Edit: Make subclip should make subsequence in timeline

Avid has best approach to this - make subclip, when used in a timeline, makes a subsequence between marks and using enabled tracks.

PPro is weaker because it is a separate command (make subsequence), so two keyboard shortcuts, and tends to include the entire blank timeline I think (It's so suboptimal that I rarely use it - but I use it all the time in Avid)

What is a subsequence?

What is a subsequence?

As a subclip is to a clip, so a subsequence is to a sequence.

A portion of a sequence subbed out for reuse....

Ah so, basically a nested timeline done with fewer steps.

Are you asking to eliminate the subclip feature entirely when done from the timeline, to have only the subsequence operation?

Ah so, basically a nested timeline done with fewer steps.

Well... the sequence created by nesting, but without the nesting.

Are you asking to eliminate the subclip feature entirely when done from the timeline, to have only the subsequence operation?

Pretty sure that 'create subclip' currently has no effect in a timeline.

Ah, so a purely new addition.

Sounds good to me.

I'd like something like this. Maybe 'New Sequence from in to out'. I can't remember what made a subsequence different to a regular sequence, but yes, I'd love the ability to make a sequence from a portion of an existing sequence.

I don't know what Avid does, but subsequance, sounds like it is essentially nested timeline in some form or another. Which exists. If you want no timeline but have subclips from a particular clip, duration markers do that. Otherwise one has to create timeline for obvious reasons.

Duration markers allow creating what is essentially a series of subclips from in and out points on a clip. Normally, you can make only one in and out point before you have to rest and doing again on the same clip. While having active in and out points you can make a subclip from it or duration marker. Duration markers unlike standard subclips have several advantage . They are automatically added a series of subclips to original clips, and will show up by default under the original clip as subclips, if you are in the list view of media pool.

sshot-1025.jpg (296.98 KiB) Viewed 949 times

Alternatively they can be searched as thumbnails that retain thumbnail image of in point duration marker. Since they are markers, notes and colors etc are supported. They retain whole access to a clip in case you need it, but by default they are limited to duration of the clip between markers.

duration markers sshot-100.jpg (108.51 KiB) Viewed 949 times

Another way to make a timeline of clips without actually making a timeline, is to use source tape on the cut page. You sort the bins by some logical order and you put clips there are are relevant to what you are doing and in the cut page you can have a temporary timeline in the source viewer to use for assembly of your actual timeline, which can later still be refined. Its the quickest way to do this. Which is why it was created. As was the sync bin for multi-cam work.

sshot-1026.jpg (340.85 KiB) Viewed 949 times

Weather you use source tape or duration markers. it depends on what kind of project you are doing, but it is a way to create rough assembly with no permanent timeline in the case of source tape and catalog and create subclips with duration markers and not commit to a timeline or re-use in other timelines and projects.

I don't know what Avid does, but subsequance, sounds like it is essentially nested timeline in some form or another.

Avid and Premiere both do this. It is not 'nested' as such - it is a copy of the sequence from just the in to the out.

So process (in Avid) is:
Mark in and out in the timeline
Select tracks (like 'auto select' in Resolve)
'Make Subclip'

produces a fully independent sub sequence for selected tracks, between the in and out - with the timeline timecode matching the source sequence.

What's it useful for (not an exhaustive list):

Transitions (e.g. replay wipe with sound effects)
Graphics (e.g. with transitions in and out and sound effects)
Selects (e.g. if you keep the shots you haven't used at the end of the timeline you can subsequence them before removing from the main sequence).

Seems that Resolve actually does this - if the sequence is open in the source monitor, then create subclip does duplicate the timeline, keeping just the in to out section (all tracks). Not sure why this wouldn't then be easy to implement in the timeline itself. - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VshQOt ... EcJ64hvH5y

I don't know what Avid does, but subsequance, sounds like it is essentially nested timeline in some form or another.

Avid and Premiere both do this. It is not 'nested' as such - it is a copy of the sequence from just the in to the out.

So process (in Avid) is:
Mark in and out in the timeline
Select tracks (like 'auto select' in Resolve)
'Make Subclip'

The term sequance might be a big confusing when used in context of resolve. Since sequance implies sequance of something, which may or may not be separate timeline.

To do what you say here, you could create a compound clip which puts all the tracks into one container called compound clip.

Compound clips, fusion clips, mutlicam clip etc, are all a form of nested timelines that can be open as timeline if you right click on them and choose open in timeline.

You can of course also use nested timelines as well, but you would follow a bit differnt workflow. In other words order of operations and you could use stacked timelines if you wanted to.

...produces a fully independent sub sequence for selected tracks, between the in and out - with the timeline timecode matching the source sequence.

What's it useful for (not an exhaustive list):

Transitions (e.g. replay wipe with sound effects)
Graphics (e.g. with transitions in and out and sound effects)
Selects (e.g. if you keep the shots you haven't used at the end of the timeline you can subsequence them before removing from the main sequence).

In resolve you would probably use fusion and various generators, adjustment clips etc for this. Different way of working, I guess.

Seems that Resolve actually does this - if the sequence is open in the source monitor, then create subclip does duplicate the timeline, keeping just the in to out section (all tracks). Not sure why this wouldn't then be easy to implement in the timeline itself.

You could do in and out points and make a subclip from timeline, but as I've noted before, duration markers are like sub clips on steroids. Offer more options.

There is also take selector, which a bit clunky to use, but works well as the name suggests. Take selector. Like versioning.

Sequence here is just other NLEs’ term for Timeline.
Subsequence is other NLEs’ term for nested Timeline.

I THINK Avid, FCP7, and other NLEs don’t have a distinction between Timeline and Compound Clip. I’m not sure why this distinction is necessary in Resolve either.

What’s the difference between a Timeline with assembled contents and a Compound Clip? Or maybe a better question is what’s the USEFUL difference and might it be done instead by some flag rather than having so many Timeline-like objects?

Sequence here is just other NLEs’ term for Timeline.
Subsequence is other NLEs’ term for nested Timeline.

Thats what I understood as well.

I THINK Avid, FCP7, and other NLEs don’t have a distinction between Timeline and Compound Clip. I’m not sure why this distinction is necessary in Resolve either.

What’s the difference between a Timeline with assembled contents and a Compound Clip? Or maybe a better question is what’s the USEFUL difference and might it be done instead by some flag rather than having so many Timeline-like objects?

There are several reasons as far as I understand. Compound clips and fusion clips for example, while they are technically nested timelines, the difference is in how they package what is inside and for what reasons.

For fusion to work properly following the image processing pipeline in resolve, it has to reference clips from edit page but use the clips from media pool.

When you create compound clip or fusion clip, copy is made and placed in media pool, so when you open it in fusion it will open the duplicate "container" from media pool in fusion. But its a way to conform timeline resolution etc to fusion. Otherwise source media in original state is open in fusion from media pool.

Compound clip will allow fusion to open clips as one clip, but sequentially one after the other. While fusion clips will take stack of layers or tracks and convert them to nodes. Compound clips can be decomposed to access original clips on the timeline, while fusion clips cannot, but you can access clips from fusion clip in fusion itself, by choosing layer / track number in media In nodes, corresponding to tracks in fusion clip itself.

Nested timelines don't really have this extra ability but have all the functions of timelines, like timeline settings dialog box and all that it includes.

Multicam clips are yet another form of nested timelielines where you can access differnt angles but can also go into mutlicam clip as its own timeline and re-arange the clips.

While I'm not a fan of nesting or precomping workflows, there are uses for them and resolve offers several flavors for each situation.

Haha - timeline I'm subclipping/sibsequencing from has a multicam clip where the individual angles are compound clips containing a video layer and a fusion referenced comp.

No wonder I'm not making much sense...

Resolve is pretty strong in this regard. Avid does not have nesting (other than multicam clips and you can 'collapse' layers).

Kruno - as far as I can tell all the stuff you’re mentioning is internal to Resolve stuff that the user shouldn’t have to know.

If it were all one type of object - a Timeline presumably - AND Resolve fixed its Timeline nesting bugs - it’d all be much simpler and more understandable.

Kruno - as far as I can tell all the stuff you’re mentioning is internal to Resolve stuff that the user shouldn’t have to know.

Not sure why one wouldn't want to know that, since its how you control it and can do some powerful things. The user should know this so they can actually control it, and if they can't then they should probably avoid using such workflows. Most of the problems I've seen comes from people who don't know how things work in resolve, don't care to learn and think they can do whatever they want, At which point something breaks sooner or later. And its not that difficult to learn.

What I mean is all these functions could work on a Timeline rather than you having to make a different kind of object - a Compound Clip - for them.