how to do super fast cuts between two clips?

[poohat1000]

Hi Guys, was wondering if anyone knows of a quick method to do really fast cuts between two clips (aside from frame by frame with the blade tool) in fcpx

this video has the technique used loads :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6j4f8cHBIM


Thx

 

[WRP]

no there is no quick way. Editing is an art... stop thinking of workarounds. You should WANT to take your time.

 

[poohat1000]

thanks so much for reminding me that editing is an art.

Who the hell uses workarounds anyway, keyboard shortcuts are for scum!

 

[WRP]

keyboard shortcuts aren't workarounds. The blade is the fastest way to do this, there is no short way around it.

Haven't used FCPX since the day it was released but I'll tell you how I would do it in FCP. Put both clips on individual layers, hit "b" twice to bring up the "razor blade all" tool. Go through and make your cuts and the while holding holding command with your selection tool, alternate layers and click the clips like a checkerboard. Once you have them selected alternately, hit delete. There is no faster way than that.

 

[JustinBlue]

Does FCPX have the Blink filter? That's how to do it in the older versions. Place your first clip, then place your second clip in the track directly above (I know FCPX doesn't have "tracks", but you get the idea). Add the Blink filter to the top clip. The filter can be set to keep the clip "on" for a certain number of frames, then turn "off" for a certain number of frames. When the top clip flashes "off" the bottom clip shows through. This is a super fast way to create that fast cutting, strobe effect found in the video you linked.

 

[simsaladimbamba]

Who the hell uses workarounds anyway, keyboard shortcuts are for scum!

Tell that to the thousands of editors using Avid products, Final Cut Pro, Premiere Pro and some other advanced editing applications to deliver you all the content you watch on your TV or computer or the cinema. They use keyboard shortcuts daily, hourly, minutely.

 

[WRP]

Does FCPX have the Blink filter? That's how to do it in the older versions. Place your first clip, then place your second clip in the track directly above (I know FCPX doesn't have "tracks", but you get the idea). Add the Blink filter to the top clip. The filter can be set to keep the clip "on" for a certain number of frames, then turn "off" for a certain number of frames. When the top clip flashes "off" the bottom clip shows through. This is a super fast way to create that fast cutting, strobe effect found in the video you linked.

Why would you do something you have to render when it can be done manually? Also it has to be the exact duration between blinks every time unless you want to go through and keyframe all the changes. Then you will be essentially doing the same thing going through and razoring it. I personally wouldn't recommend this at all.

 

[arjen92]

I never used multi cam, but if I'm right you can use your keyboard to switch between feeds/tracks. So I would just play the multi cam and start hitting the keyboard!

----------

thanks so much for reminding me that editing is an art.

Who the hell uses workarounds anyway, keyboard shortcuts are for scum!

You're so right! Sometimes I see people using shortcuts like command+v or command+c and I just know, they're scum! I can't believe they even do it in public, it's just disgusting!

 

[WRP]

I never used multi cam, but if I'm right you can use your keyboard to switch between feeds/tracks. So I would just play the multi cam and start hitting the keyboard!

You can use open-sync to play in realtime and use the add edit shortcut to make cuts in realtime. So this could techinically work real well but the clips have to be the same codec, the same settings and you have to watch it in realtime which could be slower and more "piss and prey" when it comes to getting the exact cut. But given all those are met, it would be a good way of doing it.

Have no idea how FCPX handles this now.

 

[JustinBlue]

Why would you do something you have to render when it can be done manually? Also it has to be the exact duration between blinks every time unless you want to go through and keyframe all the changes.

Why would you painstakingly slice and delete a ton of single frame clips when there is a filter that does it for you? That's what the Blink filter is made for. It should render in a few seconds. You're correct that the durations would be the same without keyframes. For some of the slightly slower, changing speed cuts, I imagine it was probably done manually. But in many cases, say, to flash between two clips to match a drum roll, a filter is the way to go.

Let's say a director (or yourself) watches the edit and decides the flashes should be slightly slower, or wants the flashing clip to come in a second later. A couple of clicks on the filter parameters, or a quick repositioning of the clip, and you're done. If you've got dozens of chopped up frames all over your timeline, you're back to counting frames, cutting, deleting, cutting, deleting...it's just not very flexible. I've done it both ways and there is really no comparison.

 

[WRP]

When your timelines look like this on a daily basis I guess ease and difficulty are subjective.

I can usually go anywhere in my timelines zoomed in and know exactly where in the cut I am based on the clip cuts. Can't do that with a filter. I guess different strokes for different folks but I will ALWAYS do something without a filter if it can be done. When you're dealing with giant timelines render time can be in the hours so I try to mitigate that as much as possible.

And if you read my suggestion I never said cut, delete, cut, delete. That is a ridiculous way to do it.

 

[JustinBlue]

Ha, thought I was looking at my own timeline for a second! It's exactly because of these massive, complicated timelines that I prefer the filter (not to mention the ease of making quick changes as I said previously). Just a note, I just put the Blink filter on a two clip stack (DVCPRO HD 720) and I didn't even get a render bar. I'm on an old Mac Pro but I know I've had the same result with an iMac. Hopefully no one ever uses this filter on a long clip - that would get painful fast.

To the OP, I did a quick search and I think the Blink filter might not appear in FCPX. If you do find it, though, give it a shot. I think it's what you're looking for and if you don't like it it'll cost you only a few seconds of your time.