-
FCP X at the NAB Supermeet – Thomas Grove Carter live edit demo.
-
[Walter Soyka] “I’m all about iteration and reducing friction, but did you see this post a week or two from Franz about how activities that look like massive time-wasters may actually encourage ideation?”
I’ve never had a problem with something to “encourage ideation.”
Not to say I haven’t experienced that.
I’ve seen shows and visited museums and found those actions triggering all sorts of “creative ideation” – however, I’ve also sat in boring airport lounges and sat at my desk looking at precisely the same thing I’ve seen for 1,000 prior hours and had creative ideas pop up.
If someone else needs or wants a particular trigger for their creativity – even if it’s watching a render bar crawl across the screen – they should go for it.
I do not.
Moreover, I find that the excitement of losing annoyances like having to fix problems I’d once associated with tracked timelines makes me happy. And being happier is it’s own reward.
Just me, of course. I’m sure there are plenty of others who feel much more creative when they are struggling or miserable. I can only wish them well.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
walter, thanks for making us aware of that fascinating thread.
I fall heavily into the camp of needing a lot of time to figure out an edit. I thoroughly appreciate the efficiency tools that continuously improve in NLE’s but for me none of that efficiency is as important as taking the necessary time to let an edit evolve into what it’s supposed to become.
Adobe Premiere 2017.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management) -
That seems similar to what Walter Murch has talked about when shuttling through a reel on a Steenbeck. One interesting point he made was, when you shuttle through a reel, however fast, you are still seeing every frame. I don’t know if any NLE can claim that. 🙂
-
[Bill Davis] “Too much of my time used to get wasted in unproductive busywork.
Said another way, the less time I waste moving stuff around and fixing things – patching tracks, avoiding overwriting my prior decisions with new ones – the MORE time I can spend on what’s really the most fundamental part of editing.”I think that is in the eye of the beholder and I certainly realize you are speaking about your own personal experience. OTOH, there are a lot of editors who are familiar with both Premiere and X who would argue that X isn’t faster, in fact. But it really depends on what you do and how you do it. So saying ABC is faster or slower than XYZ is really pretty immaterial. For example, in Premiere if I want to go from a skinny video track to a larger one showing thumbnails, all I have to do is roll the school wheel of my mouse. No keystrokes or mode changes required. In that example, which approach is faster? So speed, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
[Bill Davis] “Basically, magnetism, clip collision avoidance, and persistent vertical as well as horizontal asset relationships – set once that will dependably remain how I set them initially”
These sort of things always strike me as a red herring. Clip collisions might be a nuisance to some, but it simply isn’t something most editors give a whole lot of thought to, outside of the converts to X.
[Bill Davis] “I don’t know anyone who’d rather do MORE busywork so they can be less efficient in achieving their goals.”
That’s really a false argument. Between myself and Steve Hullfish (Pro Video Coalition “Art of the Cut”), we’ve done a ton of editor interviews. These sort of concerns almost never come up in the folks we talk to and those are all editors at the top of their game.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
OK then, Oliver.
I guess your point is that I must somehow be too inexperienced or ill-equipped to judge this stuff, properly.
Which is certainly possible.
But it’s also a bit odd that for quite a long time I was a rare voice saying three things consistently.
A) The value of X was being widely misunderstood.
B) it was MUCH more capable at professional editing than the “iMovie Pro” branders were noticing.
And that
C) I was able to get more work done, more efficiently, with less struggle and more ease than before I adopted it.Regarding C), I will say I always pointed to SPECIFIC features of X that had caused me to form those opinions.
From the vantage point of today, it seems to me that in each of those three areas, time has not diminished, but strengthened the case for my opinions.
And I suppose the fact that there are now so many other working editors* successfully using X at all levels of editing, all around the world, just means there are quite a few others willing to fork over their CASH like me, who must be deluded in exactly the same way I must be.
So at least I have LOTS of company?
On reflection, I’m OK with that.
I simply see X as trying to move things forward.
And (just to support my “provocative” mini-brand) it’s competitors as largely too scared to rock anyone’s boat overly much.
How else do I decode that over 20 YEARS they have elected to keep things VERY comfortable and safe. I keep asking here and elsewhere for people championing the other big NLEs to point out any significant innovations in approach from their pre-2000 NLE Toolsets. I get mostly silence. It’s possible that the NLE designs of the 1980s and 1990s were just so PERFECT that there’s no room for much improvement. But I reject that. Loudly.
They’ve also innovated MASSIVELY in the PAYMENT space, (right?) subscription, subscription and free? – so why not in tool design? Is it largely because they see the financial space as WAY more important and wildly more deserving of creative effort than their actual creative tools?
You tell me.
Enough internet spouting off, even for the Debate space.
I’ll put the internet beer bottle protection net in place for the night and close the phone now.
(Does feels like old times a bit – somebody wake Aindreas and see if he wants to come out and play. Nostalgia rocks.
Take care.
* why else fork over $300 of your earnings for a digital tool unless you feel it has SUPERIOR earnings potential through efficiency? Right?
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Bill Davis] “B) it was MUCH more capable at professional editing than the “iMovie Pro” branders were noticing.
And that”Some people needed broadcast monitor support, multi-cam, closed caption and other various things that FCPX lacked upon release. It is great that it worked for you but it could not work for a lot of people.
[Bill Davis] “From the vantage point of today, it seems to me that in each of those three areas, time has not diminished, but strengthened the case for my opinions.”
I don’t doubt FCPX is much better than FCP7 but have you actually bought and used any other NLE? I know Premiere Pro CC is much better than Premiere Pro 1.0 but that would not indicate that Premiere Pro CC is better than FCPX.
[Bill Davis] “How else do I decode that over 20 YEARS they have elected to keep things VERY comfortable and safe. I keep asking here and elsewhere for people championing the other big NLEs to point out any significant innovations in approach from their pre-2000 NLE Toolsets. I get mostly silence. It’s possible that the NLE designs of the 1980s and 1990s were just so PERFECT that there’s no room for much improvement. But I reject that. Loudly.”
Who is champion the other NLEs? I think it is good to point out the facts about the other NLEs but I would not confuse that with champion the other NLEs. I let you know several times that Fast/Pinnacle/Avid had background rendering first but even Newteks Speed Edit had it long before FCPX. Also Fast/Pinnacle/Avid had GPU acceleration long before FCPX. If you want to get technical about it the Canopus Explode Plugins were GPU accelerated before Fast Liquid. Also some of the PC editing programs used Quick Sync before FCPX. Don’t confuse setting the record straight with champion a NLE.
[Bill Davis] “They’ve also innovated MASSIVELY in the PAYMENT space, (right?) subscription, subscription and free? – so why not in tool design? Is it largely because they see the financial space as WAY more important and wildly more deserving of creative effort than their actual creative tools?”
What does Apple charge so much to go from 8 GB of RAM to 16 GB of RAM when I can buy it myself for less than half the cost?
[Bill Davis] “I guess your point is that I must somehow be too inexperienced or ill-equipped to judge this stuff, properly.”
Have you ever bought any other software beside FCP? If so what what other NLE was it?
[Bill Davis] “And I suppose the fact that there are now so many other working editors* successfully using X at all levels of editing, all around the world, just means there are quite a few others willing to fork over their CASH like me, who must be deluded in exactly the same way I must be.”
No one said FCPX will not work. Keep in mind you make references to the past and back in 2011 FCPX was unusable for some people. By 2014 it was ready for most editing tasks but keep in mind Premiere Pro was also getting better and better. As of 2017 I don’t claim FCPX is better or worse than Avid, Premiere or even Edius. A lot would depend on where it is being used and who is using it and for what purpose.
-
[Bill Davis] “I guess your point is that I must somehow be too inexperienced or ill-equipped to judge this stuff, properly.”
Gosh. How did you come to that conclusion? My apologies if that’s what your take away was. Certainly not my point at all.
[Bill Davis] “And I suppose the fact that there are now so many other working editors* successfully using X at all levels of editing, all around the world, just means there are quite a few others willing to fork over their CASH like me, who must be deluded in exactly the same way I must be.”
Again, I’m not sure where you got that idea. No one is accusing anyone of being deluded. And for the record, I, like you, have been using X since the beginning. It’s just that we both have come to different conclusions after 6 years, because, while I see the value of X’s workflow, I don’t feel that it’s superior in each and every case. Can it be used? Sure – I’ve cut features, docs, spots, and corporate videos with it. Does it excel for everything? Not in my opinion.
But my point is that the speed argument is pointless. I can point out a dozen items where Premiere is better/faster and you could do the same with X. But if you don’t engage in the tasks that I do, where I feel that Premiere is faster, then it’s not relevant to your circumstances as an editor. And the same is true the other way around.
[Bill Davis] “I simply see X as trying to move things forward. “
What in the world does that mean? Forward to what?
[Bill Davis] “How else do I decode that over 20 YEARS they have elected to keep things VERY comfortable and safe. I keep asking here and elsewhere for people championing the other big NLEs to point out any significant innovations in approach from their pre-2000 NLE Toolsets. I get mostly silence.”
Maybe a lot of editors simply don’t want the approach Apple took with X. Or maybe most working editors aren’t as focused on software specifics to really care. They just want to get their pieces done. Familiarity with a given paradigm, when the mechanics are automatic, equals speed and efficiency for most editors. The “if it ain’t broke, why fix it?” argument.
[Bill Davis] “They’ve also innovated MASSIVELY in the PAYMENT space, (right?) subscription, subscription and free?”
Another red herring argument.
[Bill Davis] “somebody wake Aindreas and see if he wants to come out and play”
☺
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Don’t sweat it my friend.
You came to say:
Bill’s wrong about this view, and this view, and this view.That is EXACTLY what debate is supposed to be.
I welcome that.
I get to respond to your contentions by saying “l don’t think I am wrong, and here’s why…”
And the debate progresses.
And sorry but, in my view one legitimate part of the debate about editorial speed can easily include the motives behind the major vendors actions, which is why that part of my post about the financial model is arguably NOT a red herring at all. It specifically addresses why Adobe appears to be so disinterested in serious product workflow innovation that could provide more editorial speed to their customers – at least compared to where they laser focused their sights – which was streamlining their cash flow.
They are playing directly to the part of the market that is significantly more comfortable in the editing landscape of the turn of the century / than the landscape that might be evolving for the future. (There, THAT should light enough hair on fire to bring more players to the debate)
From my view, it’s hard to see any another reason for their primary focus in ONLY allowing access to the editing tool via CC. Could they not allow a persistent “bread crumb” version of the program that doesn’t always need to “phone home” to see if they need to turn your access off or give an editor legacy access to their own work? Of course they could. But they don’t. So what are we left to think? The early alt narrative was subscription was “so we can deploy features more rapidly.” But could THAT be the actual red herring here? Apple is similarly delivering quarterly updates (on average) while apparently having no trouble introducing significant new workflow efficiency features (arguably much deeper and more transformative for the user experience) than those coming to Premiere.
Actually, probably this ALL might be a massive RED HERRING exercise.
While we’re all wasting our time here, Google is quietly investing MASSIVELY on pushing a monster sized loyalty lock-in into kindergardens through 4th grade across the whole country. In the guise of “automating the classroom” for teacher efficiency, they’ve brilliantly set kids up with personal accounts that hold all their communications and schoolwork interactions – and set those accounts to follow the student for life, migrating across schools and even states.
When those kids hit their teens, you want to bet Google doesn’t have a series of cloud video editing/sharing apps just waiting for them?
Why waste time learning ANY new OS or App when you’ve already been using one since you were 6 years old?
Cheap Chromebook and your “private” cloud.
Our whole little game may already be rearranging virtual deck chairs on the Titanic.
And we just don’t see it yet.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
Bill,
While you were holed up in the FCP suite at NAB, Black Magic Designs dropped a bomb on the post community that seems to have been missed by most everyone engaged in this debate. I’m talking about the addition of Fairlight to Resolve 14.
Look down the index and see Marco’s review of Fairlight audio mixing suite. This is starting to turn heads and raise eyebrows. I’m just saying. Y’all better start framing the FCP debate as a FOUR WAY horse race: FCP, PPRO, AVID, and now Resolve.
-
[Mark Raudonis] “Look down the index and see Marco’s review of Fairlight audio mixing suite. This is starting to turn heads and raise eyebrows. I’m just saying. Y’all better start framing the FCP debate as a FOUR WAY horse race: FCP, PPRO, AVID, and now Resolve.
“Yes but Resolve still has those “turn of the century” tracks, with all the clip collisions and track patching problems that plagued us all for years……apparently
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up