Create Multicam Source Sequence straight from an existing sequence like how you create a Nest

Hi,

Thanks for your reply.

Those methods have been available in Premiere for years and they are not what I am asking about. As I said, there is a fundamental difference between a "fake" nested multicam (a regular nest with multicam view switched on) and a native multi-camera source sequence. The two behave similarly in the timeline, but they are different object types inside the project, and at our scale that difference is everything.

EXAMPLE 1 - NESTS ARE COPIED, MULTICAM SOURCE SEQUENCES ARE REFERENCED

Nested sequences are copied from one project to another the moment you drag or insert a segment from a nested multicam in project 1 into project 2. So if you have a sync sequence for a shooting day and you are using a nest with multicam view enabled, and you want to cut from it in the Source Monitor into a timeline in another edit project, Premiere copies your selections into project 2 as physical nested sequences. From that point on, the edit in project 2 is linked to those copies, not to the original.

With multiple editors working simultaneously in a Production, that is a non-starter. The only viable option is a multi-camera source sequence: a native item that is referenced rather than duplicated. Take the case where the edit in project 2 is nearly finished and a third camera finally arrives and has to be added to the multicam. With a nested multicam that is impossible. If I change the original sync timeline in project 1 (which other editors are working from as well), the multicam in project 2 does not update, because it is a separate copy.

EXAMPLE 2 - RELIABILITY

Separate from the nest-versus-multicam question: over the past few years, Productions (or Premiere in general) has proven unreliable when an entire shooting day is turned into a single multicam that is then used by multiple editors, across multiple (stereo) sequences, in multiple projects. That applies with and without audio included, but especially with audio included.

Two of the most common issues we have run into (we deliver to a wide range of clients, from local broadcasters to cinema, and from online to streaming platforms such as Netflix):

- Certain multicam clips could not be flattened for turnover. The clips would simply disappear, or the source timecode would change - video and audio each on their own. In case of audio, after flattening, some tracks could randomly change order as well.
- A single multicam would become corrupted, causing one camera angle to keep reverting to the wrong timecode. The only fix was to build a new multicam source sequence and replace every segment already used in the other timelines.

The best balance we have found is to use multicam sequences for video only. We leave the audio untouched, sitting underneath the multicam segments. The workflow that has proven most stable for us:

1. Import all audio and video into one project, interpret the correct audio channels, and label every clip with the right camera label (camera 1 = 1, camera 2 = 2, and so on).
2. Select all audio and video, choose Create Multi-Camera Source Sequence, and manually verify that everything is 100% in sync.
3. Drag the entire content of the multicam source sequence onto a stereo sequence and adjust the sequence start time so it runs in sync with the timecode of the footage.

THE ACTUAL REQUEST

On that stereo sequence we then convert the individual takes into their own multi-camera source sequences, and right now that takes an unnecessary number of steps. Say a shooting day has 20 takes shot with multiple cameras (in between single cam takes). Each multicam take gets its own multicam source sequence. The only way to do this today is: find the relevant video clips in the project bin, select them together, create a new multi-camera source sequence, remove the audio, and then replace the 2/3/4 stacked video clips in the timeline with that single multicam source sequence. Twenty times over, per shooting day.

What I am asking for is a way to do this directly in the timeline: select the synced video clips on the timeline and choose something like "Create Multi-Camera Source Sequence", which creates a proper native multicam source sequence in the project and replaces the selection with it in place. The same command that already exists in the Project panel, but starting from a timeline selection instead of a bin selection.

To explain why the nested route does not solve this for us, it helps to look at how Premiere treats the two objects differently:

1. The multicam source sequence is a different type of project item. Premiere treats a multi-camera source sequence as media - a clip with angles - while a nest stays a sequence. That distinction is not cosmetic. Adobe's own Productions documentation states that clips used across projects refer back to their original source clip and are not duplicated. Sequences do not behave that way. It is exactly why the standard Productions guidance is to keep multicams in media projects and use them like ordinary source clips, and why nested sequences are documented as being copied rather than moved when they cross a project boundary - including a duplicate of their bin structure. Cross-project referencing was never intended as a live link between projects for sequences.

2. Because the multicam is referenced, it can be opened in its own project via Open in Timeline, and an angle can be added, replaced or resynced late in the process, with every downstream edit in every project following automatically. With a nested multicam, every project holds its own copy, so there is nothing to propagate to.

3. It carries real multicam metadata. Angle numbering, camera labels, the sync method and the relationship to the original camera masters are stored in the item itself. That is what makes Match Frame, Flatten and a clean turnover to grade and online deterministic. In a nest, "multicam" is a display mode. Nested multicams also do not survive a round trip through XML.

4. It scales, and nesting does not. In a Production with over 1,500 projects, every nest dragged across a project boundary adds a duplicated sequence plus a duplicated folder structure to the target project. Multiply that by 20 takes per shooting day, across a full series, and the cost is not theoretical: larger project files, slower open and save times, more items to resolve on load, and a growing set of near-identical copies that nobody can safely delete.

This is not a preference. The nested approach breaks the referencing model that Productions is built on; the multi-camera source sequence is the one object in Premiere that does not. We are already doing the right thing. It simply costs us an unreasonable number of manual steps, and I know of other companies that (mostly) do the same.

Hope this elaborates ;)

I think you mean the Nest option. That’s not the same as a true Multicam Source Sequence. There’s a difference when it comes to performance/memory load, especially on large, complex timelines. It’s also very unpractical when working with Premiere Productions. You will end up with tons of standalone copies each time you bring a selection from Nested sequence to another project.