Copy link to clipboard
New in Premiere Pro Beta 15.2 (Build 9) is a refined workflow for controlling how label colors and clip names are displayed in the timeline. Previously you could use a checkbox in the Project settings called “Display the project item name and label color for all instances” to control if your timeline clips used their own independent name and label color or matched the source clip in the Project panel. Now, this option has been removed from the Project Settings and can be found as a view option in the wrench menu in the Timeline panel called “Show Source Clip Name and Label”.
This change means you can easily toggle this view setting via a keyboard shortcut. Additionally, if you are working in a Production you now have a way to control this setting and decide if you want your clip name and label colors to be unique to the timeline, or reflect the source clips.
Let us know how this feature is working for you!
Jarle is correct. .mogrt names should not sync the same as regular clips since they're different.
Why should users be forced to choose between:
1. unsynced clip names + properly named .mogrts
2. synced clip names + messed up .mogrt names?
Why can't we benefit from having both synced clip names + properly named .mogrts at the same time?
If you really feel that .mogrts should appear with their parent's (i.e. source's) name when syncing is turned on, then perhaps a work around would be to show both names:
Parent .mogrt: Title 1
Child 1: "Title 1" renamed to "Relevant Title 1"
Show Source Clip Name and Label turned ON
Child 1: name appears in Timeline as "Title 1 > Relevant Title 1" (with only the second part of the title being editable)
Show Source Clip Name and Label turned OFF
Child 1: name once again appears in Timeline as just "Relevant Title 1"
Would something like this be possible? What do you think Jarle and Neil?
The idea that users should need to turn syncing on/off regularly is foolish IMO. Syncing options should be logical and flexible enough to be a set it and leave it thing users rarely if ever need to change after they set it to their preference.
BTW, calling the new option "Show Source Clip name and Label" might be confusing to some since the option doesn't just show the source clip's name and label, it also syncronizes changes made in the Timeline back to the Project window. The old checkbox had a tooltip. I suggest adding a tooltip to the new option as well, that clearly explains how it works, including changes made in the Timeline syncing back to the Project window.
Regarding the current all or nothing approach:
1. nothing synced
2. everything synced
...rather than giving us the flexibility to choose:
1. clip names synced, labels unsynced
2. clip names unsynced, labels synced
...if the Pr team's argument is that no one is asking for that functionality, I would counter argue that perhaps it's because the checkbox was so well hidden prior to v15.3, most users don't even know about it, so how could they possibly ask for it to work better? With the much better location of the syncing checkbox in v15.3 Beta, I can see a lot more people learning about it and getting frustrated with the inflexible all-or-nothing approach and the issue of renaming .mogrts.
I think it would be better to switch the order of the name sections.
So the Child 1 name appears in Timeline as "Relevant Title 1 (Title 1)".
This would show the custom name first, which would be better in most cases IMO.
Putting our minds together always comes to the best solution Jarle! "Relevant Title 1 (Title 1)" works fine for me.
Copy link to clipboard
I am confused. The wrench toggle works nothing like the old checkbox.
Now, tf I go to label one instance of a clip in my timeline green, every other instance of that source clip on my timeline turns green. If I go to the wrench and toggle off "show label" then none of the instances show the label anymore. (BTW, the source name stays up either way).
But apparently, totally gone is the possibility to make one single clip on a timeline a different color from the other clips in the timeline, regardless of whether they are from the same source. That is what unchecking the old box used to accomplish. And that functionality seems to be gone from premiere.
Can someone explain how I can go back to taking one clip, or a chunk of selected clips, on my timeline and changing their color without changing every instance? This is a big part of my workflow. Thanks in advance.
This checkbox works exactly as expected on my end, it's identical to the original checkbox hidden in the menus.
@wondtacular By default the wrench checkbox "Show Source Clip Name and Label" is off. This means when you cut a clip into a timeline it has the same name and label color as the source clip, but it is not linked. You can change the name or label and it does not affect the source clip in the bin.
If you then turn on the Show Source Clip Name and Label option, the clip will revert to the name and label of the source clip in the bin. In this state, changing the name or label in the bin or in the timeline will effect the other as well.
If you then turn off the option, the timeline clips will revert back to whatever state you left them in last time the option was off.
Thanks for the clarification, Matt.
Copy link to clipboard
That looks like you're not seeing the full list, there should be another couple/three up at the top I think. Huh.
Nope, I see the full list,..
15.2.0 is not showing the option
22.0 is working
Copy link to clipboard
This only works for overwrite and insert - it doesn't work for copying and pasting, which is a huge issue for the project I'm on now. I'm searching via the transcription feature and copying and pasting parts into another sequence. I'm having to change my custom label colors back every time I paste. NOT HELPFUL - PLEASE FIX. This was not an issue in the previous version when I could check "display the project item name and label color for all instances."
@sarahg44467382 I'm sorry I don't follow the problem you're describing. Could you share some more detail or steps of what you're doing and what you are expecting to happen, but is not happening? Thank you.
Thanks eveyone for all the work being done on this!
I'm very late to the conversation here, but I just wanted to simply state that I too am deeply missing the ability to have 'non-absolute' labels. I've been using Labels like tags (customizing the name and color to be more useful for my workflow, which then becomes a searchable 'tag' within the timeleine.
As it is in the current release, the labels feature is mostly useless to me - as I did most of my label/tag work within the timeleine.
I'm finding this thread after looking in the request features/bugs area, and submitted the folloing request
I empathize with the issue of complexity / states, but... Premiere is a Professional creative tool (not a consumer product) , and had a tagging system built in to the timeleine (paired with the search timeleine tool + Select label group feature) that most users were simply unaware of, by just customizing the label names to suit your needs. And while perhaps it was not well know or popular, now premiere has absoulty nothing to offer in that area, while other more NLEs are doubling down on tagging and metatata workflows...
I personaly think that there are many hidden gems in premiere (Audio track effects, for instance) , that could just use a little sunshine, and perhaps dusting off to make a little more friendly for new users - practicaly unveiling 'new' featuers to pros who had not even been aware they existed.
Thanks again everyone!
@SquareEyez√ Could you explain what you mean by wanting to have "non-absolute labels"? Nothing about this feature described in this post removed any functionality. You can still set the timeline to show a "local" color that doesn't ripple back to the source clip. Thanks.
Copy link to clipboard
Given all of the posts, detailed thoughts and illustrations I've added to this thread and on User Voice, something tells me that I've spent far more time advocating for this to be fixed than Adobe's staff ever spent considering the merits of it being fixed.
Cue Michael Jackson's song "All I want to say is that they don't really care about us..."
Sadly, this issue + the dozens of feature requests on User Voice that have been ignored for years (even some with hundreds of votes) all indicates the above lyric to be true.
I'd love for the Pr team to prove otherwise, by tackling actual issues in Pr rather than wasting time reinventing the wheel as they currently are with the new import and export panels that will be of limited/questionable value to Pr users who get along just fine with the current methods of importing and exporting stuff.
It's rather disingenuous Matt when you say that you considered fixing this problem, but decided it was too much work or too complex to do so, all the while giving the import/export interfaces complete overhauls, which is WAY more work for your team, and when doing so will help the average user so much less than if you actually tackled the current issues we're dealing with in Pr. It seems your team's list of priorities are out of touch with reality (i.e. OUR reality, the reality that matters, that of your USERS. NOT the reality of product managers and what they imagine is best for editors while not even using the software on a daily basis like we do. Sorry to say this, but it's time to get real and stop with the nonsense.)
Hello Pierre Louis,
We understand your frustration. I hope to provide further useful context.
First, don't blame Matt: A senior PPro QE and film workflow specialist (as well as a working colorist!), Matt's understanding of these workflows is unsurpassed, and there is no stronger customer advocate on the PPro team.
About us not caring: We care.
Premiere Pro's users ("Us", in your post) are a diverse group, many of whom rely on PPro for their livelihood, using an astounding variety of workflows. No one uses every feature, and I'm sure everyone questions the value of the work we do, on features upon which they don't rely.
Example: My PPro team is responsible for (among other things) Dynamic Link, Productions, and Transmit devices. None of these is used by a majority of users, yet if PPro is to remain a viable option for the most demanding professional workflows (feature films, news orgs, broadcasters, sports/event productions) it's important to invest in improving PPro's behavior in those (and other) arcane-yet-demanding functional areas. I doubt many professional editors want to spend time learning an NLE that isn't a viable option, for those workflows.
Our work on label colors and clip names is a great example of what it sounds like you want us to do; rather than introducing new features, we refined (a.k.a. "fixed problems with") PPro's existing behavior, enabling workflows that relied on that flexibility. Stipulated: We don't expect this behavior to generate a lot of excitement for most users, but as you point out, improvements to existing behavior are often more desirable than new features.
I too had grown accustomed to the old
Import New Project dialog, and was quite frustrated that (in early versions) I couldn't make a new project without using a mouse (a problem the team quickly fixed). But as I looked at the old New Project and New Sequence dialogs "with new eyes", I realized how many of the decisions forced upon users before they even started working required informed choices, about all sorts of not-terribly-relevant technical details.
"Let's see, I'll need a new project for the new episode I just shot, for my YouTube channel...[opens PPro]...I wonder, which HDR Graphics White (Nits) setting should I use? Are all seven of my scratch disk paths set correctly? Should I set the Timecode display format to Feet + Frames 16mm, or Feet + Frames 35mm? I guess HDV capture should be fine...??!!"
As Kathy Sierra points out in her (great!) book "Badass: Making Users Awesome"*, any time an application changes functionality out from under a user, the users "lose expertise". No one likes to be made to doubt themselves, and any changes to familiar workflows are very likely to be perceived (initially, at least) as a hostile act.
Still, as I hope the workflow example [above] illustrates, some such changes are worthwhile, and desirable.
Happy to discuss further.
Thanks for using PPro, and for wanting it to be better.
* Fun Fact: "BadAss" was a selection for our team's Book Club. As mentioned; we care.
PS: I'd appreciate clarification: In your first paragraph, what specific behavior are you asking to be "fixed"?
Hey, I knew you worked heavily on the Ae/dynamic link and scripting things, didn't know you also are on the Productions process. Which has been an INCREDIBLE improvement in the app, thank you very much!
And I'm a (mostly) solo shop user, who's found the Productions model makes my life so vastly much easier, faster, and more productive. I can have all my b-roll, my audio/sounds library, my "special needs" sequence setup templates, all of that available instantly for any project.
Without duping assets ever. Sweet and slick!
One things the vast majority of users seem to miss, is that everyone else out there works very, very differently than they do. One of my main joys at NAB is the aisle discussions by the booth. People sharing their processes, and ain't NOBOBY works the same process like anyone else in the discussion.
One intriguiging group was a TV station lead editor and his four assistants. All hired as total noobs, and taught by him how to edit. And they laughed about how different they all still ended up in their processes. Even with the lead stipulating certain conventions to their proceses so someone else can step in at need.
And I've seen the list of the top 'wanted' things by user requests ... and gotta tell you, there were some really weird things to me that got high on that list. The engineer and I talked about how you had to be high on something to want some of those, but hey ... there they were, way up on the request line.
And some things that to me are very basic still need either updating or fixing. Yea, that's Life. Frustrating at times ...
Thanks everyone, and thank you Bruce Bullis
I can't speak for Pierre Louis B., as they have invested lots of time, and words, already.
The reason I'm here does seem to intersect with their concerns however.
What I'm here for now is not a new feature, or a fix, but a request to maintain an existing feature that seems to have been discontinued, as far as I can tell: independent instances of clip labels colours, and clip names in the timeleine (non absolute), as was functioning in CC2020 relases.
I have used this feature since leaving AVID, in FCP, and then when migrating back to premiere over 12 years ago.
Indispensable when structuring music videos, there are simply too many examples of its effectiveness and integration into the premiere toolset to try to concisely share here, but if you are interested please contact me and I'm happy to elaborate 🙂
Thank you again for the constant juggling act you do, developing these professional tools for diverse uses and users 🙂
Well, if that setting "Show Source Clip label ... " is unchecked for a sequence, you should get the ability to set by timeline, which seems to be what you're asking?
Because showing the Source clip label then puts the 'system-wide' label thing in operation. Not using that means the clips should be open to any labeling, without affecting the rest of the project.
I don't know how I misunderstood how that was functioning - my various tests had not indicated that.
... Reminds me of mattchristensen's point about the number of states, as I was not able to replicate the state I needed..
Thank you Neil!
Ahh.... Now I can just get back to editing...
Copy link to clipboard
You did not have to remove it from its original place. You could have given both options. Thisn has caused me problems.