Reuben Evans · January 9, 2016 at 6:17 pm

• Author comment by Philip · January 10, 2016 at 9:03 am

  Keywords are also searchable, as are the contents of any note. There is nothing you can do with a Favorite that a Keyword does not do better. Everything you say you do with interviews is MUCH BETTER done with keywords. You are not working the way you should be in FCP X. It’s costing you time and efficiency.

  • Robin S. Kurz · January 10, 2016 at 10:19 am

    You can’t be saying that for transcription (as described) you should use *keywords*, right?

    Because I have used favorites the exact same way that Reuben describes also. Mark dialog passages as favorites in various takes, rename them according to what is said, switch event to favorites only, enter search term “XYZ” and only have every instance displayed where that term is used. Absolutely brilliant and NOT in fact possible via keywords (unless you’re cool with having literally *hundreds* if not more), markers (which I first tried) or notes.

    So yes, I for one in very much in favor of using favorites this way. 🙂 Unless you can in fact show me that some other function (that I must have missed) in FCP can do the same thing?

    • Author comment by Philip · January 10, 2016 at 10:23 am

      I am indeed saying that keywords are better for transcripts. We have a little experience with this in Lumberjack and indeed keywords on speakers, searchable content in the notes is faster. As the guys who used it on the OJ Simpson documentaries. Webinar at Moviola this week on the subject.

      The workflow described is slow and cumbersome by comparison.

      Search XYZ and the notes will be searched. I can’t see any advantage in the way you’re doing it, and several disadvantages.

      • Author comment by Philip · January 10, 2016 at 10:25 am

        Would you rename a Reject? Then why rename the opposite?

      • Robin S. Kurz · January 10, 2016 at 12:33 pm

        Only that notes cannot be limited to a PART of a clip, so I don’t see how that is a gain in that situation. I’d be curious to see the OJ guys’ event.

        IOW if I entered the dialog of a clip into the notes, let’s say starting with ”I killed Mark…”, then ten minutes of something else, then “… took the dog outside”, and subsequently tried searching for “dog”, I’d get the ENTIRE *ten+ minute* clip and have to skim through it to find what I’m actually looking for and not just the part where he says “dog”. As I do with said technique using favorites. That is, the only part of interest to me.

        With favorites I get JUST the “… took the dog outside” part wherever it was said, i.e. all the angles if multicam, OR, when scripted, all the various takes where it was said. I guess in a sense a poor man’s “ScriptSync”. 😀

        If you ask me, favorites are in fact the actual SEARCHABLE range based keywords (without having to go into some elaborate search FILTER/Smart Keyword Collection that is).

        So unless I want an *endless* amount of (range based) keywords, one of which would maybe be “dog”, using named favorites are my only option and, from experience, by far the fastest and easiest one. Even though tedious of course. Because as opposed to keywords, entering the title of a keyword into the search field does nothing.

        Or another way: if I have a half hour interview with e.g. 50 questions and answers, I for one would by FAR prefer the individual questions tucked away in non-visible favorites rather than FIFTY (or multiples thereof) keyword collections to scroll through… which would only be for that ONE clip or a few. In fact I’d personally rather use MARKERS before I used that many keywords, even though that would (again from experience) yield the exact same results as with notes when searching, which is why I switched. None of it is anywhere near as efficient imho.

        And no, I’m not comparing it to “automated” keyword collections generated by Lumberjack. I’m talking about “normal” use situations. 😉

      • Author comment by Philip · January 10, 2016 at 3:58 pm

        I see the problem. You don’t know what a keyword is. 🙂 A key concept from part of a clip. Concept. In the Notes field of the concept keyword you put the text notes you want.

        But whatever works. I think you’re crazy for using Favorites in this way. I would totally be using keyword for many reasons: organization, concept building, timeline index, export to MAM/DAM et al.

        I would, and have done so with my family history project, keywords for each questions’ answer. If I needed further details I’d put the notes in the Notes field. Which is still searchable. If there’s only one reference to something like “dog” then you’re not building a story on it are you?

        But, like I said, whatever works for you.

      • Author comment by Philip · January 10, 2016 at 4:00 pm

        Adding: all text is searchable. Keywords are incredibly powerful when combined with searching content in NOTES. That’s where ALL the transcripts for OJ went, and where they found things “they otherwise would not have found”. All organized by Speaker-based Keywords. Not a single favorite used.

      • Robin S. Kurz · January 10, 2016 at 12:36 pm

        And rejects serve an entirely different purpose, Philip. They’re there to move things OUT OF THE WAY that you don’t care about, not move things into your attention that you DO care about, like favorites. So obviously that’d be completely nonsensical to name them, yes.

      • Author comment by Philip · January 10, 2016 at 3:59 pm

        Favorite and Reject are structurally equivalents. If you’re not naming Rejects, that should be a very big hint that you shouldn’t be naming Favorites either. But whatever works for you.

Ben Balser · January 13, 2016 at 9:27 am