Why do I have to insert a slug to get the right outpoint?!??!

Question

I have a timeline with audio/video, a background and a title/close graphic. In just about any other editing program on the planet, one would mark in/out, and the program would be smart enough to know that you wanted to include all the tracks in your output unless you explicity told it to ignore something. On that same premise, ALL pro editing tools would also know that you'd want to, you know, use the actual in/out that you set in your output. But no - it would appear that X thinks otherwise and forces the editor to put a slug at the end of your primary storyline in order to catch the elements you want. Why? This is such a stupid timesuck that I am certain I must be doing something wrong and/or missing a step along the way.
Pictures may help explain what I am talking about....Here's my timeline:
So, I have set the playhead at the end of my close graphic, but note where the 'range' selector says my outpoint will be. I can't even select the outpoint of the graphic - the program won't let me and instead insists on using the last part of the primary storyline as my out - despite there being content that extends beyond it. I thought Apple wanted us editors to "abandon the timeline"????
Instead, I am forced to do an opt/w and insert a slug - as shown here - in order to output the correct content:
NOW I can output that last bit of content! But why force the editor to go through the extra step of inserting a slug?!?!?!?! To many, this may seem like a trial complaint. But when you're in a production-factory environment and cranking these things out by the boatload - the extra steps mean lost time and wasted energy.
As I stated earlier, I strongly suspect that the problem is the part behind the keyboard. At least I am hoping so... No pro editing solution should be this stupid. That should be left to the editor...

Answer 1

Paul Figgiani wrote:
So if you are as busy as you say you are - maybe you should not be using X. The ******* and moaning is old news dude.
See, here's the rub, Paul. I love working with X. I was initially one of the people that DID jump ship from 7 to PP because X freaked me out, and in the early days - it was pretty far removed from the tool it is now. Apple has made tons and tons of awesome improvements to the platform and I can now edit circles around the other two editors in the shop - one on PP and one on 7. I've been editing for over 20 years, so while I was pretty darn set in my ways - I was eager to figure out a new way of working if that meant more speed, more posibilities, and more flexibility. Since I've made the total-jump to X, I've found all 3.
But how did all those changes happen between the inital offering of X and what it is now? Yeah, you got it - the ******** and moaning from the users about stupid, bone headed workflow ops like having to insert a slug in order to output the content you need to versus just using I/O and being done with it. When Apple has NOT addressed something that the majority of users have complained about, 9 times out of 10 - someone out there makes a plugin for it that addresses the problem. I was hoping for someone to say "Oh - yea go get plugin XYZ and be done with it.." (Like, say, the brilliant decision to leave out the ability to rotate something around the Z axis, the lack of a garbage matte, and others...).
It turns out that this is "just the way it is" - at least for now, so I'll deal with the frustration. The rest of X is pretty great.
Your reply was frustrating this morning because instead of simply offering "Nope! That's the way it works" - you elected to attempt to school me and publicly shame me by telling me to RTFM. Far from helpful, and borderline confrontational. Neither of which I've ever been able to grow fond of. Thus, the offer for a cup of Joe - which still stands. A quick Google of your username shows you as someone that knows a lot about a lot, and I certainly feel like we got off on the wrong foot.
As for Mr. Innocentius... Maybe something a little stiffer would benefit you, of which I would also be happy to provide. Thanks for your enlightening comment.