After a year of bitching about it, Ive moved to the dark side.

[Sam Mestman - WMM]

Really? You find a CDL too complicated? It is exactly 12 numbers that represent an entire color grade and is interpretable and readable by essentially every color grading system currently available without ambiguity. An ALE is simply an exchange document format that can contain any amount of metadata, and gets automatically imported so that the metadata is already loaded into the editing program without any manual entry of name tags, scene numbers, camera angles, or anything else. I don't see any complication there. I see a great deal of utllity and simplification. Fact is, a lot of the manual entry that I've seen you demonstrate in FCPX would disappear if it just imported ALE files, since a lot of the metadata already exists from processes that precede editorial. Of course, this also goes back to something I pointed out previously - FCPX is not designed to work with a separate dailies process. So maybe that's what you're hinting at. But in my world - which, once again, is that of studio level television series and larger features - a dailies process is absolutely part of what needs to be done, for a number of reasons including but not limited to quick turnaround and QC of camera files (to allow for cards to be recycled), fast creation and verification of backup elements (usually LTO tape, and written to particular specifications that differ between studios), uploading of viewing copies for next morning availability, proper application of color, absolutely accurate double system sound sync (regardless of time code issues), and redundant storage of original materials. And all of this completed in a timely manner regardless of how much material is shot in any given day - and that can amount to 8-10 hours of material in some cases. The whole "put it all into the edit system and have the editors do all that stuff" approach just doesn't fly in that world.

Yeah, the reality is that I'm not very smart, and I do find much of ALL of that unnecessary and over complicated. For us mere mortals, I want to work with my original files, ideally coming in from dailies with scene, take, and angle metadata already attached, rename with my preset, and just focus on editing. But that's just me. If you love ALE and CDL, use it. I don't need to... it hasn't slowed me down to this point, and I don't see how it will in the future. I have no problem with how you want to work, and am glad you're working that way, in the NLE of your choice. To each their own.... just don't tell me that things that I do don't work and what I can't do, because, well, they're already working for me, I can do what I need to do, and deliver everywhere I need to go.

 

[Scott Crawley]

the fact that I only have a single field (Notes) for descriptive entries in the Event Browser - speaks volumes to me.

What does it tell you? All it tells me is that Apple would like you to try using their meta tagging methods instead for all of the reasons that meta tagging is useful. Want to add a descriptor? Use a keyword, then you can search, sort, etc. etc... Their "Favorite" meta tag is supposed to be the best method of marking circle takes.

I apologize for not following your portion of the discussion, but what can a column in the Event Browser do for you that a keyword can't?

 

[Detlev Eller]

... I was on FCP from day one.

At one point, i was testing a little app called "imovie" .... LOL .... which was incredible in getting a rough cut together ... skimming through everything that has been shot ... with "dynamic zooming" into the footage catalogue ..... it even marked the used footage with a little orange bar ....

I thought, THIS IS GREAT!

so, i from then on, i prepped my first, rough cut in imovie ... then xml ed to FCP and do the nitty gritty ....

and i was waiting for FCP to implement this stuff ....


BUT IT GOT LOST, or i cant find it ... there is keyword tagging and stuff ...
but this little feature, showing the footage, that is already placed into my timeline ...

which helps me in many ways with the editing, to shape story, progress, to find related moments, structuring my mind, having a visual representation of density and stuff.


The second, really awesome feature of imovie, that i cannot spot in FCPX is:
clicking on footage to select a predefined clip length .... awesome feature, especially when looking for some hard timed, music video editing rhythm ....

I really miss this. And i cant get my heart around to spend more time in FCPX, without this - APPLE!

So, if anyone had the patience or good fortune to find these TWO things,
i would be in editors heaven - already!


thx.





ps.
once, I´ve build a little prototype app to create rhythmic editing templates (xml for FCP7)
... http://automatic-timeline.com/bpm_beat_mapping

 

[Oliver Peters]

but what can a column in the Event Browser do for you that a keyword can't?

A lot. By using columns I can see relationships side by side. For examples, location notes versus my own notes. Favorites stack under a clip or into Smart Collections so the function is completely different. I've also found that the larger the project, the more cross-referencing (like lots of Keywords, favorites, etc.)and the slower the application becomes. Probably because the database isn't really that robust.

Columns are also sortable. In the case of Media Composer you can do a two-column sort, which is often better than simple ascending/descending order of one column. Also in MC, you can sort/sift/show/hide based on defined parameters. This is sort of like Smart Collection definitions, but not exactly the same. Also in MC, text in any bin is accessible via Find. I'm not arguing that FCP X should be Media Composer. There's nothing wrong with what is there now, but it can be improved in ways that best serve the customer, not just Apple's designers.

Most of the metadata parameters that are there tie into camera manufacturer SDKs and not really user-defined, custom criteria. We need a bit more of the latter. If you look at FCP7, we went from 8 entry fields for custom descriptions (not counting scene, take, reel, etc.) to one (Notes).

- Oliver

 

[Scott Crawley]

I can see relationships side by side. For examples, location notes versus my own notes. ... Columns are also sortable.

hmmm... I forgot how useful that can be. I guess I haven't missed it, but that could be because I have been too absorbed in trying to learn some of the more basic features to concern myself with it.

Seriously though, I did create a custom metadata field, but found no way of displaying it as a column in the Event Browser. I have to agree that would be a nice feature to have. While dragging metadata fields around in the Inspector it occurs to me that it would be cool if you could just drag a metadata field from the inspector into the Event Browser window.

While it isn't quite as useful being confined to the Inspector, you can create custom metadata fields and display them in any order you choose. Therefore it is possible to look at fields side by side and compare them, albeit on a clip by clip basis, so you can't sort and group by those criteria... FAIK

 

[MichaelP]

A lot. By using columns I can see relationships side by side.

The ability to view in context is very important and beneficial to the creative process. Like Murch and other will tell you, you might find the shot you need versus the one you thought you needed.

Michael

 

[M Most]

To each their own.... just don't tell me that things that I do don't work and what I can't do, because, well, they're already working for me, I can do what I need to do, and deliver everywhere I need to go.

I never did. I never even implied anything like that. If that's your interpretation, I can't help that. But that's not what I said.

 

[MichaelP]

I don't think I've ever read anything from M Most that tells people what they should do or should not do. Everything I've read is about what he does and the markets he provides services - What he did imply, and you said the same thing is: "to each their own."

Michael

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

As David mentioned Apple solutions take the left brain tech shit out of our daily lives and allow us to concentrate on the creative tasks at hand.

That was a subjective perception and not a fact. Apple may be wanting to achieve this but is far from doing that.

If that was true experienced industry professionals wouldn't have to force themselves to re-wire their brain from completely intuitive and free Non Linear Editing (NLE) to conditioned Borderline Linear Editing (BLE).

Also, as "picture is worth a thousand words", extra tagging and tools for tools to compensate for changes are actually forcing the left brain in circumstances it shouldn't have to be forced. As Apple PR named "clutter" is "data" but without words and tagging. And in most humans visual navigation is more efficient than additional text processing or logical processing of computer algorythm made relations.

 

[Mike Garrick]

I really don't see an issue here.............. for certain projects FCPX fine .......for more collaborative projects bouncing around between various users/systems/ facilities ......Avid .

This isn't a "biggie" . We are no longer in the Avid verses FCP wars of noughties are we ?

@ Hrvoje LOL @ BLE....thankyou ; )

 

[M Most]

I don't think I've ever read anything from M Most that tells people what they should do or should not do. Everything I've read is about what he does and the markets he provides services - What he did imply, and you said the same thing is: "to each their own."

That, and an attempt at explaining what is necessary in that particular market. None of this is about what "I" do or what "Sam" does. It's about what is demanded by a client base, and how things are done in the part of the industry some of us work in. These choices are not personal. They are dictated by client needs, studio requirements, and post expectations going through an entire process. THEY are the ones who make the choices, including the choice of editing software. If anything, I hope I've gotten across that I would like to see Apple open up a bit to standard input formats because it could save quite a bit of manual work in situations where the metadata has already been harvested and collected as part of an earlier process. I also feel that FCPX offers a very nice alternative to "traditional" editing programs, and might find wider use in the market I'm talking about if they didn't insist on locking out the use of standard metadata interchange formats, particularly ALE. I get the impression that some here understand that point, and others, well..........

And I haven't even mentioned sound......... :001_unsure:

 

[Scott Crawley]

That was a subjective perception and not a fact. Apple may be wanting to achieve this but is far from doing that.

Of course it was subjective, as all of this is. I was agreeing with him. Few tech companies I have encountered are as successful at making intuitive software and hardware as Apple. Again, that is my opinion.

Who said anything about facts?

Facts? We don't need no stinking facts!

 

[Oliver Peters]

Of course it was subjective, as all of this is. I was agreeing with him. Few tech companies I have encountered are as successful at making intuitive software and hardware as Apple.

I would definitely agree with this. There are things I'd like to see improved/changed with X, but I won't quibble with the fact the Apple is all about the user experience. 90% of the time or better they nail it. Sometimes with a bit of tweaking, but their track record is hard to beat.

Oliver

 

[Sam Mestman - WMM]

That, and an attempt at explaining what is necessary in that particular market. None of this is about what "I" do or what "Sam" does. It's about what is demanded by a client base, and how things are done in the part of the industry some of us work in. These choices are not personal. They are dictated by client needs, studio requirements, and post expectations going through an entire process. THEY are the ones who make the choices, including the choice of editing software. If anything, I hope I've gotten across that I would like to see Apple open up a bit to standard input formats because it could save quite a bit of manual work in situations where the metadata has already been harvested and collected as part of an earlier process. I also feel that FCPX offers a very nice alternative to "traditional" editing programs, and might find wider use in the market I'm talking about if they didn't insist on locking out the use of standard metadata interchange formats, particularly ALE. I get the impression that some here understand that point, and others, well..........

And I haven't even mentioned sound......... :001_unsure:

Ha. I certainly understand the point. I just don't necessarily agree that ALE and CDL is a requirement for this data to be transferred, maintained, and delivered in order to work and deliver at the highest levels of post. I do absolutely agree that it would make it easier for established professionals like you to embrace X more fully, though. Anyway, we can go in circles all day... no point in it. As stated above, to each their own.

Also, Oliver... yeah, it is a bit annoying that you can make a custom metadata field, but you can't have it show up as a column, or make it searchable in the event browser, even as a text field. It doesn't bring much to the table for you, and the custom fields currently don't serve much of a purpose. What I do is use some of the other fields which are meant for other purposes to fill in this info that I would put in for an additional notes column for example. That said, I hope as many people as possible send this in as a feature request (use the feedback form in X). I'd love to see more functionality with this... and while we're at it, I'd love to see more batch renaming tags added as well.

 

[M Most]

Ha. I certainly understand the point. I just don't necessarily agree that ALE and CDL is a requirement for this data to be transferred, maintained, and delivered in order to work and deliver at the highest levels of post.

It is if the studio/post producer/network/editorial team says it is. This is exactly what I've been trying to say. On the shows I'm talking about, I don't get to make up my own rules and neither do you. We are given very detailed and specific delivery specs for dailies (both editorial and viewing), locked cuts, promo materials, and final deliveries. It doesn't matter what we think about them, because they are requirements. If you refuse to follow them, you don't work on the show. Period. In most cases, there are entire post pipelines already set up that make use of these things somewhere along the line, often very good use of them. Sometimes they are just in the specs because they were used on a previous show and those involved are just used to it. But that's reality in my world. If I'm working on something where I'm in charge I get to make the rules. If I'm involved in something for a studio that has a long list of specs, I don't.

I don't want to belabor this, so I'll make this my last comment on the subject...:closedeyes:

 

[Corey_O]

Agree to disagree.

This is a moving target and next week, month, year all things could be different in editorial.

Thanks for the debate. I enjoyed it.

 

[Scott Crawley]

Also, Oliver... What I do is use some of the other fields which are meant for other purposes to fill in this info that I would put in for an additional notes column for example.

Yup, I've done that, even in 6. My anal retentive side doesn't like it, but it works.

 

[David Moffitt]

That pretty well echoes my own experience - cut my teeth on Premier with an old M-JPEG card taking in 16mm from s-vhs and other video sources, learned avid with the advent of dv / hdv, went to FCP around v4, back to avid with xpress dv / pro, then back to fcp. HATED X when it came out, an editor friend sent me tutorials and said "go through all of these, even if it starts out rudimentary, and you hate it" and sure enough after a few days I was cutting commercials on it faster than I'd ever done, and had come to terms with the changes / differences. Now I don't know how I'd ever live without the whole clip meta data / tagging / bin methodology. Still a few things that irk me but that's any software (heck, Adobe stuff often has me doing a combination of yanking out hair and throwing things across the room).

 

[Terry VerHaar]

This whole discussion underlines one major point for me; I sincerely hope Apple resists the urge to reach backwards and add some of these older "pro" features that are being spoken of. If that happens, the light of a new path simply goes out and we fall back into a mode of slogging forward in a (barely) evolutionary fashion with no hope for real paradigm changes in the workflow. I am quite appreciative that Apple has the courage (and, more importantly, the financial wherewithal) to define another path.

 

[David Battistella]

I'm not so sure about that Terry.

While the guillotine leaves a clean cut it also leaves two distinct pieces. It's a violent separation and I think that is why is spawns so much debate.

My audio workflow has been a nightmarish pain in the ass.

And before 10.08 and some 3rd party tools getting good list out for a Pablo conform took every shred of post experience I have.

While probably more than 90 percent of stuff originated in the software will finish there, the remaining high end 10 percent need these things desperately in order to interact in their environments. (The percentages are for illustrative purposes)

Apple leaves this to third parties who do it very well but that means the market dictates whether this stuff gets implemented. It also means you get excellent service for specific needs (X2pro and intelligentsia assistants being two prime examples.

What really blows my mind is how complicated seemingly rudimentary math like extracting timecode from a timeline and converting that text based, tab delineated data into various formats becomes a complex problem. Subtitles are another seemingly simple task in which days can pass with much hair pulling before one can "get it right".

david