|
Tell us what you think of the site.
|
Autodesk Media & Entertainment User Community
|
Autodesk® 3ds Max®
|
|
Autodesk® Maya®
|
|
Autodesk® Softimage®
|
|
Autodesk® MotionBuilder®
|
|
Autodesk® Mudbox™
|
|
Autodesk® ImageModeler™
|
|
Autodesk® Sketchbook® Pro
|
|
Autodesk® Smoke on Mac®
|
|
Autodesk® Entertainment Creation Suite Ultimate®
|
|
Hi,
I want to do a Fit to Fill edit so I mark In and Out in the Source Viewer, select the clip in the timeline that I want to replace, hit X to get In and Out in the timeline.
As I don’t want to replace the clip right away I position the focus point one track above (V2) the original clip (V1)so I don’t loose it right away.
I execute Fit to Fill but the clip that goes into the timeline is not fitted between the In and Out marks, instead it is fitted between two clips that are somewhere on V2.
How do I get that new clip on V2 to fit to the In and Out marks I set before?
Thanks,
André
|
|
|
|
When you move the Focus Positioner up it implicitly selects the entire range between the 2 clips on V2. This would be the same as Selecting the GAP itself.
Instead of hitting Fit to Fill, choose Overwrite. It will do a TW to perform a Fit to Fill and use the In/Out Marks.
Brian Mulligan
[The Area Smoke Forum Assistant]
WTHR-TV
Indianapolis, IN, USA
SMOKE 2013.2.2 HP9400/FX5800 | HP z800/FX5800 | & now Smoke 2013 SP2 on MBP
[Twitter @bkmeditor] | Check out the Smoke Blog on PremiumBeat.com |
|
|
|
|
To me this is just wrong behaviour. Fit to fill is by definition dependent on respecting in and out points. I understand why it does this and can probably think if one or two times a year it might be handy to totally ignore the edit timings I’ve explicitly defined but it is fundamentally wrong.
Yes we all (me too) go cool, thanks Brian now I know why pressing fit to fill is the wrong choice in this situation and we should use overwrite (in 2012 I never once used for to fill - always overwrite) BUT its wrong and totally at odds with their design objectives if making smoke easy to learn. Every idiosyncrasy like this makes the learning curve that bit steeper. Stuff like this particularly makes a couple of hundred downloaded say ‘yeah I tried it but I could never work out fit to fill so I’ve gone premiere’.
As a new user said smoke is hell powerful but its still kind if retarded. And sadly between this stuff, the fact that so many keyboard shortcuts need two hands, desktop move looks like copy and the rest, I have to agree.
Best regards
Mike
All's well that ends. That's why its called finishing.
|
|
|
|
|
i think its not that difficult:
Insert Overwrite & aligned edit (SyncPointEdit) are related to IN / Out & are the basic “common” editing features
all other operations replace/swap with/out ripple & stuff are shot based & ignore the marks
at least, thats how i see it ?
robert
Author: robcoulin
|
| Replied: 14 November 2012 09:59 PM
|
|
|
|
|
I agree that it seem wrong. I almost exclusively use Overwrite, as I know that clips will auto fit to fill when there are 4edit points. Fit to fill does work when you are on the clip as explained in the original post. Also, you can make cuts I the in/out marks on a gap that will make the fit to fill work on gap layers.
Smokes features are deep enough that sometimes little things like this get in the way of itself.
Brian Mulligan
[The Area Smoke Forum Assistant]
WTHR-TV
Indianapolis, IN, USA
SMOKE 2013.2.2 HP9400/FX5800 | HP z800/FX5800 | & now Smoke 2013 SP2 on MBP
[Twitter @bkmeditor] | Check out the Smoke Blog on PremiumBeat.com |
|
|
|
|
Like I said I never use fit-to-fill for just this reason. But the longer we all keep going ‘haha yeah Smoke is a bit odd but its powerful’ the longer AD have to accept being a niche player. All new users see is fit-to-fill does not behave as it should, which adds to the oddness of the application and the general level of user acceptance.
They have a golden opportunity to just get these oddities ironed out and gone forever, we all know what the odd things it does are and we work around them every single day, how much better would the software seem to new users if the work around list was none existent. I’m thinking ‘Smoke it just works’ rather than ‘Its just a few more clicks’.
I do have to say though the last two betas have seen huge leaps in usability towards where I want it to be - I still dont care about bugs as such as I know they will get sorted, I just really want them to get these small details right as its user interface issues that most irk people and prevent them getting into the software. If people don’t want to use it they won’t care how powerful it is.
best regards
Mike
All's well that ends. That's why its called finishing.
|
|
|
|
ADSK might classify the current oddity a bug.
I’m not really sure why there even needs to be a Fit to Fill operation when Overwrite does the same thing when it detects a 4 point edit. Lightworks never had a separate Fit to Fill operation, it was always just overwrite with 4 points.
Premiere just uses Overwrite with a dialogue box. FCPX doesn’t seem to have a Fit to Fill, so it feels very much like a FCP7 hold over.
After all it’s just a 4 point edit with a TW.
Brian Mulligan
[The Area Smoke Forum Assistant]
WTHR-TV
Indianapolis, IN, USA
SMOKE 2013.2.2 HP9400/FX5800 | HP z800/FX5800 | & now Smoke 2013 SP2 on MBP
[Twitter @bkmeditor] | Check out the Smoke Blog on PremiumBeat.com |
|
|
|
|
The Overwrite-Fit To Fill only works works with Auto Timewarp enabled.
I have that disabled all the time as I don’t want Smoke to timewarp anything into a gap where it normally wouldn’t fit.
If it doesn’t fit, I either adjust the length of the source clip or I adjust the edit in the timeline.
If I really do want to make a Fit to Fill edit then I want Smoke to respect the In and Out marks just like it does with a normal Overwrite.
I can’t think of a situation where the current Fit to Fill behavior would be a benefit over the way any other editing software does it.
André
|
|
|
|
Seems its s bug! I tried the same thing in flame 20 and it respects the in and out points…
In fact I’m REALLY enjoying the way reels and timeline work together - drag multilayered clips into the timeline etc it all seems to work as you think it should. Ill write up my flame experience elsewhere but so far so good!
Best regards
Mike
All's well that ends. That's why its called finishing.
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have just read this thread and I thought it would be good to clarify some of the functions.
FIT TO FILL - Will take the in and out points of a source and fit it to the focused/select segment in the sequence. It does not take into consideration the in or out points set in the sequence.
OVERWRITE - Will take the in and out points of a source as well as the record in and out points and edit the clip into the designated areas.
Both FIT TO FILL and OVERWRITE will timewarp the clip by default if the duration of the source clip is different to the selected segment (FIT TO FILL) or record in and out duration (OVERWRITE).
The long short of this, FIT TO FILL does exactly what OVERWRITE would do to a segment if you just wanted to overwrite segments without setting in and outpoints in the sequence. Being more specific with in and out points on portions of the segments or clips in the timeline warrants the use of OVERWRITE more often.
What I am finding difficult to understand that if you just wanted to fill up a gap in the sequence with no time warp why are you not just doing a 3 point edit? You would simply mark up the sequence with an in and out point. You would mark the source with either an in or out point (depending if you are forward timing or back timing your edit) and press to OVERWRITE to fill the gap.
My understanding of FIT TO FILL, is that if you have a certain number of frames that you want to fill into a gap/segment in the sequence, this will make Smoke fill up the area with the frames, even if it has to timewarp the source to ensure it fits the gap.
Regards
Grant
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for explaining.
I see the difference you’re making between those two functions.
This does make sense in the Smoke way of working, with focused/selected segments and Auto Timewarp turned on but it’s totally different from what FCP and Avid do. Not sure it’s better tough.
Basically you’re right about the 3 point edit and I find it really hard to explain why this is tripping me up.
Very often I will set in and out just to see the duration of a clip in the source viewer or a gap in the timeline.
So I end up doing 4 point edits a lot simply because I don’t delete the in or out before I press OVERWRITE.
This is no problem because Avid and FCP just fill the gap with whatever is beyond the out of the source clip if my source duration was shorter than my gap duration and then I adjust the length in the timeline or decide to use it.
If the duration in the source viewer is longer than the duration of the gap in the timeline they will use whatever fits into the gap and I can play and see if that is enough and then decide to adjust or not.
Avid and FCP will also warn my if my source clip is too short and cannot fill the gap.
This is when I decide to FIt to Fill, look for another clip, adjust the gap in the timeline .....
In Smoke I always have to remember to delete one in or out point before I press OVERWRITE and this is disturbing my flow as i edit along.
So because of this I often have timewarped clips in the timeline and then I have to remove the timewarp before I can continue editing.
Puh, now I’m confused and I’m sure you are too if you made it to down here but I’m sure when I’m back editing it will all make sense again. :-)
I guess it’s all a matter of muscle memory and habits that we develop over the years and sometimes it#s just hard to unlearn things.
Thanks,
André
Author: andrega
|
| Replied: 16 November 2012 04:17 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I fyou are just checking lengths then you can alt+Hover or /+Hover over a clip or gap and it will tell you the length in the middle field. Also, Phantom marks turned on might help you.
Author: Brian Mulligan
|
| Replied: 16 November 2012 04:33 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know why this is tripping you up, it tripped me up too! For me, it is because every application I have used didn’t automatic timewarp in a 4 point edit. So I would mark an in and out point in my first draft, but then end up not using that clip. Then later I would come back to that clip. In other apps, It doesn’t matter if you have an out point, you use the clips on your timeline to fill a hole, and then scratch your head as to why it time warped. It happened to me several times. Until I said, okay smoke is different I must remove the out point, and got use to it. I like the ease of a 4 point edit for timewarping, very quick. But smoke is still a new editing paradigm (in my opion, learning how to use the focus point efficiently took a little doing) , but much easier to use than 2012.
Author: BrooksTomlinson
|
| Replied: 16 November 2012 09:15 AM
|
|
|
|
|
I’m genuinely curious, other than that a couple of shortcut keys might be more familiar to you in what ways is editing in 2013 better than in 2012?
Best regards
Mike
All's well that ends. That's why its called finishing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
well that last sentence might have been a little off, I more meant the flow of 2013 in my opinion flows better for me than 2012. I have not edited in smoke 2012 all that much, but having more similar shortcut keys is a big help. That feeling of editing more came from the ease of importing material, and a more “like” bin list. In my head the cfx workflow and nodes fits better than the desktop to timeline feel.
Also being able to use pro-res as the render codec speeds up the process. I can actually watch my timeline playback in realtime. (didn’t have fast enough drives)
and there seems to be a lot more free tutorials on 2013 that can get you up to speed than what I saw in 2012.
to be honest I was not really qualified to make the statement about the timeline editing, per say, I should have said the feel of 2013 is smoother than 2012. But I was out the door as I was typing. :)
I, like most, couldn’t even get media into the system until I watched a tutorial on it in 2012. So the mediahub has made editing better to me, because I can quickly get more footage. But really as far as the “timeline” editing goes, I can speak to the difference, only the experience.
Author: BrooksTomlinson
|
| Replied: 17 November 2012 02:57 PM
|
|
|
|
|
I think being able to use it as opposed to not is a massive improvement!
I wasn’t trying to put you in the spot I was just wondering what people perceived as so different in terms if editorial.
Best regards
Mike
All's well that ends. That's why its called finishing.
|
|
|
|
