APPLE FINAL CUT PRO: Apple Final Cut Pro X FCPX Debates FCP Legacy FCP Tutorials

One Sequence Per Project?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X

VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Russell Lasson
One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 5:22:44 am

I'm I crazy? Can I really only have one sequence per project? This whole events vs project thing is seeming kind of convoluted.

Russ

Russell Lasson
Colorist/Digital Cinema Specialist
Color Mill
Salt Lake City, UT
http://www.colormill.net


Return to posts index

John Pale
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 5:48:01 am

There are no sequences. Only projects. You are not crazy....just thinking this works like other NLE's...it doesn't.

Read this...it explains the new paradigm better than I ever could...

http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/fcp_x_first_look_martin.html


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 5:56:17 am

[Russell Lasson] "I'm I crazy? Can I really only have one sequence per project? This whole events vs project thing is seeming kind of convoluted."

Yes, it's one sequence per project. And because clips are organized in the Events window, a project basically is a sequence, and nothing else. I'm surprised they even still call them 'Projects' and not just sequences.

There are a couple of things to keep in mind here. One is that you can open projects directly from the FCP X interface, so if you do need to work with multiple sequences, this doesn't mean you have to keep going back to the Finder. You can also organize projects into folders directly in Final Cut, if you need to group related sequences.

The other thing to remember is that FCP X has far more powerful support for what are, effectively, nested sequences, in the form of Compound Clips. Between this feature and Auditions, a lot of the things that were best done by organizing clips across multiple sequences in FCP 7 can easily be done within a single sequence in FCP X, once you wrap your head around the new organizational tools.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index


george manzanilla
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 6:26:04 am

Maybe I'm missing something, but i never heard of this being on any editors FCP wish list. Organizing sequences in projects makes sense to a lot of people. I like being able to organize my bins however i want to...

Can i drag a folder of images into my events? or stock footage from another drive? it just seems that what used to take 1 single step now takes a ton more time!

george manzanilla
rundfunk media
http://www.rundfunk.com
myspace.com/rundfunkmedia


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 6:29:49 am

[george manzanilla] "Can i drag a folder of images into my events? or stock footage from another drive?"

Yes.

[george manzanilla] "it just seems that what used to take 1 single step now takes a ton more time!"

Not as far as I can see. And organization in general should be much faster. There's well thought out tagging, you can search for clips within events, etc.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 11:53:12 am

Chris, you've been making very good explanations.
I think people are confusing old language/nomenclature with new functionality.
Also a lot of the new methodology has a lot to do with how AV Foundation works. A basic understanding can help with the understanding of the superficial appearance of "one sequence" per "project" and even why there's a "gap" function. People have to break away from their understanding of what a "sequence" and a "project" is and grasp how "events" work. A "project" is really something very different' than what a "project" used to mean even though it's the same word.



Return to posts index


Simon Ubsdell
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 12:46:16 pm

[Craig Seeman] "A "project" is really something very different' than what a "project""

Isn't this all just a confusion based on some things having changed their names?

A "project" is to all intents and purposes identical to what we used to call a sequence - there doesn't seem to be anything more mysterious going on here.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 1:01:08 pm

Simon, you're generally correct but Apple is changing a lot of nomenclature and that's causing some confusion. In this case I wish Apple used another term but the nature of AV Foundation is that it's not a "sequence" at all. In many respects

it's kinda/sorta like creating a file with parts linked together. It's "stuff" in a wrapper so to speak. That's why Apple now uses the term "Storyline" since sequence implies something it isn't. Basically FCPX is a database managed from metadata in which one puts the data together to create a "file" of sorts built around AV Foundation functions.

The problem people are having is they're trying to translate previous ways of understanding to a new language (new technical way of putting together media) that doesn't necessarily translate directly.

In some ways it reminds me of the use of the term Grok in Robert Heinlein's "Stranger in a strange land." Describing the new word can be very complex because there's no English equivalent and to say the Grok means to know or understand would be entirely inadequate and that's what people are trying to do and I think it's resulting in a lot of frustration.



Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 1:06:41 pm

[Craig Seeman] "The problem people are having is they're trying to translate previous ways of understanding to a new language (new technical way of putting together media) that doesn't necessarily translate directly."

Fair enough, but the essential point is that operationally in terms of the actual GUI you're sitting in front of, which is all that will really matter for the majority of users, a "project" is a "sequence" in every meaningful sense and it would only help to think of it that way - to tell them they need to get their head around a whole new universe of meaning because that's the way it's working under the hood isn't really going to do much other than confuse unnecessarily. It's best if they stay ignorant of the Matrix and don't swallow the blue pill of wisdom (or was it the red pill?)

No?

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 1:44:02 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "o tell them they need to get their head around a whole new universe of meaning because that's the way it's working under the hood isn't really going to do much other than confuse unnecessarily"

But it's the essence of the "why does it" or "why doesn't it" questions that are leading to so much frustration. Someone things of it as a "sequence" and they ask "why can't it do something that I've always done with sequences before." It's because it's not a sequence. It's kinda like a sequence but it really a whole lot different and it's why it lends itself to some features and not others. The "gap" is a good example of that. Some might say "why do a need to add a gap now when I didn't need to do that in a sequence before." AV Foundation can't have a "hole" any more than you can have a hole in a single Quicktime file (or any other typical media file). It has to be filed with media so FCPX "gap" is a media slug. Amongst other things it allows things to be linked to it before and after as well as "above and below."

Sorry but it is the Matrix and it's why people are frustrated. Once one understands where some of the frustration is coming from one can break through.

I remember a friend of mine from Venezuela was learning English and one day he woke up an excitedly said that he dreamt in English. That was a language breakthrough. His mind no longer needed to translate Spanish to English. Once you can break free of inadequate parallels and understand the new language, it makes INTUITIVE sense. As editors we want to work intuitively without having the "translate" things. When one is stuck in "translation" it slows one down. Once one understands the language itself intuitive instead of trying to be "comparative" one gets how the new thing works.

You can't deny the HUGE amount of frustration going on here and it's far beyond missing a few very important Pro features. There's a fundamental "understanding" of the new language that hasn't yet happened for most people. It may, it may not happen for some people but that's what I see going on.



Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 1:49:35 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Sorry but it is the Matrix and it's why people are frustrated"

Lots of interesting points there as always.

But I think I still disagree with you about letting people see the Matrix. For example read Stefan's posts in this thread and you can see the level of confusion that results from not calling a spade a spade. I don't think your point about gaps is really that much of a clincher - it's a minor wrinkle in what is otherwise a very straightforward one-to-one comparison.

I think what a lot of people need when encountering new stuff like this are helpful analogies - and the analogy of FCPX "project" equals FCP7 "sequence" is surely entirely valid even if it doesn't reveal the hidden truth. At this point I don't think people need the hidden truth - not just yet anyway when there's so much else they need to get their head round.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Philip Van Dyck
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:55:37 am

I see it more as someone pushing me to do everything there way.
I can't think of any project that I've done in the past that could work in the new system of editing. I need lots of sequences for many projects. I live in Belgium and everything we do here (corporate commercial,...) must be in different languages because of Frenh (south of Belgium) Dutch (north) and English and sometimes German.

I like FCP7 as it was/is, It just needed the speed bump we all had been waiting for and a few new features. It didn't have to reinvent editing.


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 24, 2011 at 6:11:07 am

I agree. The more I look into this, the more I do not understand why the decisions behind this were made, other than to augment a consumer experience, and as an extension of the social media experience. I can see no other reason for this kind of architecture. It is a really great idea, following that thinking, if all my video revolves around me or my experience or a company' experience. I see how media collects, congeals, interrelates and gets "brighter" as more connections and associations are made. It is the kind of thinking that makes iPhoto increasingly "smarter." But, MY production needs don't easily fit into or really require in any way this paradigm. I find all of this effort under the hood an intriguing exercise in complexity, but why? And why should I have to come to terms with a whole approach to video? I'm an interested sort of person. I like puzzles. So, if there is something here, I'd really like to find out. But I really cannot see any reason for all of the effort put into this shift, other than as relates to "social media associations." I see why that would be great for iMovie. Why is it great for Final Cut Pro, other than logging potentially useful metadata? The contortions it has has to go through, conceptually, don't seem worth the trouble to me. And, by the way, I really am asking. I'm not making a statement.


Return to posts index

John Pale
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 12:43:35 pm

[george manzanilla] "Maybe I'm missing something, but i never heard of this being on any editors FCP wish list. Organizing sequences in projects makes sense to a lot of people. I like being able to organize my bins however i want to... "

If I asked my customers what they wanted they would have said a faster horse---

Henry Ford (?)


Return to posts index

J Hussar
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 5:08:27 pm

If I asked my customers what they wanted they would have said a faster horse---

Henry Ford (?)


That is a bad analogy as Henry Ford was a "pro" car maker who REALLY understood cars. I doubt any of the coders at Apple are professional Editors or run a post house. It seems that they asked the hobbyists and book writers for input and got their inspiration from iMovie, which Grandma uses.

This is a cluster f *** - I just sent feedback saying I am impressed that Apple has decided my old projects shouldn't be available to me anymore and that everyone's tape libraries are now dead. And these are just a few things they screwed up.

Absolutely unbelievable FUBAR move on apple's part. This is the IOS arrogance running rampant of the company now.



Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 24, 2011 at 6:20:01 am

J., I'm actually in your camp with my feelings about this. A thing I want to mention to you though, is that this forum has currently been set aside specifically for technical and usage discussions since the main forum has turned into a furnace of anger. Despite my own feeling, which--as I say--are similar to yours, I'm trying to respect this area and engage in discussion. I don't like the program, but I AM curious about the thinking behind it.

I certainly wouldn't want to tell you what to do, but I thought I would let you know what the thinking is behind this impromptu forum.


Return to posts index

David Burch
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 10:16:06 am

Honestly this is not one of the things that worries me. Compound clips seems to be the new method of nesting sequences, and I actually like that. Honestly, I think I would be happy at this point if Apple added multiclip editing and XML/OMF support. I think I can work around everything else.


Return to posts index

Stefan Buhrmester
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 11:17:53 am

You can always create a new compound clip directly inside the event browser. That's the closest you get to FCP7 sequences.


Return to posts index


Simon Ubsdell
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 1:17:41 pm

[Stefan Buhrmester] "You can always create a new compound clip directly inside the event browser. That's the closest you get to FCP7 sequences."

No really, Stefan, it's not that complicated - a "project" really is a FCP7 "sequence".

Compounds clips are "nests" in all but name, or rather they behave almost identically to nests in FCP7 with the advantage that you can "break them apart" much more easily (with a single command).

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Stefan Buhrmester
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 1:28:40 pm

Sorry, I disagree. This is why I believe that Compound Clips are the equivalent substitute for Sequences. Not Projects:


FCP7 Sequence FCPX Compound Clip FCPX Project
Has it's own timeline Yes Yes Yes
Viewed in Media-/Event Browser Yes Yes No
Can be dragged into a project Yes Yes No
Can be edited like a media file Yes Yes No


Return to posts index

Ray Wang
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jul 13, 2011 at 3:24:23 pm

How do you drag a compound clip to another project?

Structure:

Project A
>> Compound clip of 3 clips
Project B
>> Primary / Secondary Story Line

If I follow the Ripple training method, you can go to Project A, copy compound clip and go to Project B and paste where you'd like it to be.

There is one issue. changes in Project A does not reflect in Project B. Basically I am only making a copy. I would like to link to avoid crazy long timelines in one project.

Any ideas on how FCP X compound clip / project is designed to work?

---
Ray


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 1:26:13 pm

OK, can you then have multiple FCPX "projects" open?

For example, in a current FCP7 project, I have no less than 16 different sequences for 16 different videos all based on the same media, but all sequences are unique, so Auditions and Compound clips won't help. So in FCPX terms, who would I manage 16 different projects?

As you can tell, I haven't downloaded it yet. No baseband video out was the killer for me for now, hoping for that change to come soon.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 1:33:09 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "OK, can you then have multiple FCPX "projects" open?"

Yes, fortunately you can. I rely on this absolutely when I'm cutting so am glad to see that it's there.

You can "tab" between them using the arrow buttons at the top left of the Timeline window. And you can easily copy and paste between projects which is what I like to do all the time. So no real change from FCP7 there ... at least ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 2:12:51 pm

So if I have a current set of FCPX events and projects, how do you archive?


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 24, 2011 at 6:36:43 am

That's a piece of good news.


Return to posts index

Stefan Buhrmester
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 1:36:49 pm

As I just posted in reply to a post before your's, I would not view projects as a substitute for sequences.

Here is how your setup would look in FCPX:

You import your media file and put it into an Event. Events are the new way to group media files together.

You have ONE project (not 16).

You create 16 compound clips based on your media.

These compound clips can be used in your project just like sequences can be used in FCP7.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 1:40:54 pm

[Stefan Buhrmester] "You have ONE project (not 16)."

You can have as many "projects" as you like - there is no sense in which an FCPX "project" is remotely the same as an FCP7 "project" which is what you appear to be saying unless I've got you wrong.

What FCPX calls a "project" is really just the same thing (for all practical purposes) as what FCP7 used to call a "sequence". An old FCP7 "project" is much more like an FCPX "Event" - though there are much bigger differences here, not that they affect the basic sense of it.

I can see from your post that the change of descriptive language is really not helping people get to grips with FCPX, sadly.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Russell Lasson
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 2:39:57 pm

So a FCP7 sequence is loosely equal to a FCPX project. As far as I can tell, the traditional FCP7 project has gone away.

So for one show that I'm working on:

- I see all the events from all of my other clients or shows
- There likely would be different FCPX projects open for this one show
- I should only use one event for the show and organize media by folders, metadata, ranges and keyword.

Honestly, I'm struggling with the idea that the media/sequences for one show aren't organized by project, but seem to be grouped in with everything that I have on my system. This might be cool for a home video library, but I don't want to see all the events for all of our shows that we keep on our san in every project I open. If I want to share footage (which we rarely do) I'll just copy it over to the other project media folder, but I don't need or want access to all media from all projects all the time.

And organizing sequences by compound clips in a project doesn't seem realistic either. So if I have a feature film, I would have one project with a ton to compound clips in it? Some compound clips would be scenes. Some would be outtakes. Some would be different versions. Some would be titles or different languages. This would get confusing fast.

Russ

Russell Lasson
Colorist/Digital Cinema Specialist
Color Mill
Salt Lake City, UT
http://www.colormill.net


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 2:45:41 pm

[Russell Lasson] "And organizing sequences by compound clips in a project doesn't seem realistic either."

I don't think this is something that you are meant to do - think of "compound clips" as FCP7 "nests" and you have a very close approximation of what they are. Yes, you could use nests in FCP7 to organize stuff but I can't imagine anybody wanting to.

The whole Event library thing is possible the hardest part of the new paradigm to get your head round but it may well turn out to be the most powerful part of the whole app. On the other hand it might just be a shitty idea they ported over from iPhoto and hoped would do the trick. On balance I think the former, but you never know ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 24, 2011 at 6:54:31 am

Thank you guys for having this conversation. I really enjoying it. The use of the event library really perplexes me. I really can't get it out of my head that it is a social media organizational concept. It makes a great deal of sense at the center of something like iPhoto, which builds on experience. I don't get why it is here, unless this program really HAS been designed as a consumer program from bottom up. I mean, if I'm building my life with home movies and iphone footage and photos from friends and songs I really like, and I'm making project along the way, the all-inclusive event library makes sense. If I'm working on Promos for three different clients next week, all from different networks, and my art documentary on the weekend--what does the event library get me? I understand that I can do some intense indexing to create very precise bin-like behavior, but, while this has some advantage, the overall added complexity does not seem even half worthwhile.

The approach only makes sense to me as a consumer experience tool that has been rewrapped as a professional tool. Any thoughts?


Return to posts index

Stephan Walfridsson
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 24, 2011 at 7:21:46 am

[Chris Harlan] "If I'm working on Promos for three different clients next week, all from different networks, and my art documentary on the weekend--what does the event library get me?"

I would actually think that your "Art documentary" and any other projects that have a slightly more nonlinear creation process could benefit from the Event based library and the expanded metadata handling.

So if they had just kept "Projects" as the top level organizational concept it would make a lot more sense.

Stephan


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 2:51:48 pm

I'm with ya, Russell. There has to be a logical explanation for how this works?

Or perhaps it's just not possible with the current build.

Such a weird release.


Return to posts index

Stephan Walfridsson
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 3:22:46 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] " There has to be a logical explanation for how this works?"

I'm going to go out on a limb here and risk being shot down by people mistaken me for a little chicken.

I think that the logic is pretty obvious. Just put your self in the shoes of let's say a DSLR shooter making cool skate movies. You would gather everything you shoot in Events, call one "Pasadena Skateboard Park June 21 2011" and another "Practicing at the mall".

You decide that you want to make a short film where you intercut footage from the different Events. Easy, create a new project, let's call it "Summer of Skate". You start adding clips to your storyline, add b-roll and edit away. Use Compound clips to keep finished sequences (as in "parts of your story") locked and Auditions to try out different jumps in one sequence.

A few weeks later you want to create another film focusing on just the Pasadena stuff so you create a new project and edit away.

Basically I don't think that the logic is aimed at handling complex projects (in the old nomenclature). Not saying that it can't be done.

Stephan


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 3:26:28 pm

[Stephan Walfridsson] "Not saying that it can't be done."

You could be right - but it's not remotely clear what you're saying "can't be done" so it's hard to know where to look for the solution!

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Stephan Walfridsson
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 4:09:18 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "but it's not remotely clear what you're saying "can't be done""

In my head it is... ;)

To be clear I specifically didn't say that anything can't be done. Just that the logic behind the design is better suited at certain types of workflows. So when Jeremy asked "There has to be a logical explanation for how this works?" I tried to answer that question.

To clarify even further:
I don't think that the logic behind the design is aimed at streamlining workflow with separate jobs (projects) containing multiple timelines, based on a limited set of media. It seems to me to be more focused on efficient handling of large quantitys of media that you need random access to at random times, to create one off "storylines" that build from the entire base of source media.

It's not a design flaw, it's a design choice.

Stephan


Return to posts index

Russell Lasson
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 4:33:53 pm

This doesn't seem to work for me as a professional, but as a home video user, events are great! Very excited to edit avchd and h264s of my son! This is great! But then for work, it doesn't work.

Russ

Russell Lasson
Colorist/Digital Cinema Specialist
Color Mill
Salt Lake City, UT
http://www.colormill.net


Return to posts index

Larry Asbell
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 6:55:35 pm

I haven't got my hands on FCPX yet but could a professional editor with lots of clients and projects get along with the FCPX paradigm in this way?:

On an external RAID you have a folder for each client and within each of those a folder for each job. Whichever job your working on at the time you move (at the finder level) that folder into the Events folder at the top level of the RAID. FCPX will only see that job's media (Events)* and sequences (Projects) because it only sees what's in that folder. As you work you create as many Projects (sequences) as you need for different shows and different versions. It's your choice whether to remove a job folder from the Events folder either every time you change the job you're working on or when that job is totally done. When you do, FCPX is blinded from seeing that material.

*FCPX term capitalized.



Return to posts index

george manzanilla
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 7:02:05 pm

And this is supposed to be a better way to work? I'm confused. Wouldn't that become increasingly sloppy? I'm still trying to wrap my head around what is the best way to organize yourself when you depend on multiple applications (AE,PS,IL, Protools, C4D) to finish a video. We all have learned how to organize projects at the Finder level, i never really heard anyone complain about that.

I was perfectly fine the way things were organized before. Still don't understand why they tried to fix something that was never really broken.

george manzanilla
rundfunk media
http://www.rundfunk.com
myspace.com/rundfunkmedia


Return to posts index

Larry Asbell
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 22, 2011 at 8:06:47 pm

Reading some more and I see that the name of folder to move in and out of may be Final Cut Pro Projects, but we'll get that cleared up in time.

There are plenty of reasons FCP media management needed improvement. For one: change the media folder location and everything became unlinked.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 24, 2011 at 6:57:43 am

Exactly! That's what I'm seeing.


Return to posts index

David A Fenton
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 24, 2011 at 1:02:28 am

I come from a non-video editing background and while I finally figured out the FCP nomenclature/terminology it always seemed bizarre.

I think the "Projects" as they exist now in FCPX are much more intuitive to a person new to the software. Not sure I agree with "Events" though.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 24, 2011 at 7:05:14 am

Very interesting discussion. I have to say I'm glad you got it started. I'm still grumpy and not quite over the shock of FCS3's retirement, but I do find the thinking behind this very interesting, and I've had a pleasant few hours reading through everyone's posts.


Return to posts index

Tori Walker
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 24, 2011 at 6:37:40 pm

Only one sequence?

I'm utterly baffled on how to work like that...

My FCP 7 workflow (in part)

I do a rough cut in "sequence 1"
I get notes then duplicate that sequence for the next revision. This is "sequence 2"
I get notes (from director and/or producer). Again, duplicate and make "sequence 3"

If director remembers they liked something better in sequence 2, I can easily copy/paste that into another sequence.

Often by the time the film is finished there are 6-7 sequences before picture lock.

I often will also create a sequence to edit a tricky scene, so there are also "scene 2" type sequences.

How would this work in FCPX? Would I need a new project for each sequence?

-- Tori

Walker Post


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: One Sequence Per Project?
on Jun 24, 2011 at 6:49:38 pm

Too many post in this thread to follow but a project in FCPX is not the same as project in FCP7.
You can have multiple Project per Event AFAIK.
Basically the Event is the Project and Project is the sequence and its components . . . and the Storyline is where you put the media in the Project on.

I think Apple created confusion by using the word Project in FCPX.



Return to posts index

VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2019 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]