-
BrickSculpting and Classical Conditioning.
-
[andy patterson] “It is one thing to have a Kong-Fu or Aikido practitioner practice wrist lock and deflections with friends in the dojo. However when they enter the real world the wrist locks and deflections do not work as they has practiced. In fact it does more harm than good.”
LOL – that’s a bit like saying that you can’t produce high end work using FCPX because casual users aren’t capable of producing great work with it. I think you should pick a subject that you’re more knowledgeable about to make your points. ☺
Shawn
-
[Scott Witthaus] “[andy patterson] “Once again I think FCPX is a good program but I think even people using FCPX will have a different method to their madness.”
My method has nothing to do with FCPX. I did the same thing in Avid, FCPLegacy, DS and Premiere.”
I didn’t say your method had anything to do with FCPX. In fact I have posted several times if you have 10 FCPX editors they may all do things slightly different.
[Scott Witthaus] “[andy patterson] ” I think an editing contest would help to find out what techniques and methods actually work best. Remember many people thought Chinese Kong-Fu was the best form of martial arts until the UFC proved that to be false.”
I have no idea what you are talking about. It’s like having artists having a “painting contest”.”
Actually I think we could all learn a thing or two.
[Scott Witthaus] “[andy patterson] “Why would you grade all the footage if some of it might not make it to the final edit?
”Read my post. Grade, as in favorites, reject, keyword. Giving a “grade” to each shot, not color grading.”
Sorry. I seen grade and thought it was color grade. My bad but only slightly because I am not sure you always have to grade by way of reject, favorites or make use keywords.
[Scott Witthaus] “[andy patterson] “Shouldn’t you show them your method but at the same time let them know there might be a more efficient way of working?”
Been at this for 36 years. I have tried a lot of strategies. They can discover that if need be. But I find my way the most efficient way I have tried, so that’s what I teach.”
Once again ten FCPX editors could all do things slightly different. Everyone will think their method is the best. As I sated new features will be added making us constantly evolve our editing process. Keep in mind FCPX did not have all the metadata it has now when it first launched. Keywords, keyword collections projects etc have changed over time. I don’t doubt your method is very good. I say teach it. I would just always let the students know that things change and they should always be looking out for new editing paradigms. That is all I was hinting at. You didn’t edit like you do today 36 years ago using 3/4″ tapes. Things will evolve and change requiring a paradigm shift. Having said that I am not sure you always have to grade (as in favorites and rejects) or always add keywords. I think most of the time that would be helpful and FCPX does a good job at it.
-
[Shawn Miller] “[andy patterson] “It is one thing to have a Kong-Fu or Aikido practitioner practice wrist lock and deflections with friends in the dojo. However when they enter the real world the wrist locks and deflections do not work as they has practiced. In fact it does more harm than good.”
LOL – that’s a bit like saying that you can’t produce high end work using FCPX because casual users aren’t capable of producing great work with it. I think you should pick a subject that you’re more knowledgeable about to make your points. ☺
Shawn”
For starters I was not comparing FCPX or Adobe to any type of martial arts. That my friend is your bad. I am saying that everyone thinks there editing paradigm is the best and that their NLE is the best. Martial artist think their style is the best an their technique is the best. I always say there are cool thing about FCPX, Avid, Premiere and DR. You kind of messed up a tad bit there didn’t ya?
Nothing I posted would suggest FCPX cannot be used for high-end work. I think people might think you have a hard time grasping analogies. Having said that just simply owning FCPX does not guarantee that the user can produce a major motion picture with it. That might have been the better way to word it and more accurate.
-
[andy patterson] “For starters I was not comparing FCPX or Adobe to any type of martial arts.”
I think you completely missed my point – saying this:… “It is one thing to have a Kong-Fu or Aikido practitioner practice wrist lock and deflections with friends in the dojo. However when they enter the real world the wrist locks and deflections do not work as they has practiced. In fact it does more harm than good.”
…is like saying this… “FCPX cannot be used in high end workflows because inexperienced editors cannot use it to get professional results”
I’m saying that you don’t understand martial arts enough to know that your statements are incorrect, as incorrect as someone who doesn’t understand FCPX, but insists that it can’t be used in high end workflows.
[andy patterson] “You kind of messed up a tad bit there didn’t ya?”
I really didn’t. BTW, its Kung-Fu or Gung-Fu… not Kong-Fu… ☺
[andy patterson] “Nothing I posted would suggest FCPX cannot be used for high-end work. I think people might think you have a hard time grasping analogies. Having said that just simply owning FCPX does not guarantee that the user can produce a major motion picture with it. That might have been the better way to word it and more accurate.”
Please see my first comment. ☺
Shawn
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] ““good editing”. How do you define it?”
That is the main question. I think we have to look to the work itself. In addition, the knowledge of craft is the practice of the craft but that is not knowledge. For knowledge, we see the doctor tells the patients how to be healthy; how the Cow tells the “new” editors the craft. At that point, in my view, our knowledge becomes/is (don’t get me started on that!) moral philosophy.
[Franz Bieberkopf] “the functional difference between the various platforms is small enough that there is not much influence on editing approach”
My observations of this forum (and I won’t go search for posts) the “FCPX-bar theorists” (haha) often say something like X is revolutionary. They consider the new editing metaphor as causing their editing. Simon’s post also did that. His timeline “causes” editing. The discussion between Jeremy and Simon was my favorite part of the thread.
-
Acquisition is more like knowing by doing and errors are seen as developmental. Learning is more like knowing by being told and errors as seen as mistakes.
-
It’s interview footage — all of it — all at once.
He cuts the radio edit. This point, up until Andy raised it, has been overlooked in this supra-meta-thread. Simon concedes the point. His sculpting is tailored to this radio edit deliverable.
Then he looks at the picture framing quality etc.
Then he finds b-roll.
I think you’re quite correct, Mr. Patterson.
-
I’m also a wrestling folk style wresting referee. For me, UFC is a joke of a “style.” It needs some kind of standing 8 count so the referee can control the action. Right now it’s either let someone get pounded or call the fight preemptively.
-
Just for the record–I have never, ever even remotely thought: Hey! That Shawn, he has a hard time grasping analogies. I have found, over the years, that have superior skills in both producing and understanding analogies. You are, in fact, damn good at it.
As for Kong-Fu–I believe those are the set of teachings and philosophies that accompany the quest for the acquisition of a 12th level Donkey Kong belt. I could be wrong.
-
[Chris Harlan] “Just for the record–I have never, ever even remotely thought: Hey! That Shawn, he has a hard time grasping analogies. I have found, over the years, that have superior skills in both producing and understanding analogies. You are, in fact, damn good at it.”
Thanks Chris, that truly means a lot to me. ☺
Shawn
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up