-
Difference Between Final cut pro and Final cut pro x…
-
[Craig Seeman] “I suspect those rooted in “convention” have a harder time unlearning which is why we see comments claiming FCPX is hard to grok by some.”
FCPX is not hard to grok Craig – not at all, and frankly there is a canard in all this guff from you and bill about it being fresh and intuitive on the one hand, but on the other, that people who disparage it are missing some mystical insight (Bill is unbelievably bad here) and that it is their lack of comprehension that leads to their criticism.
This is, as the man says – passive aggressive, you are using a false assertion to state that those who disagree with you are intellectually inferior, unable to grasp the things that you yourself have mastered. In Bill’s case it allows him to self aggrandise his own insights and opinions, while questioning the intellectual elasticity of those who disagree with him. that said, if we didn’t let bill do that here, he would have to start feeding his urge to proselytise FCPX and the brilliance of his insights out in the real world, with unprepared strangers in supermarket queues say – so best he gets the outlet here perhaps.
the bottom line is that it is a false assertion – you know your way around it better than me, because you have used it more than me, you have a gut intimacy with it because you have used it in anger (have you?) but that aside – I’ve been over this software a lot and you have no insight that escapes me Craig, you are no smarter than those who disagree with you, and you have no reserved insight with regard to FCPX. There is nothing that has occurred to you about this software that would not casually occur to me, or any number of other people on this forum. We simply disagree with you as to the worth of this software.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] ” I’ve been over this software a lot and you have no insight that escapes me Craig, you are no smarter than those who disagree with you, and you have no reserved insight with regard to FCPX. There is nothing that has occurred to you about this software that would not casually occur to me, or any number of other people on this forum. We simply disagree with you as to the worth of this software.”
Are you currently so flushed with confidence after your “victory” over Jeremy on the PIOP thing that you claim the same insight about the intricacies of FCPX as us who use the software?
Steve Connor
‘It’s just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure” -
don’t be silly – you know what I’m saying above – we all have brains, we’re all editors – you don’t know anything about that software on a fundamental level that I don’t know, the fact that you’ve been in the wars with it notwithstanding.
I’ve dicked around with every part of it, I’ve grown to hate its handling of audio and waveforms with a deep abiding passion, i’ve grown to love the cc stuff with masking, I think the timeline is a joke, I think ranges are restrictive, I think a single superbin is restrictive, etc etc – this isn’t a forum of FCPX users having to explain to other people why they don’t get it – although you would very much like it to be that forum, its not.https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “don’t be silly – you know what I’m saying above – we all have brains, we’re all editors – you don’t know anything about that software on a fundamental level that I don’t know, the fact that you’ve been in the wars with it notwithstanding.
“Of course you do, you’ve “dicked around” with it.
[Aindreas Gallagher] ” this isn’t a forum of FCPX users having to explain to other people why they don’t get it – although you would very much like it to be that forum, its not.”
Don’t tell me what I would like this forum to be, you’re starting to sound like Bill!
Steve Connor
‘It’s just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure” -
no Steve – I AM BILL.
bomm bomm boohhhhhhmmmmmm.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
FCP legacy is to FCPX as AVID MC was to FCP legacy when FCP legacy first came out.
Some people loved it and dove in, others hated it. Others hated it for a couple of versions and dove in later. Same as it ever was…
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “This is, as the man says – passive aggressive, you are using a false assertion to state that those who disagree with you are intellectually inferior,”
It has nothing to do with intelligence which is specifically why I used the word “grok” which is on a different level (as used by ScFI writer Robert Heinlen).
I’d also go back to the language analogy. Children pick up their first language naturally. Then as one gets older it seems to be much more difficult for most people to learn a new language. Even knowing the second language isn’t quite the same as the first. As a long ago friend from another country once said to the effect, I know English because I’m now dreaming in it. Basically when you no longer need the “inner translator” you have an internalized, rather than translated, sense of the language.
I believe the same holds true for many skills and young people who have no prior advanced NLE skills seem to take to FCPX very quickly as I’m hearing from many instructors and trainers. They aren’t more intelligent. They are less encumbered though.
-
[Craig Seeman] “many skills and young people who have no prior advanced NLE skills seem to take to FCPX very quickly as I’m hearing from many instructors and trainers.”
and welcome once again, to craigs Gallup census of, you know, some people he talked to somewhere, about many other people somewhere, and the important thing is they’re all down with FCPX… ok some snark there.
[Craig Seeman] “They aren’t more intelligent. They are less encumbered though.”
craig – they’re using a massively reduced timeline – in my view, its the primary sin of FCPX. its simpler because its crassly simplistic and automated.
Its not a virtue, its an error.And they can like it all they want, but if they want a job, they need to learn Avid, and premiere – in that order.
Four premiere pro only positions on Mandy worldwide this week. new record there. not a single FCPX position advertised on mandy in the last 18 months.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Craig Seeman] “I believe the same holds true for many skills and young people who have no prior advanced NLE skills seem to take to FCPX very quickly as I’m hearing from many instructors and trainers. They aren’t more intelligent. They are less encumbered though.”
Craig,
It might be that they are “less encumbered”. Or it might be that FCPX re-enforces the conventions they know already (which I guess in your language would be “re-enforcing their encumbrance” or something). So it seems more familiar to their imaginings of what editing is.
FCPX is built on an A/B conception of editing which is a well developed and pervasive convention. It is also a simple idea which is easy to teach and easy to learn.
Or it might be something else.
Or it might be some anecdotes and vague generalizations.
But all this speed talk again (except where it takes “six months” to learn) – and little indication (once again) of what people find “faster”.
Franz.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “But all this speed talk again (except where it takes “six months” to learn) “
Before this becomes yet another stupid “mini-meme” let me try to derail it up front.
I think I was the person who first noted the six month figure.
I was NOT saying it takes “six months to learn how to use FCP-X” at ALL.
I was noting that like every other complex NLE – X takes months to MASTER.
I’ve always felt that one of the signature issues with X is that since it entered the market as inexpensive, downloadable, and controversial – part of which is that in the beginning, a cadre of highly experienced editors argued loudly that it was “dumbed down” from where Legacy was at that time.
Many felt that those meant that the program was somehow “simple” as well.
It’s not. At all.
The truth from my perspective is simply this.
If you’re a highly experienced editor who’s been conditioned over years that NLE operations happen in a certain way – it takes significant concentration to break those old expectations to allow the way X operates to become second nature.
If you’re new to NLE editing – the curve is lessoned since you’re not fighting pre-conceptions.
And most critical, X is a surprisingly DEEP software product. (Exactly as Legacy was!) that rewards constant use and study.
I’d expect it to be “usable” for simple editing tasks for most users (and especially those without pre-conceptions!) for basic editing tasks in a week or so.
After a month, most of the basics will be in place and you can function with it quite well.
After six months or so – depending on your dedication, the tool should be second nature and feel as natural for editing as any other NLE.
And after eighteen months or so, you shouldn’t be surprised if you’re STILL learning to master some of the deeper and more complex processes built into the program.
That’s the reality as I experienced it.
YMMV.
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.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up