasso all clips that you want to select and "apply fade". This part is automatic (i.e. only 2 strokes), except you also get a fade at the beginning and end of clips where you might not want them. So I'm not seeing where applying a fade automatically creates an extension of the clip.

BTW - detaching sync audio should be avoided at all costs, because there are no out-of-sync indicators in FCPX.

- Oliver


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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 15, 2016 at 11:49:26 pm

I see your point. Thanks for sharing. That being said, I still think FCP X is better than others.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 12:07:48 am

[Brian Seegmiller] "That being said, I still think FCP X is better than others."

For me, all NLEs are a love-hate relationship. I really like the organizing and rough-cutting capabilities of X, but I prefer the finishing/finessing/on-lining side of Premiere Pro. Oh well...

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 8:32:34 am

Not trying to beat a dead horse, but the audio only transition that you can create in motion would save you a lot of time. I know it is not as user-friendly as you would like but it works.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 2:34:22 pm

[Brian Seegmiller] "but the audio only transition that you can create in motion would save you a lot of time"

I get that and that's what the Sound Only effect is, which I have. However, what happens with J and L cuts? Or when you want a 15-frame video dissolve, but a 4-frame audio crossfade?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 3:04:40 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I get that and that's what the Sound Only effect is, which I have. However, what happens with J and L cuts? Or when you want a 15-frame video dissolve, but a 4-frame audio crossfade?
"


Give up now Oliver, I understand what you're asking for but it's that simple it's obviously an issue to implement!


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 3:27:19 pm

[Steve Connor] "Give up now Oliver"



- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 4:26:12 am

I'm confused about one thing Oliver.

Seems to me the vast majority of my cuts in dialog driven clips will almost universally be made at natural stopping points or pauses in the dialog. I seldom cut to something else mid word unless I'm doing something like franken-byting.

In that context, what's the point of a 2 frame audio only dissolve for normal dialog editing? Is it because of some issue with the signal to noise ratio of the audio recording where you're trying to smooth out the sound of the background at the transition points?

Maybe it's because I do so much VO in controlled recording situations where I count on the background to be studio-dead - but I just want to understand the circumstances where theres a audible benefit to be gained from using this kind of technique.

Wouldn't just laying a controlled room tone walla under everything do the same job of smoothing out any cut point anomolies?

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 5:08:47 am

[Bill Davis] " Is it because of some issue with the signal to noise ratio of the audio recording where you're trying to smooth out the sound of the background at the transition points?
"


Not to answer for Oliver, but I work a lot with audio recorded in uncontrolled/semi-controlled environments and I'll almost always add a two frame edit to the head & tail of all my dialog edits in order to smooth them out (some people are just loud breathers too boot).


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 5:48:52 pm

Thanks Andrew,

I'm just trying to understand how fixing this with extremely short audio only ramps results in something audibly different to the classic smoothing technique of adding just enough consistent room tone to bury any small audible anomalies beneath the background sound floor?

If I've got room tone available - or even just access to a believable room tone effect from my library - I can do that for my whole project with one global action that takes me just a few seconds.

And if that frees me from needing to go through a project and manually insert 100 2-frame ramps - wouldn't it be a significantly better solution?

I'm asking here, not arguing. I've cut audio for video for a lot of years, but never felt the need for the type of extremely time-consuming cut by cut ramp process you're suggesting.

Perhaps in common workflows it results in something audibly superior for the cost in production time. If so, that would be useful information.

One reason it's even a worthwhile discussion, IMO (and it surely IS) is that I worked in eras where all sorts of switching transients were real problems that required a lot of fiddly work like this ramp stuff to fix. But I haven't encountered them remotely as much in the past few years - so today I'm less attuned to it as a problem.

And its causing me to wonder if it's more necessity these days - or more a "best practices" habit from the past - and nowadays there are simpler ways to fix it where you can maybe get 90% of the cure - for 10% of the effort?

Hopefully, others will weigh in.

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 8:04:35 pm

Adding the 2 frame fade just takes a couple of clicks since I already have that set as my default audio transition. I just highlight all my dialog audio (which is typically on A1 and A2) and hit Command+Shift+T to apply the default audio transition to everything highlighted. I usually do it as I'm cutting though so I can better time it with breaths, getting in/out between words, getting rid of "ummms", etc.,. I mainly work in the doc/unscripted world (usually w/o narration too) so I do a lot of dialog editing/frankenbiting and using the fade is second nature to me. Do I need it on every cut? No, but I'd say on 90% of the cuts.

I certainly have used room tone (assuming I get it from production) or canned background noise, but it doesn't always match the situation. For example, one piece I worked on had an interview with two bar owners and when the interview started the bar was empty but by the end of the interview it was pretty full with the lunch crowd. There was a steady increase in background noise that would've been hard to replicate with tone unless they had recorded room tone via a separate mic for the duration of the interview. For that I did use room tone once the place started to fill up, but I still used the fades so that 'sharp' sounds (like a beer glass coming down on a metal counter) didn't get cut off mid 'thunk'.

I might also have many interviews in various locations edited into a single piece so that would require separate tone/sound design for each interview. More often than not the combination of audio fade plus music bed is enough to keep the audio edit invisible. If I have room tone (or at least something that I can fake as room tone) I like using it because I like using nat sound to help bring people into the piece, but more often than not the quick fade is required to keep the audio edit from calling attention to itself.

I think it's mainly a product of the type of work I usually do. The quality of the audio person in the field also makes a big difference. On one project the interviewee was driving his truck down a country road with the windows rolled down and the audio from his lav was pristine (no wind noise at all from the open window). I don't know how the audio guy did it in the field, but it sounded amazing. And sometimes I get things where I swear they pointed the mic at the AC vent instead of the interviewee. #PostProblems


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 9:31:57 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Adding the 2 frame fade just takes a couple of clicks since I already have that set as my default audio transition."

I'm with you here. I do this with nearly every audio edit I've done, regardless of application. If I'm in a DAW like Audition or Logic, I can adjust the edge and a crossfade is automatically created by the overlap. IMHO, adding a constant bed of room tone under the entire track simply adds more noise on top of noise when someone is speaking.

Adding the crossfades also adjusts differences in the ambience under the speaker. It just smooths it out in imperceptible ways that would be obvious with a straight audio cut. But it is driven by the work you do. More location sync interview stuff, the more it's needed.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 10:40:51 pm

When cutting sound in a doc there are so many variables. So many times a person makes the point I want but then they try to go into another point that I don't want and I have to cut it off but make it sound natural, as if they stopped there. That's when I tend to go for the fade handles and I like the handles because I like the control. How much fade I want.

My narrator was a professional and cut her tracks in her studio. Sounded perfect and I didn't have to do anything with that. Most times when the narrator is speaking I put music under them anyway as a transition to help move things along for the viewer.

I tend to not like to see people sitting in a chair on camera for too long so I will show them briefly and then go to the b-roll of what they are talking about. I'm a big fan of the J cut so most times I'm cheating in the sound of the b-roll under them so it's covering the room tone in that spot.

It just depends, but I'm pretty sure I didn't fade my sound bites 90% of the time. The narrator alone would cut down my percentage. Thats certainly not to say it's not worth dong 90%, I'm sure Andrew's mix sounds awesome.

I just don't think I did it myself that many times.


Return to posts index

Dean Neal
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 18, 2016 at 10:39:04 am

[Bill Davis] "I'm confused about one thing Oliver.

Seems to me the vast majority of my cuts in dialog driven clips will almost universally be made at natural stopping points or pauses in the dialog. I seldom cut to something else mid word unless I'm doing something like franken-byting.

In that context, what's the point of a 2 frame audio only dissolve for normal dialog editing? Is it because of some issue with the signal to noise ratio of the audio recording where you're trying to smooth out the sound of the background at the transition points?"


This has been actually for a change in this group - a beneficial debate (discussion).

Bill you have had some great points so far, but when you hear clicks and pops within FCP X in straight multi camera video only switches with Audio (some say its to do with Audio 'cycles' etc.) and frankly pops and clicks are inevitable IMHO when cutting dialogue anywhere except in perfect background silence... and even then the pickup points could still be dirty and need smoothing out.

Let's not forget as well - those umms and ahhhhs that we hope the Producer dealt with on the shoot but are still there and are butted tightly against some amazing line of dialogue we must incorporate in the final cut. ☺

This latest update to X has us closer than ever to a fully rounded platform for audio. One thing I would suggest would fix this is enabling standard cross dissolves between clips in the new 'Audio Lanes' timeline view.

Of the 100+ Long Form TV shows I have now Produced/Edited using 'X' - I can tell you I have used the 'Sound Only' dissolve in 99% of them. The problem is... it IS true - it is a kludge.

The New 'Add Fades' is nice but it doesn't give you the default overlap you may need between sound clips.

One thing I will say however - Give me the lack of having to repeatedly revisit Clip Collisions and Audio Track Assignments in other NLE's....

However, some smoothing out (pardon the pun) of the Audio paradigm would be the final slam dunk for X...

Dean Neal...


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 22, 2016 at 11:22:20 pm

[Dean Neal] "However, some smoothing out (pardon the pun) of the Audio paradigm would be the final slam dunk for X...

Dean Neal..."


Fair enough.

I don't edit much dialog - so I will bow to the expertise of those who do.

Happy Holidays.

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


Return to posts index

Mark Smith
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 1:28:44 pm

I follow you Oliver until 'apply fade' . Do you mean 'command T' or is there another command for applying an audio fade?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 16, 2016 at 2:25:18 pm

[Mark Smith] "I follow you Oliver until 'apply fade' . Do you mean 'command T' or is there another command for applying an audio fade?"

In Premiere, I use the FCP7 keyboard and it's Command+T. In FCPX, I have mapped the "Apply Fade" command to a keyboard position. I use Shift+F9 for it.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 17, 2016 at 1:30:37 am

Oliver, I really do see your point and this discussion has been educational. The kind of fades and edits you want should be simpler to do in FCP X. Good luck. I have not tried 10.3 yet but hope audio lanes might make way for easier audio fades.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Speaking of FCP X editorial speed...
on Dec 17, 2016 at 6:05:28 pm

Just kicking back around to the main point of his video, he wasn't trying to show that he was fast in this one program (because he would be efficient in any program. He didn't start editing when X came out) his whole point was he is more efficient in "X" then he is in tracks because of the way X works. Not because he learned this program and didn't bother to learn the other programs that put him at the top of the game. Because of the program itself. The example he uses to show that, is cutting a 60 to a 30. I think that was the first time he mentioned speed.

"this is quite a good example of how fast I can be in Final Cut"

Then he goes about cutting the 60 down faster than anybody could in a track based program.

Many of us have to do that same thing. Go from 60 to 30 and even to 15. Even if all things were equal with assembling the same 60 in other programs X would run away with it in the end as this example shows.

You have put all of your creative juices into the 60 and now you just need to knock it down. Many times based on what the client is telling you they want. fun time is over at this point. You just need to knock it down, and I want to knock it down the same way he knocked it down.


Return to posts index

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