-
Back to FCPX From PP (Rant)
-
[Tim Wilson] ”
Can we at least, rational nay- and yay-sayers alike, agree on that? That Apple isn’t trying to reach “everyone” in ways that it did just 5 years ago? They’ve said so often enough that it seems a little disrespectful to insist that they are.”Yes and no. 😉
I think Apple is more concerned with trying to reach more of “everyone” in general with X and less concerned with trying to reach “everyone” within the specific niche of guys and gals that edit all day, every day for a living.
-
[Tim Wilson] “After all, the number Apple stated for Legend was only a bit over 2 million units over its entire life. FCPX passed that number relatively quickly, although I remain on the record absolutely stupefied that it hasn’t blown that number apart. “
Actually I don’t think those numbers are right, Tim. Wasn’t Apple’s last official announcement for FCPX in 2014? At that time it was only “over 1,000,000 users”. So, I too am surprised that there hasn’t been any acknowledged larger amount since then. Unless of course you have updated info from Apple.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Andrew Kimery] “With that being said, I don’t see how, in terms of story, a movie shot on film is inherently different than a movie shot digitally.”
It’s not. I was referring more to the way that you treat the medium. For example: Tape needs to be acquired and therefore needs an import step to copy it to a digital file. Digital files do not need to be “acquired” and so you can just drag them from a card and drop them onto a timeline. NLE’s that require you to perform an import step when it’s not longer needed because the medium has changed, are force fitting an old workflow to the new medium that doesn’t need it. So I was talking more about updating workflows to match new mediums than about iconography, although I do find it quite odd that all software still uses the black floppy disk icon to save when most millennials have never seen a floppy disk in person. (I have several boxes in my basement if anyone wants to take peek at them) 😉
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com -
[Andrew Kimery] “FCP X still has things like the razor blade tool, sprocket holes, film leader, an 18th century looking key icon, etc.,. ;)…What matters is if the interface still effectively communicates the desired information. For example, it’s easy for people to associate ‘razor blade’ with cutting something so giving the tool that allows you to make a virtual cut in your virtual footage a razor blade icon still effectively communicates the function of that tool…”
This item you casually mentioned is actually a deep, divisive debate within the UI design community, about skeuomorphism. Jobs and Scott Forstall liked it, Jony Ive and his team do not. The previous iOS Podcasts app with the reel-to-reel tape metaphor was held up as an example of skeuomorphism gone wild — most users had never touched reel-to-reel tape, so why use it. An example of the complaints: https://gizmodo.com/5991798/apples-podcasts-app-no-longer-has-horrible-reel-to-reel-skeuomorphism
Besides end users, the UI design community piled on this as uncool and out of sync with the new wave “flat UI” approach. They use UI buzzwords like “authentically digital”, referring to how great the flat non-skeuomorphic design is.
Instead of rationally and carefully excising selected skeuomorphic elements, a mind set has taken hold that every trace of real-world UI realism must be eradicated — no matter what the cost. This includes things like color gradients, drop shadows, real-world textures, etc. In UI designer lingo, they disparagingly refer to these elements as “chrome”.
They had some valid points but this is producing a UI which many users find sterile, unfamiliar, puzzling, ugly and (worst of all) inefficient.
A good example is the much-maligned iOS Podcasts app. However archaic, the previous reel-to-reel metaphor instantly conveyed what the app was, what state it was in and what UI options existed. Now we have a trendy, flattened Podcasts app which is difficult to figure out, and is incapable of playing a video podcast full screen on an iPad. Here is how a video podcast looks on the new iPad Pro. It is severely letterboxed and there’s nothing you can do about it:
https://joema.smugmug.com/Computers/IOS-91-Podcast-Player-on-iPad/n-F4k9VW/i-jQBpD7b/O
The chief UI designers at Apple pay lip service to Bauhaus design, which says “form follows function”. However their actual implementation of flat UI design often repudiates this. It prioritizes form (the flat non-skeuomorphic look) *over* function (readability, intuitive elements). In essence, it is a new version of the much-maligned “chrome”, no different than other fads of the past like automotive tail fins. It reality it is “chromeless chrome”, non-functional flat design elements which adhere to an austere UI doctrine, yet interfere with and obscure the underlying function. The gigantic borders on the iOS 9 Podcast Player are such an example.
FCPX is actually an interesting case. It is a new database-driven approach which eschews tracks and other artifacts which were brought forward from the flatbed editing world. It has a few residual skeuomorphic items like the razor blade and key but these efficiently convey the purpose. I just hope Jony Ive doesn’t get his hands on FCPX and damage it as happened to the Podcasts app and OS X Disk Utility.
-
[John Rofrano] “Why would I want to line up clips on tracks like box cars in a train yard when that’s not the way a story is told.”
Actually, storytelling going as far back as its oral traditions, is a very linear enterprise. Every good story has a beginning, middle, and end. Only a poor storyteller gets confused regarding this order. Modern tools give us ways to rearrange the various parts of a story but, in the end, you’re always going to arrive at that “line of of clips on tracks like box cars in a train yard.”
I get that X allows you to rearrange things quickly. But if you have a solid script, why is that such a selling point? If you’re just throwing things into an event with the intent of building things on the fly, I suppose a non-tracked and unstructured sand box, like X, is the perfect place to play with your clips.
On the other hand, I’ve never had a problem rearranging things in Avid when needed, and I prefer being able to see the beginning, middle and end of my story as I build it. Structure, after all, isn’t a bad thing.
Canon XF-300, Canon 5DMkIII, Canon 7D MkII, Avid Media Composer 7.05, Adobe CC 2015, iMovie Pro.
-
Well, respectfully, you might want to read some of the interviews with the two women that edited the big StarWars blockbuster (on AVID) recently. The story by Shane Hurlburt is on the ProVideoColition website. From reading it one gets the distinct impression that today’s top editors aren’t so much engaged in “following the story” as much as in intense collaboration with the director, of course – in actually creating it. Listening to how things as fundamental as deciding WHEN Leia appears IN the actual film implies that if all one thinks about is simply “following the script” as an editor – one may not actually be as skilled an editor as they might become. Just a general observation referencing no one.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
Steve Hullfish, not Shane Hurlbut. 🙂
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[John Rofrano] “Of course, only Lillian can clarify.”
That would be a good thing.
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
FCP X is just as linear as any other non-linear editing app. Your film ends up as a linear progression/a timeline. How you get there depends not only on the editor but how the pieces of the puzzle were produced. Traditional tracks keep many layers more organized, but X’s connected clips help move segments around more easily. I think they both have their pros and cons. The end result is the same. It’s not like the connected clips go off in different angles or start telling stories in some alternative universe. They go straight down the time line just like any other NLE. And the same rules apply. Top layers dominate the visuals. Even an old school it starts on the page production benefits by FCPx keyword smart collections to help organize the media using metadata.
I think that if you could keep certain elements in their “tracks” but still employ its connection to the primary you’d have the best of both worlds. That is be able to keep any given clip or collection of clips on a certain layer above or below the primary. Secondary storylines I think try to address this but not as clearly for me as say 5 tracks of audio. On the other hand, the connection points and how easy they are to manage is very intuitive. So much easier to keep things in sync.
Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.
-
[Bill Davis] “if all one thinks about is simply “following the script” as an editor – one may not actually be as skilled an editor as they might become. Just a general observation referencing no one.”
Having helped rewrite scripts in the edit bay while under deadline, I certainly understand and appreciate collaboration. Having won six Emmys for my work as an editor as part of of an investigative journalism unit certainly qualifies me to have an opinion on it. And my opinion is that having a polished script at the outset obviates the need for a lot of experimentation in editing, especially when you’re under tight deadlines.
Most of the script editing my colleagues and I did in the edit bay was directed at eliminating – as much as possible – the need to re-edit on the timeline. It had nothing to do with avoiding dragging clips around, but about getting the story right before ever laying a single clip down. A good editor can see problems in a story while they’re still on paper. That’s where the collaboration should really begin.
IMHO.
Canon XF-300, Canon 5DMkIII, Canon 7D MkII, Avid Media Composer 7.05, Adobe CC 2015, iMovie Pro.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up