-
FCPX is not used by professionals and only suitable for editing home movies!
-
[Ronny Courtens] “If you see your face appearing here and you don’t want it to, just click on your photo and select Remove. You have full control over this.
– Ronny”
Yes, Ronny, that’s good to know, but he may not even know his face is up there, and he didn’t put it there, which is the only point I’m trying to make. But, I don’t want to further interrupt the glee you are all having from burning him at the stake, so please continue. Sorry for the interruption.
-
I remember during my college years at UT at Austin when FCP was first mentioned. At that time some TA’s were using it for rough cut to later generate EDLs to move to an Avid. The filmstudents interested in editing were using Avids, and none of us took Final Cut serious.
When I moved to Berlin in 2000 I started as a trainee at DW-TV. To my surprise I had to learn A/B Roll editing, since they only had one Avid at the time, and 12 A/B Roll seats. During the transition to Avid there was a lot of complaining, i remember one of the old school editors getting all flustered because i was clicking my way through frames with the keyboard, and it annoyed him…Avid was an established software at that time. the freelancers adapted very quickly, many already working with Avid in other places anyway, but many among the tenured editors use it reluctantly still to this date.
In 2001 I started playing around with FCP 2, and later started working for a commercial director. Das Werk in Berlin was not to happy when they had to deal with FCPs mediamanagement, since it didn’t make shorter clips when consolidating projects like Avid does. It almost felt like we had to apologize for using FCP.
Till 2005, other than working for the commercial director, there was almost nothing high end in Germany with FCP.
Mostly small start-up Postproductions. During that time i got hired for Star news internet stuff. Now that i think of it i got my first FCP TV broadcast job in 2010..:-)) The majority of big houses in Germany are still mostly Avid, and if at all have only accomodated FCP. Studio Hamburg is the only big player i know of seriously using FCP Legacy.i don’t think FCPX needs the upper elite to succeed, it needs to convince the new generation, and eventually it will be part of an elite toolkit, as much as Premiere and Avid will continue developing. And lets not forget that decisions are not just if a NLE does this or that, but whether its runs on the platform you like using.
And the question of who is more professional is kind of irrelevant. The changes and ground breakig things usually come from the younger less established crowds, who still feel that drive to need to prove themselves, or due to financial constraints decide to edit at home.
You know, its kind of funny, with all this talk about what and who’s professional, its TV broadcasters starting to realize that YouTube is the one making groundbreaking moves. I havent heard of internet moving towards TV, I don’t know of any you tube producers using big shoulder cameras or expensive HD decks. I do see a lot of VJs at DW-TV using small cameras and editing on laptops. Twitter and iphone videos are used by big news broadcasters.
“Always look on the bright side of life” – Monty Python
-
our whole department has recently transitioned to fcpx and we are one of the major broadcasters in the country so from my perspective i would have to say that makes it pretty darn professional……why would kevin use fcpx for home movies when he has avid? seems like a rather dumb statement to me…maybe avid is too complicated for using on home movies! maybe the simplicity of fcpx is its strongest feature….maybe fcpx allows him to be more creative……thats like saying you use garage band for your podcasts when you have protools or logic sitting on your machine…..huh?
-
I believe it’s up there due to several of the tutorials he created for FCPX.
-
[Andy Branner] “And that’s exactly where the same special pleading comes in that Kevin thrives off of. Moving the goal posts to fit your argument. Sorry, I don’t buy it. Because that kid edits videos for a (damn good) living. Period. “
Completely irrelevant. No more valid than anyone else’s vanity production. Fine, he makes money. Has no bearing on any part of the industry that I work in, nor probably most of the folks on this list. There have been people making money with iMovie (old and new), Vegas and Movie Maker. It simply doesn’t matter.
[Andy Branner] “By the time they are full fledged EDITORS (whatever that ends up meaning) there won’t even be “broadcasting” or “film” as we know it anymore! “
You are making the common mistake of confusing the craft with the distribution media.
[Andy Branner] “Dude… SIXTH GRADERS and I find the whole thing, custom lower thirds and all although long winded, pretty amazing. And whether you agree or not, I say there is no way they would have even gotten close to a similar result with Premiere and I won’t even mention a MC.”
The piece is good, but your assumption simply is not true. I’ve participated in teaching and have judged video productions and video competitions at various grade levels. Kids were doing this with Premiere 4 and even linear technology in High School more than a decade ago. The kids are smart and creative and with a good teacher to guide them, will do good work.
Ultimately we are talking about a tool among many tools. The tool neither makes nor breaks the artist or craftsman.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Chris Harlan] ” But, I don’t want to further interrupt the glee you are all having from burning him at the stake, so please continue. Sorry for the interruption.”
🙂 People do tend to get worked up when someone attacks the tools of their trade huh? I fall into it every now and again.;-)
Other than the stuff I said in the other thread, it really doesn’t matter to me. He’s entitled to his opinion, even if it’s wrong. lol The timing sure is interesting though. Hold on while I adjust my tinfoil hat….
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Charlie Austin] “:-) People do tend to get worked up when someone attacks the tools of their trade huh? I fall into it every now and again.;-)
Other than the stuff I said in the other thread, it really doesn’t matter to me. He’s entitled to his opinion, even if it’s wrong. lol The timing sure is interesting though. Hold on while I adjust my tinfoil hat….
“Yup. I’ve got no problem with vehement disagreement of anything he said. I just saw the mounting anger over his audacity in having his picture over the techniques forum, and simply wanted to interject a little truth in there, in that he didn’t put it up there. Ironic, it is; diabolical, it’s not.
-
[Nikolas Bäurle] “You know, its kind of funny, with all this talk about what and who’s professional, its TV broadcasters starting to realize that YouTube is the one making groundbreaking moves. I havent heard of internet moving towards TV, I don’t know of any you tube producers using big shoulder cameras or expensive HD decks. I do see a lot of VJs at DW-TV using small cameras and editing on laptops. Twitter and iphone videos are used by big news broadcasters.”
‘Old school’ media has the content that people want while ‘new school’ has the distribution flexibility people want. Both schools are gravitating towards one another.
YouTube is certainly trying to get the ‘premiere content’ that TV has (content that advertisers want to be associated with and audiences will pay money for). YT is partnering with traditional media companies to get more content and has put in over $100mil of its own to help fund original premium content.
-
I agree, but the spark of change comes from the new guy. TV will need YouTube to keep up with new ideas and Youtube needs TV Broadcasters to improve its quality. But more and more high quality post can be done at homestudios, you can get cameras for little money with high quality. Video on demand is working better and better. As a professional you won’t need to rely on the big players anymore to get your ideas out to a broad audience.
-
[Nikolas Bäurle] “I agree, but the spark of change comes from the new guy. TV will need YouTube to keep up with new ideas and Youtube needs TV Broadcasters to improve its quality. But more and more high quality post can be done at homestudios, you can get cameras for little money with high quality. Video on demand is working better and better. As a professional you won’t need to rely on the big players anymore to get your ideas out to a broad audience.
“I agree that the drastic drop in the cost barrier-to-entry over the last decade plus the rise of internet distribution has opened-up a lot of potential opportunities that never existed before but ‘Internet money’ is still peanuts compared to compared to ‘old media’ money.
From 2006 to 2011 my main day job was creating original web content and it is a rough, low budget world where underpaying (or not paying at all) is pretty much a necessity. By and large the people that are making good web money are either single players (ex. YouTube video-bloggers that have pretty much zero overhead costs) or owners of content aggregators/’studios’ like Maker Studios and Machinama. I feel like each week I hear of a new web based content distributor which sounds great as a content creator until you see how little these aggregators pay out.
I’ve seen some amazing pieces that people have done for little money but there’s no viable business model for it. Cast and crew members can’t make a living working for food, credit and the always popular promise of deferred pay.
From a technology standpoint (and a distribution standpoint) lots of things are changing but from a content standpoint the change isn’t nearly as drastic,IMO. I mean, Netflix has been very disruptive on the distribution side of things but do you think the production of “House of Cards” is really all that different than the production of a drama series by a cable or TV network?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up