Nested Sequence in Main Project Timeline Won't Open Anymore in Own Timeline (Tab)

No need for elbow room if you master the trim tools. Just be aware of sync.

> is there an agreement here that in general practice, if I edit in sub sequences, before quitting
> FCP it is better that I should copy and paste just the clips into the main timeline, rather than
> leave the nests?
> If you ask me, yes.

I disagree. Depends on the situation, of course. If you're trying to export an OMF, as strypes mentioned before, then of course you'll need to finalize the edit and assemble the actual clips.

But if you're still editing in individual scenes, it's an utter waste of time to assemble the clips. It's time-consuming because you have to check to make sure every little element has made it into the assembly, it creates a massive copy of the actual timeline, it takes forever to render, and if you're changing the edit tomorrow, you either now have to work with an hour-plus timeline with 50,000 items in it, or you go back to the shorter sequences...making the assembly obsolete.

I recommend this.

1. Edit in shorter sequences. Always open them from the Browser, not a timeline.

2. If you're assembling just to have a look -- eg. DVD burn, movie-file export, see how scenes flow -- just use nests. BUT, only nest to assemble. If you're changing anything, delete the nests from the assembly and go back to the individual sequences. Only nest them again when you're ready to put everything together for an export.

3. Upon picture lock, or when exporting something like an OMF or XML, then assemble the clips themselves in a timeline. But don't edit in that timeline (in fact, I'd lock all the tracks -- having that many items in the timeline invites user mistakes), and don't keep that timeline in an active project. If you need to preserve that version in this un-nested form, save it in an archived project file so that all that extra data doesn't bog down your current project file.


www.derekmok.com

I'm not sure how you work there D, I usually I'll start by cutting scenes in scene numbered sequences, so I can skip between scenes easily if I want to. Then when I'm ready to assemble the scenes, I'll select all the scenes, apple drag them into the timeline. Usually at this stage, this is where I work on joining between scenes, trimming down portions for pace, add in some sound effects, or maybe add some music between scenes to join them better, etc.. And when the director comes in, he'll want to watch everything from the top, so we run through the entire episode, and while he's watching, sometimes he may want to take out a shot or two, or reshuffle the scenes. Sometime in the edit session, he may want to start watching from the 3rd commercial break onwards. Then at the end of the day, he'll want to watch everything from the top again. Shifting between the scene sequences in the browser and the main assemble sequence in the middle of the director's session is going to be very time consuming.



www.strypesinpost.com

Obviously the director and producer's viewing habits come into play. I tend to work with projects that are either much, much shorter (30-to-60-second commercials where you produce four to six versions a day, 20-minute short films) or much longer (60-minute-plus). With the latter, we really can't watch the whole show more than once in a session, so we don't do the editing in a large timeline. While editing a scene, if a director wants to see the previous scene for flow, I'd often put the nest of that scene in the beginning of the timeline as a temporary "screener". Take it out once it's not being watched.

As for shuffling scenes, that's actually why I prefer working in chunks, because then you're moving 100 clips around at a time, not 2000. Extra-large timelines also lend themselves to that classic problem of something offscreen happening, and nobody notices until you run out of undos, in some cases even days later.

But, if I run into a director who wants the whole show in one timeline, who am I to say no? All I'm saying is that there's more than one way to organize. Ian was asking whether he should assemble at the end of every session, regardless of editing progress, and that sounds nutty to me. If you're not even done with Scene 14 yet, for example, why would you put it into a larger timeline, with all of Scene 14's alternate takes, placeholders, etc. still being juggled around?


www.derekmok.com

>As for shuffling scenes, that's actually why I prefer working in chunks

I usually cut and paste, or ripple cut and paste. With a nest I can shift the scenes faster, but when I think about having to step in and out of nests to do all the individual edits when I'm trying to trim down a scene in context to the overall story, and the possibility of having nests going awry, that's the deal breaker with nesting scenes when assembling for me.

Usually I assemble when I have all or close to all the scenes already laid out, and I'll fill in placeholders for scenes that I have yet to cut. Then I go through the assemble sequence and start trimming out bits, and reworking parts of the story that don't flow so well when they're put together. So nests don't work too well for what I'm doing. I nest for effects- transition from two clips on composite modes, etc...



www.strypesinpost.com

> With a nest I can shift the scenes faster

I don't rely on only nests for scene organization, either. One scene per nest is insane if you have a long show -- 120 Sequences for one version is just unviable. So I tend to use a film-related method. In film it's about 20 minutes per reel. Twenty minutes is a bit fat for my taste, so I make each sequence eight to 15 minutes long. Within those timelines, I use visual tricks to help speed up navigation -- for example, a "dummy", Clip-Disabled placeholder to signify the beginning of a new scene, the use of different tracks, etc.


www.derekmok.com

Agreed. My "scene" sequences are usually a bunch of numbered scenes, eg. Sc001-005 depending on the movement of the story, so I do put everything on a timeline. I would split it if it was feature length, though.

I have seen an edit of a half hour show choked full of nests, and they were thinking of sending that to the audio house. That was just nuts, and that sort of edits kills FCP pretty quickly.



www.strypesinpost.com

> I have seen an edit of a half hour show choked full of nests, and they were thinking of sending
> that to the audio house. That was just nuts, and that sort of edits kill FCP pretty quickly.

Killed me, too. I was chief editor on a half-hour reality series that had gone through the hands of about 10 different freelance editors. Nests, nests of nests, turtle nests, ant hives...you don't know pain until you have to figure out why Sequence 1 1 1 is in a timeline and Sequence 1 1 1 1 isn't, or whether Sequence 1 copy is more current than Sequence 1 final final copy.


www.derekmok.com

Great discussion. Enjoying it immensely. Thanks.

Quote
Derek
Killed me, too. I was chief editor on a half-hour reality series that had gone through the hands of about 10 different freelance editors. Nests, nests of nests, turtle nests, ant hives...you don't know pain until you have to figure out why Sequence 1 1 1 is in a timeline and Sequence 1 1 1 1 isn't, or whether Sequence 1 copy is more current than Sequence 1 final final copy.

Ouch. That just gave me the chills and a headache...



-Dave

most of my work is longform, either drama, or documentary.

with the dramas, what i do is to work in large sequences, compiling scenes.
the sequences are labelled with scene numbers, like Strypes' method.
depending on the amount of rushes material, i will also break the film across a few projects when necessary.

the last film, i knew would be fairly manageable, so i only used 4 master sequences in one project, one for each "act",
so i'd have sequences labelled "Film Name pt1 01-19" "Film Name pt2 20-36" etc etc
and maybe some identifying description.

the previous film had a lot more material, so was broken into four PROJECTS, one for each act.
within those projects i would have one or sometimes two master sequences.
the beginning of the film for instance had a very complicated set-up which required it's own sequence

i work with all my rushes in sequences too,
so to aid with take selection, i will often start compiling / assembling the scene at the end of that sequence.
then i will copy it into the appropriate master sequence.

as the individual scenes go into the master sequences,
i use text generator place-holders that say things like missing sc: "Fred goes to the shops" to go in between the scenes.


as the end of the edit is nigh, and i get ready for "handover" (handing over the film to sound and the lab)
i'll split the film into more traditional "Spools" of about 15-20 minutes

i do this by copying al the sequences into a new project,
and compiling them into one timeline.
i know on the current film i've used NESTS for this, but i've done it otherwise in the past.
(especially important NOT to nest if there is a neg finish and you need to check if you have used anything more than once. but no-one finishes like that anymore)

then i create a blank text generator which is 22 minutes MAXIMUM,
and had markers at the 21, 19 & 15 minutes points (or something like that)

i can place this over the whole film and help divide it into the correct spool lengths.

because i used nests this time, i did a copy/paste session to break the film into spools.
that was too complicated, and i don't think i'd do it again.

if i had had the entire film un-nested in the timeline, i could have:
marked the spool sections with in/outs
selected in-to out, (option A)
then MADE A NEST, (option C) which would place a sequence in the browser

(less prone to error, and a bit simpler, although i'd still have to add head and tail leaders, and re-set the timeline TC on each)

for playouts for screenings, or DVDs, i've also been using nests,
nesting the 4 master sequences into one sequence then rendering (if necessary) and exporting.
this all happens in a separate project, which acts as an archive of that version.


nick