Skip navigation
pebalsamo
Currently Being Moderated

Remove Razor Cut

Apr 2, 2009 3:47 AM

Is there anyway to go back into a sequence and remove a razor cut?

Thanks
Phil
 
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 2, 2009 3:55 AM   in reply to pebalsamo
    Try UNDO.
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 2, 2009 4:06 AM   in reply to pebalsamo
    Phil,

    Harm's suggestion works if you've immediately or not too long after changed your mind. However, if it was a while back since you add the edit, undo won't fix the problem.

    Unfortunately, PPro lacks this direct ability at this time. The workaround is to select the clip immediately before or immediately after the edit, delete it, and then drag the head or tail of the remaining clip to fill in the gap. You'll have to replace any transitions that existed on the clip you deleted.

    Adding a "remove edit" command would be a great feature request...
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 2, 2009 4:34 AM   in reply to pebalsamo
    Glad this worked for you. Be sure to ask for enhanced functionality in this regard, like I have...
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 2, 2009 4:36 AM   in reply to pebalsamo
    It all depends on how your preferences are set. If you have 99 undo levels set, going back to your history may be sufficient to resolve the issue. If it is more, then Colin's suggestion may come in handy.
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 2, 2009 7:06 AM   in reply to pebalsamo
    Another thing you can do is select the two clips, right click and Nest.

    Or; select the two clips and right click and choose Group if you just want them to stay connected.
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 2, 2009 8:45 AM   in reply to pebalsamo
    I thought grouping worked on vertically selected clips, such as video and audio. Will it work with video clips selected linearly?
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 2, 2009 9:14 AM   in reply to pebalsamo
    > I thought grouping worked on vertically selected clips, such as video and audio. Will it work with video clips selected linearly?

    Yes.

    You may be thinking of Linking
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 2, 2009 9:14 AM   in reply to pebalsamo
    Jim,

    Yes, it works for items on the same track (ie. V1) or items on different track (V1 and V2). You can also group non-contiguous items, if you're so inclined. For instance, you could have Clip A, Clip B, and Clip C all on V1, and group just A and C. They could also be on multiple tracks, separated by time, as well. Kind of a nifty feature.
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 2, 2009 9:54 AM   in reply to pebalsamo
    Yep...Linking.
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 2, 2009 11:18 AM   in reply to pebalsamo
    You can even nest discontiguous clips. The nest just inserts transparency where there are spaces between selected clips.

    But when you do that you have to start paying attention. :)

    After nesting; check the project panel for the a seq of the original clips. Its interesting feature.
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 2, 2012 10:38 AM   in reply to Colin Brougham

    Three years later and still no way to "one-click reconnect" an accidental razor edit?!

     

    Oh and yes, this is not when you JUST used the razor tool (for which you can of course just undo) but if the cut was made a while back and I don't want to undo all my other edits. And I know I can just delete one clip and drag...but I still can't IDENTIFY easily where this mistaken razor cut is located. It'd be nice to identify where an accidental razor edit was made like in FCP. If a clip is cut with a razor and no further edit is made then nothing happens but it would be nice (for multicam edits specifically) that if its done accidentally, I could easily identify WHERE a razor cut is that does NOT result in a change of clips/angles.

     

    FCP identifies this by having two small red arrows pointing inward on each clip signaling that the two clips are the same continuous clip and then if I right-click on the razor cut I can re-join the clip and the razor cut disappears. Much easier and more helpful. Feature request submitted today HERE. Just hope this isn't overlooked for another 3 years.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 2, 2012 11:48 AM   in reply to DMH79

    Well, actually there IS a way to correct that Razor Cut.

     

    You have a Clip, and then Cut it, so that you have two sub-clips (note: there is an official element, called Sub-Clips, so do not confuse them). You wish to close that Cut (basically healing it). Just Select that second sub-clip, and Delete it. Click on the Tail of the first sub-clips, and drag it to the point, where the Tail of the second sub-clip (the one that we Deleted) was. Done.

     

    Good luck,

     

    Hunt

     

    PS - other than maybe some minor inconvenience when, say moving Clips that have been Cut, that Cut is really meaningless, as PrPro will just reference the Source Clip, and do nothing where that Cut exists, when outputting.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 2, 2012 12:12 PM   in reply to Bill Hunt

    Hi Hunt!

     

    Thanks for the response. As I mentioned before I do know that I can simply delete and drag. I also know that it does nothing when outputting, etc. BUT, deleting and dragging eliminates any transition tied to the END of the clip (if its the 2nd sub clip as you stated). So now I have to delete, drag, then reapply the transition. 3 steps instead of one.  FCP had it right here allowing me to easily identify the "meaningless" cut, and then simply right click and "re-join" the 2 subclips. Done. Faster. More efficient. Better.

     

    The issue with the cut being meaningless is true BUT it helps to have what FCP has (with the 2 little red arrows showing that the clips can be re-joined) in case I made a mistake in my multicam edit and meant to select another clip there or whatever and now I can quickly go back and check when I'm all done. I know there are several steps at getting around this little inconvenience, but why not borrow a good idea when you see one from FCP (who is losing many of its former users right now to CS6 since they went in a different direction with FCPX) so that there is no inconvenience AT ALL.

     

    That's why I submitted this feature request. Here's to hoping Adobe listens.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 2, 2012 2:22 PM   in reply to DMH79

    I agree. I miss the little red arrows in FCP.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 2, 2012 5:52 PM   in reply to DMH79

    Unfortunately, that is about the extent of methods to remove the Cuts.

     

    Sorry, that it was not useful.

     

    Hunt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 27, 2013 2:54 PM   in reply to Bill Hunt

    Obviously Adobe ought to copy FCP on this one. How long will we have to wait?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 27, 2013 6:33 PM   in reply to John Link

    Some FCP users have suggested the "Heal Function."

     

    I am sure that there are some cases, where that would be a worthwhile feature, but if one considers what such a Cut actually is, then some of those desires would possibly fall by the way-side.

     

    Still, I would not be opposed, in any way, to a "Heal." I see no downside, other than the time that Adobe engineers would need to spend of adding it.

     

    Hunt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 12:12 PM   in reply to Bill Hunt

    I see no downside, other than the time that Adobe engineers would need to spend of adding it.

     

    Given the current method works just fine, that's not an insignificant downside.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 12:37 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

    Jim Simon wrote:

     

    I see no downside, other than the time that Adobe engineers would need to spend of adding it.

     

    Given the current method works just fine, that's not an insignificant downside.

     

    Disagree. Complacency breeds failure. Fortunately, with all due respect, you're not one of the engineers. Does it work? Well, yeah, sort of in a roundabout way. Can it be better and more efficient...absolutely.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 1:02 PM   in reply to DMH79

    Complacency breeds failure.

     

    Leaving that philosophical discussion for another forum, I'm not suggesting complacency.  I'm only arguing in favor or spending limited resources on other things.  If enough folks agree with you, you'll likely get the feature.  If not, we may see something really new show up, instead of just a different way of doing something we can already do.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 1:03 PM   in reply to DMH79

    Well said DMH79!

     

    Complacency breeds failure.

     

    Phil, I just read this thread and I'm astonished at some of the suggestions implied.  Set your number of undo's to 99 (so you can lose 98 edit you wanted just so you can remove an unwanted cut)???  BTW, PP CS6 is limited to 32 undos, so you can't go back 99 steps as suggested.

     

    I suggest you add your voice to the collective scream and send an official Feature Request to Adobe.  I bet they've received hundreds of identical FRs for a 'Join Through-Edit' function from ex-FCP users (that's what it's called in FCP), yet lets keep bugging them until they finally see the light of day that just because frustratingly slow alternatives exist doesn't mean we don't deserve a better tool.  BTW, I suggest you don't nest two pieces of a clip to make it 'whole' again.  That's a very bad suggestion since should you want to trim your nest outwards, you won't be able to do so without the aggravating complication of entering the nest and trimming out your clip there first.  Plus it throws any effects on the clip pieces into the nest, making it a pain to tweak them unless you cut the effects from the clip pieces in the nest and paste them back on the nest itself.  Way too much work to be helpful in many cases. 

     

    Hopefully Apple doesn't have a patent on 'Join Through-Edit' tools that impedes other companies from using the idea.  If that's the case, I guess we'll never see it in Premiere (after all, Apple patents everything, including rounded square icons on a cell phone. )

     

    Now what I really don't understand, is why FCP7 had this fantastic feature, yet Apple seems to have abandoned it in FCPX.  Baffling to say the least!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 1:06 PM   in reply to PierreLouisBeranek

    Set your number of undo's to 99

     

    Now THAT would be a worthwhile improvement to PP.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 1:11 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

    Agreed.  It would be an improvement indeed.  So would a FCP7-style 'join through-edit'.  Between the two, I'd pick the latter though.  I rarely have the need to undo more than 32 times compared to how often I wish I could remove an unnecessary cut from a clip.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 1:16 PM   in reply to PierreLouisBeranek

    I'm kind of curious why former FCP editors make so many mistakes in your cuts that you need to undo them so frequently.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 1:37 PM   in reply to PierreLouisBeranek

    PierreLouisBeranek wrote:

     

    Agreed.  It would be an improvement indeed.  So would a FCP7-style 'join through-edit'. 

    Me too. Create a feature request: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 1:42 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

    It's not that I make a mistake in the cut, but I may want to try a cut and then change my mind.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 1:47 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

    Jim Simon wrote:

     

    I'm kind of curious why former FCP editors make so many mistakes in your cuts that you need to undo them so frequently.

    In my opionin, there are really only two reasons editors want to remove through edits; to neaten up the Timeline or if they have to export an EDL where through edits are not supported.

     

    A lot of self-trained FCP editors are a bit too happy with the razor blade, using it as their primary way to trim. It's as if the Ripple Trim tool never existed. As a former Apple Certified Trainer, I had to break a lot of bad habits.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 1:48 PM   in reply to Kevin Monahan

    Hi Kevin,

     

    I already did a while back.  Question: Is posting the same FR more than once helpful?

     

    Jim, implying that former FCP editors 'make so many mistakes' is ridiculous.  As John pointed out, it's more often than not a change of mind with an edit, not a mistake.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 1, 2013 2:46 PM   in reply to PierreLouisBeranek

    PierreLouisBeranek wrote:

     

    Well said DMH79!

     

    I bet they've received hundreds of identical FRs for a 'Join Through-Edit' function from ex-FCP users (that's what it's called in FCP). 

    Yes, yes we have. Add your voice: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish

    There is power in numbers.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 1:55 PM   in reply to PierreLouisBeranek

    PierreLouisBeranek wrote:

     

    Hi Kevin,

     

    I already did a while back.  Question: Is posting the same FR more than once helpful?

     

    Jim, implying that former FCP editors 'make so many mistakes' is ridiculous.  As John pointed out, it's more often than not a change of mind with an edit, not a mistake.

    No need to make more than one request. Even though you can do something doesn't mean ya should.

    Helping others to jump on the bandwagon is totally fine, though.

     

    There are a million ways to work with FCP. Because it was so popular, a lot of people actually did make a lot of mistakes using it. Without formal training, people had a tendency to stay with what worked for them, taking several steps when only 2 were necessary. Things like that. As a major contributor to that community over the years, this I can attest to. That said, I've seen some pretty killer FCP editors chop edits together like nobody's business.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 4:19 PM   in reply to Kevin Monahan

    Kevin Monahan wrote:

     

    PierreLouisBeranek wrote:

     

    Well said DMH79!

     

    I bet they've received hundreds of identical FRs for a 'Join Through-Edit' function from ex-FCP users (that's what it's called in FCP). 

    Yes, yes we have. Add your voice: http://www.adobe.com/go/voice

    There is power in numbers.

    That link doesn't work. What is the correct URL?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 7:25 PM   in reply to John Link

    I got the same Error on Page. Try this link: https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform

     

    Hunt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 8:45 PM   in reply to Bill Hunt

    Bill Hunt wrote:

     

    I got the same Error on Page. Try this link: https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform

     

    Hunt

     

    Thank you. That works and made a request for the ability to heal a cut just like in Final Cut.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 29, 2013 10:03 PM   in reply to John Link

    Most welcome, and hope that Adobe is listening. Actually, they are.

     

    Hunt

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)