Login / Register
 
FCPX OMF misery
New Reply
Subscribe
NReichman
Thread Starter
#1
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #1
Gear addict
 
NReichman's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 343

Thread Starter
NReichman is offline
FCPX OMF misery

Dialog editing a documentary feature that was cut in FCPX.

124 tracks of ##$$% dialog! And the video editor said they worked hard to get it down to that size.

Sorry to complain...please go back to your regularly scheduled constructive conversations.
__________________
Nathaniel Reichman
Supervising Producer – Re-recording Mixer
Rhumba Recorders/Murmur Music
#2
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #2
Gear addict
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 451

JoeMilner is offline
WTH????
Wow
Why so many tracks? Is it an FCP X thing. or did they just think it would be a "good idea" to have everything completely separate?
__________________
Joe Milner
Puget Sound, Inc.
Los Angeles, CA

IMDB

Puget Sound on Facebook
#3
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #3
Gear maniac
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 211

Send a message via Skype™ to Brent_in_Sydney
Brent_in_Sydney is offline
Theres no omf or aaf support in fcpx. The dont have an audio timeline but rather roles assigned to clips and then you can use third party tools make and omf/aaf from that mess and it is never, ever painless. They cant simply arrange like with like as we would normally want. Stupid change in paradigm that makes collaboration so much more needlessly time consuming!
__________________
Kind Regards,
Brent Heber
Mixer, Sumsound
VIDEO BLOG:www.protoolsprofessional.com (PT|HD, ICON & Post tips and tricks)
#4
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #4
Lives for gear
 
danijel's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Posts: 2,057
My Recordings/Credits

danijel is offline
Amazing. Did the OMF at least import correctly? How did they make the OMF?
NReichman
Thread Starter
#5
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #5
Gear addict
 
NReichman's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 343

Thread Starter
NReichman is offline
They have a great video editor who understands the 3rd-party OMF conversion tools and dug in deep (editing XML) to be able to make the OMFs. To their credit, they have reasons to stick with FCPX, but the director certainly spent a lot of time in the video room doing audio prep for me. Crazy.

As far as I understand, all the multitrack audio for each clip travels with the clip (good), but those are unique audio tracks, so EVERY clip might have 4-12 mics, and because clips don't share audio tracks in the old (Media Composer) paradigm, there are hundreds sometimes thousands of virtual tracks inside (bad).

Anyway, it's a great doc. Back to work...
Quote
1
#6
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #6
GS Community Manager
 
Whitecat's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: Surrey / London

Whitecat is offline
Ah yes, the new 'trackless' editing paradigm...
__________________
Scott J. - Gearslutz.com Community Manager

Gearslutz on Facebook!

My personal Twitter - @WhitecatTV
#7
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #7
Gear nut
 
demariai's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 138

demariai is offline
150 channels? that sounds like a mistake.It would be really hard for the editor to have 150 audio channels in final cut on that little timeline. Why don't you double check to see what they did. I never saw that many tracks on final cut. Maybe they separated the stereo channels into mono but still a lot of tracks
#8
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #8
GS Community Manager
 
Whitecat's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: Surrey / London

Whitecat is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by demariai View Post
150 channels? that sounds like a mistake.It would be really hard for the editor to have 150 audio channels in final cut on that little timeline. Why don't you double check to see what they did. I never saw that many tracks on final cut. Maybe they separated the stereo channels into mono but still a lot of tracks
Have you used FCPX? I can totally understand how this could have happened, its trackless system can be such a train wreck...
NReichman
Thread Starter
#9
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #9
Gear addict
 
NReichman's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 343

Thread Starter
NReichman is offline
Quote:
150 channels? that sounds like a mistake.It would be really hard for the editor to have 150 audio channels in final cut on that little timeline. Why don't you double check to see what they did.
It's not 150 on the screen. It's on output, because each clip brings its own set of tracks to the OMF. I'm out of my depth here, but the video editor on this is really competent and really analyzed the problem.

I'm just bummed for our sake that the zillions of editors running away from FCPX aren't running to Avid- it seems they're mostly going to Premiere...
#10
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #10
GS Community Manager
 
Whitecat's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: Surrey / London

Whitecat is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by NReichman View Post
I'm just bummed for our sake that the zillions of editors running away from FCPX aren't running to Avid- it seems they're mostly going to Premiere...
Mainly because Avid is still buggy in the software-only domain and it's also bloody expensive... the crossgrade offers were OK (less good now), but once you're in, they want £500 for every dot-five upgrade. Cuts too much into the small operation's bottom line compared to an annual Adobe Cloud license considering what you get with the latter.

I'm trying to make a go with Avid here as an FCP replacement but it always manages to throw up a new type of crash I've never seen before on just about every project, despite the fact that as a tool it's very good when it is working.
#11
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #11
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Location: San Francisco area
Posts: 3,358

philper is offline
Is this a music film, w/ MT recordings of music? FCPX is such a scourge...my clients are finally starting to turn to Premiere mostly.

philp
#12
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #12
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 624

smurfyou is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitecat View Post
Mainly because Avid is still buggy in the software-only domain and it's also bloody expensive... the crossgrade offers were OK (less good now), but once you're in, they want £500 for every dot-five upgrade. Cuts too much into the small operation's bottom line compared to an annual Adobe Cloud license considering what you get with the latter.

I'm trying to make a go with Avid here as an FCP replacement but it always manages to throw up a new type of crash I've never seen before on just about every project, despite the fact that as a tool it's very good when it is working.
I keep hoping for Avid around here but it sounds like Premiere is winning. I know a lot of edtiors would prefer Avid but they're not the ones with the budgets.
__________________
~Will
#13
8th February 2013
Old 8th February 2013
  #13
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: London, UK
Posts: 838

tom_lowe is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent_in_Sydney View Post
They cant simply arrange like with like as we would normally want. Stupid change in paradigm that makes collaboration so much more needlessly time consuming!
In Apple's ideal world I think people collaborate souly on FCPX. Besides, why would you need sound post, FCP X does it all for you!
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
BLueROom / The Moan Zone
260
marksargison / Post Production forum!
9
BIGBANGBUZZ / Post Production forum!
0
Dallas Taylor / Post Production forum!
5

Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.