Took the FCP X plunge...

[RBDesign]

Nesting sequences in FCP7 is quite simple, this example is for a typical promo edit, with 4 versions that will broadcast throughout the week, Firstly you make your Master Sequence, show in green the the project bin, this will be the first 15 sec of the promo without the " Tonight at 2030" tags on it.

You then create new sequences for each of promo versions, 4 shown here in yellow. In these sequences you drag the Master Promo in to the new TX sequence. Then add the appropriate time caption & voice over to each TX version. You then batch export each sequence and send send to the TX server, put to tape for broadcast etc…

Depending on how often the show is broadcast, how many TV Stations it is broadcast on and different timezones i can have up to 50 different TX versions.

Making the promos this way will allow me to make any changes or revisions, (things change such as guest dropping out, updated content or new locations etc..) and those changes will simply ripple through to all the TX versions, all i have to do is re batch export and send to TX.

In FCPX Compound clips sort of work, you can make you master edit , compound it , then copy and paste to all the versions, but if you need to make a change you will have to go through all the TX ver, remember 50 of them, and re paste, with the way the FCPX time line works it will probably collapse in on its self and you would have to re edit the end graphic & voice over. This would be a lot of extra work, about as much as making up all the version in the first place.

Audition, I've not tried this but from what I've seen you would have 1 master with all the version in the audition, so you would export, change the audition, export, change the audition, export, change the audition… ( did i mention 50 times), quite a good way of getting in a mess & RSI

Or you could duplicate the master clip for each TX ver and just change the end accordingly , you would then have to make the changes in each version x50!!

The only way would i see to do this is to export the master promo and reimport it into the TX versions, and if changes are needed, re export/import and relink, dose FCPX relink? As far as i can see this is the least time consuming of any of the options, but it still a few more steps than i my current method, added to the lack of batch export, i be in edit all night again!

This is just 1 example of "FCPX dose not fit my work flow" & 1 example of how i use nested sequences. Clearly this is something that not every user would ever have a need for but it is part of my daily workflow.

I have not played with it enough yet but this sounds like yet another thing that roles may help with.

RB

 

[evil_santa]

i can see roles helping with the multiple language projects i do, another huge nested job i have to deal with , we start with 3 master of a edit 15sec 30sec & 2min and end up with 4-6 language of each version + different end graphics relating to local territories the item is broadcast in. I think its around 45 deliverables from the 3 masters.

Unfortunately although apple were happy to take my money and let me install FCPX on my macbook, it seems that it is no longer compatible and it won't let me do the update, so i will have to wait till i can afford a new machine next year.

 

[RBDesign]

i can see roles helping with the multiple language projects i do, another huge nested job i have to deal with , we start with 3 master of a edit 15sec 30sec & 2min and end up with 4-6 language of each version + different end graphics relating to local territories the item is broadcast in. I think its around 45 deliverables from the 3 masters.

Unfortunately although apple were happy to take my money and let me install FCPX on my macbook, it seems that it is no longer compatible and it won't let me do the update, so i will have to wait till i can afford a new machine next year.

Which macbook - runs fine on my 11" air - which is actually funny looking on that small screen.

RB

 

[islanders]

awkward

I'm working with FCP 7 and Premiere, and FCP X looks very awkward. No browser, no preview window, no canvas no tracks in the timeline?

I guess you get what you pay for and for a lot of people it's a better value.

I like just clicking on a clip and seeing it in the preview. FCP X would give me a headache.

PS,

At first glance, it reminds me of a low end camcorder where you have to dig through a bunch of submenus to to have some control with manual settings, and FCP 7 was a more like a professional camera that had full manual settings that are intuative and easy to access.

 

[islanders]

...

I wasn't tying to put down FCP X, those were just my observations. I'm lucky to be using FCP 7 and Premiere, however one day that might not be the case and FCP X might be all I need.

FCP X is a good option for portable platform. Somewhat limited but you can get a lot done in a very reasonable set up.

Although I'm very content using Premiere and FCP and hope to keep using that.

 

[steveOooo]

Yea maybe if your fourth tire is actually a tape - or some other fairly useless device in a lot of contexts. I have been tapeless for a LONG time.

I am not at all saying that FCP X does everything that FCP7 did but what generalized statements like that do when they are echoed over and over is cause a lot of unjustified non-sencical judgements.

Here are the facts:

1) Tape bullcrap - gone - good riddance.
2) No XML/EDL - EDL is useless now anyway - as for playing nice with others - well yes that needs to be addressed - I am sure it's thought out just not realized and could be a hinderance for the here and now. Personally I believe that this will be a non-event next year as the product matures and the market around it grows. Half of what people are moaning about here is can be dealt with in roles now and A lot of what it "used to be for" is actually inside the product now.
3) Multi-cam - committed for 2012, if how X deals with MC is half as innovative and slick as the rest of the product I cannot wait to see it. As of now, I can still cut multi-cam in 19 different ways within X as a workaround and the other improvements and speed more than make up for any tiny bit lost in the way FCP 7 dealt with multi-cam.
4)Most of what it "doesn't do" that you hear is pure horse manure coming from people that haven't even bothered to put a day into figuring out everything it does do and how it works. FCP x has some really deep functionality - it's just not presented in a blast you in the face with everything the app does UI style. It's actually quite amazing and I find new gems in it every time I use it.

RB

----------




Yea let me know what you think is going on - it only happens in the vimeo player. If I use the download option on that page and download the Vimeo processed video and play it in QT it's lower quality than my original pre-upload but does not appear to be dropping frames left and right.

RB

So what happens when a client comes to you with tape that they want editing?

Not everyone can afford £3-4000+ solidstate pro cameras- which is all i use, i could use cheapo consumer cameras, but i like to have alot of controls, audio xlr inputs etc..

I still use HDV until the glorious day comes when i can afford a NX5 - tape is a pain, but is still lingering like a bad fart - its a bit dumb to not include this - i guess the solution is to capture with FCP and convert to pro ress and import to FCPX

 

[Badradio]

...no preview window...

This is one observation about FCPX I never understand. I know that people are used to working within an established methodology, but why would you want to take up twice the screen space with two windows, when you can just have one that switches to a preview the second you mouse over a clip? I admit it was strange to see only a single window at first, but within seconds of using the clip scrubbing, it made perfect sense and I moved on.

Not trying to argue - I agree/sympathise with a lot of users' concerns, but this one does seem like a genuine step forward to me.

 

[cgbier]

So what happens when a client comes to you with tape that they want editing?

Not everyone can afford £3-4000+ solidstate pro cameras- which is all i use, i could use cheapo consumer cameras, but i like to have alot of controls, audio xlr inputs etc..

I still use HDV until the glorious day comes when i can afford a NX5 - tape is a pain, but is still lingering like a bad fart - its a bit dumb to not include this - i guess the solution is to capture with FCP and convert to pro ress and import to FCPX

HDV is no problem at all. The new capture function is even better than the old one. I've finished a bunch of HDV projects already in FCP X.... can't complain.

 

[islanders]

This is one observation about FCPX I never understand. I know that people are used to working within an established methodology, but why would you want to take up twice the screen space with two windows, when you can just have one that switches to a preview the second you mouse over a clip? I admit it was strange to see only a single window at first, but within seconds of using the clip scrubbing, it made perfect sense and I moved on.

Not trying to argue - I agree/sympathise with a lot of users' concerns, but this one does seem like a genuine step forward to me.

If this was a genuine step forward Adobe and Avid would also use a single window, but that isn't happening and isn't going to happen. No one was complaining about two windows and no one else wants it. You could also make the same argument that a Mac Pro with dual monitors is obsolete, especially if you aren't using one!

 

[Badradio]

If this was a genuine step forward Adobe and Avid would also use a single window, but that isn't happening and isn't going to happen. No one was complaining about two windows and no one else wants it. You could also make the same argument that a Mac Pro with dual monitors is obsolete, especially if you aren't using one!

A Mac Pro with dual monitors provides more usable screen real estate, in the same way as using a single window for previewing both clips and the timeline. So it is the same argument, but probably not in the way you mean.

I guess I'm trying to focus less on what Apple have done in the redesign and more on why they've done it. With instant response from the single window when you select a source by scrubbing, I can see the benefit.

 

[islanders]

A Mac Pro with dual monitors provides more usable screen real estate, in the same way as using a single window for previewing both clips and the timeline. So it is the same argument, but probably not in the way you mean.

I guess I'm trying to focus less on what Apple have done in the redesign and more on why they've done it. With instant response from the single window when you select a source by scrubbing, I can see the benefit.

It's all about choices my friend. I already said FCP X is a good option for a lap top. Somehow, I'll try and get by with FCP 7 and Premiere.

 

[mBox]

It's all about choices my friend. I already said FCP X is a good option for a lap top. Somehow, I'll try and get by with FCP 7 and Premiere.

Somehow? My friend most of us got by with FCP 5 It is about choices and its good that you know what you want. Some shops require more than one choice due to the ever changing landscape of this medium.