Emmy award winning editor at NBC blogs about FCPX

[Mike Fernanandes]

Absolutely. I make my living the way I do because a while back I convinced some producers that as long as I was re-cutting their live switched shows anyhow, they should throw out the switcher, record all the cameras and let me cut it in post. Higher quality, same cost, more time
To me and if only too me. Multi-cam is like running a switcher its great for a pass but not in the long haul. Again I’m sure it awesome for some people and if you use it and love it a tip of the hat to you. I have more control and work faster with stacks. Give any two editors the same material they all are going to give you different timelines. End of the day it all gets flattened.

loudyeti.com

[Bill Davis]

[Bret Williams] “And aren’t they planning some sort of multitrack audio tools? Seems like it’ll be one of the better NLE audio systems if they add a mixer interface and make anyone happy.
“

In my feverish dreams – they do for audio what they did for multi-cam. An accessible, separate workspace that is task specific for audio. And heck, maybe one for Color as well.

If so, it would be very stormy days ahead for the haters.

“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor

[Mike Fernanandes]

DONE! I will see you there sir.

loudyeti.com

[Jim Giberti]

[Gary Huff] “While technically you can, is it going to be anything that anyone would want to watch?”

Actually yes, if you’re talented and understand story, of course it would be.

It’s not really a relevant question any longer.

And it has nothing to do with whether these are ideal professional tools.

The question itself has been long answered.

Besides it’s kind of an odd question to ask given that the most popular genre of TV, that “everyone” wants to watch, is reality TV – which takes exactly how much skill to shoot and edit creatively?

[Tim Wilson]

I think that our Loud Yeti friend has just given us the read of his Rorschach test, and I’m not sure he passed.

For most of this year, no matter how angrily a thread begins, it becomes MORE full of helpful hints and engaging discussion than not. This forum is far more viscous than vicious, and has been for a very long time.

I can only assume that we’re seeing something of a reverse Geneva syndrome. People who like X are so adamant about how many other people “don’t get it” that they’ve missed that they’re not under seige. They’re now the majority. It’s almost like overreaction to perceived slights has become a form of self-validation.

I didn’t see anything in the Loud Yeti’s post that I haven’t seen all over this forum every day, and throughout the COW’s article library where pro-X articles vastly outnumber the early anti-X ones.

For all the people for whom X still doesn’t, and may never, have the features they need, there are scores of other posters who have moved into the, “not now, but wow, there’s some cool stuff here, let’s see where we’re at next year” frame of mind.

Maybe I have a skewed perspective as somebody with no particular perspective, and I read every single post in this forum since April 2011. Every single one. All of them. I actually keep track of what everyone says, and chart the changes over time. The forum that this used to be and the forum it is now are two different things.

So where our friend the Loud Yeti tells haters to relax, I’m far more inclined to tell the players to relax. Reason — including reasoned rejection as appropriate — is far more the order of the day than not. You’re way, way out front here, and it’s okay to act like you’re not being persecuted. One option is to graciously accept a growing hegemony.

Of course, as someone who rarely graciously accepts anything, I heartily encourage you to select another option if you’re so inclined.

Tim Wilson
Vice President, Editor-in-Chief
Creative COW Magazine
Twitter: timdoubleyou

The typos here are most likely because I’m, a) typing this on my phone; and b) an idiot.

[Jim Giberti]

[Bill Davis] “n my feverish dreams – they do for audio what they did for multi-cam. An accessible, separate workspace that is task specific for audio. And heck, maybe one for Color as well.

If so, it would be very stormy days ahead for the haters.”

I’m well beyond the emotional aspects of this or whether people feel passionately for or against. It’s ayear later. Where past the theoretical and into practical reality – those of us who are producing with FCPX.

Yes, it has holes, and how they’re filled in the coming months is all that matters.

If they’re not filled then it’s another discussion, but PP has holes too. What current system doesn’t.

But yes Bill, if they add an audio component similar to that (and I do think they’re about to) then this new system will take a giant leap forward.

[Lemur Hayop]

I like The Yeti’s analogy about Home Depot. I guess it takes a creative mind to view the world in such a way.

I think FCPX is innovative, but people can’t or don’t like to give up the old stuff, even the youngest of young editors. They love that FCP7/Premiere legacy workflow. I started using PPCS6 and although it’s oldskool I like it. I almost dumped FCPX but I need a magnetic timeline for some projects. Ultimately I’ll use both, old and new.

[Mitch Ives]

[Bill Davis] “Honestly, this is not intended to piss anyone off, tho I expect, sadly, this it will do precisely that. But if I’ve learned anything here, It’s how to face and shrug off certain types of criticism. So setup your fireworks and start your launch sequences – nothing says “celebration” more than endless speeches – punctuated by loud sparkly noise! ; )”

Bill, I don’t think honest discourse pisses people off. What pisses people off is people who dismiss legitimate criticism, as simply being a hater (a term you frequently reference).

Since I’ve been on this forum a lot longer than you (the beginning actually), I’ve seen this forum progress through it’s various stages. While there’s always been topics of disagreement, it reached new levels with FCPX’s release. I think most people saw the potential of FCPX, they also saw the gaps. Are they being addressed, you bet… and nobody is happier about that than me.

What bothers me is when someone who lacks the the experience or framework to grasp a particular issue that I or someone has raised, while in between sips of Koolaid and out of ignorance, they criticize us for bringing up something they aren’t able “to get”. The failure isn’t ours, it’s theirs.

Is it not possible to like FCPX, and yet see which articles of clothing are missing? I would think that any enlightened person would think so, and I’m guessing you do.

Awhile back when I posted the keyframing issue I discovered, people were quick to point out that FCPX uses EaseIn/EaseOut as the default (unlike FCP7). Thank you, but since this isn’t my first rodeo, I knew that. My point was that I made them all “linear” and it still has the same problem. So I clarify that, and the topic goes silent. This is a reoccurring pattern… criticize the poster who says something that isn’t positive, and once he proves it to be true, ignore him. This tactic is right out of Saul Alinskey’s “Rules for Radicals” and it has no place here on this board.

I’d suggest that in the future, instead of acting like Enron and thinking we’re all the smartest person in the room, that when we see a criticism, we say “what is it they know that I don’t”, rather than assuming they’re wrong or don’t get it?

Does that work for everybody… cause it’d work for me?

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

“Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.” – Winston Churchill

[Mike Fernanandes]

Hello Tim
I feel as though there is confusion as to timeline here. The post I put on my blog was an older post from a different website i host written around last year. My at times aggressive verbiage was from the programs launched. Which I think we all agree was a wild few weeks.

I’ve since revisited the topic with more of an understanding of the program and a goal to put it through it’s paces on a different level. Up until then most usage as I imagine with most others has been casual. And as more and more updates were presented I was searching for other editors, shows or networks that were using X in a more real demanding way. And the only other television show I could find any sort of information on was Leverage (on USA).

I’ve felt that there were more people out there that secretly liked X and maybe WANTED to use if for their day to day but maybe like myself hesitant to do so with out seeing others drink the kool-aid first. Again I didn’t post this on creative cow. it was on my blog in hopes that maybe someone searching for a little nudge would leave a comment or two to discuss. But once it went live on Creative Cow I figured I should join the discussion and maybe we can all hold hands while we jump off that cliff of NEW and UNKNOWN together.

loudyeti.com

[Clint Wardlow]

Doesn’t matter what NLE you use (FCP7, FCPX, PPRO, or AVID). Twenty years from now no one is going to be able to open whatever file format is currently in vogue. 99.999% of our computer-generated art will disappear into the ether. Face it, we are the disposable generation creating disposable art for a disposable culture.

Wow, that had nothing to do with this thread, but it was great to get that little rant of my chest.