-
In-Action Story on FCPX and Focus
-
[James Ewart] “But for the wider world who go on what they’ve been told (production personnel especially), this is a great bit of ammunition for them to use over a martini or two on a Friday night when somebody sneers at them for admitting their latest production is using FCPX.
“If someone is sneering at you for using X, bringing up Focus isn’t going to do much, IMO, because that person will see it as an outlier, not a success story. Widespread adoption/acceptance in a market segment the sneerer finds relevant is the only thing that might start to sway them.
At some point, and I’m not directing this at you personally, people have to stop looking for external validation and stop throwing stones if they choose to live in glass houses.
I remember using Premiere (the original, not Pro) back in the day and getting looked down upon by both FCP users and Avid users. I think this is around the time I stopped worrying about what I used (and stopped being sympathetic to the whole victim mentality in post in general) because the same FCP users who would whine about being ridiculed by Avid users would never pass up a chance to ridicule Avid, Premiere or Vegas users. Hypocrites deserve what they get, IMO.
Even at the height of FCP 7’s popularity it was still seen as a lesser NLE by some (and some saw Avid as the lesser NLE)…
-
[Walter Soyka] “Well, it’s not permanent.
How you know when you’ve made a bad tagging mistake until you’ve realized that you made a bad tagging mistake?”
I think it’s very different. Especially with bins, where putting footage in them, especially if you are duplicating footage, is a much more finite operation. In order to find that piece of footage among thousands of other pieces of footage, you have to know what bin it’s in.
With X, you can click the library and look at all the footage (of if you’re like me, you keep footage in one event, and then tag it all from there, so I would click just the one Event). And if something is miss tagged, you can untag it, sort the browser by unrated clips, and rate it appropriately.
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “Clearly the view was that the advantages of FCP X were so overwhelmingly convincing that finding an editor skilled in the craft of feature film editing was not considered to be of importance.
“Be careful that you don’t equate experience with skill. Clearly Jan has the skill to cut a feature film. It was just not quantified (in IMDB credits). There’s no magic amulet required for cutting a film. The same skills are required for editing a good story whether it’s on TV, film, or the web.
Your hypothetical is also flawed because no one (not myself nor the directors) is saying that FCPX is a “superior” NLE. Only that it was the best choice for their chosen workflow. A better comparison would be the choice of a digital camera over a film camera. Sure, you can make a VFX spectacle on both, but the VFX workflow is a lot more streamlined when your entire workflow is digital. The decision to use a digital camera is one to fit the overall workflow of the film. You still need someone to frame and light the shots and shoot the thing, but maybe you want someone more versed with VFX workflows than one who isn’t so you can avoid the kinds of “gotchas” that have already happened when these types of workflows were in their infancy.
The unique element in this example is that FCPX is still a pretty new program comparatively, and with the resistance from the film editor community, they probably found it impossible to hire a veteran film editor who was willing or able to cut in FCPX. Probably wouldn’t have been an issue with Premiere because it shares a paradigm with Avid and Premiere doesn’t have the unreasonable hate attached to it that FCPX does. Does this mean they should throw out their entire proposed workflow because one guy doesn’t want to use one program? Or do you find a good editor and give him a break?
Andy
https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “With X, you can click the library and look at all the footage (of if you’re like me, you keep footage in one event, and then tag it all from there, so I would click just the one Event). And if something is miss tagged, you can untag it, sort the browser by unrated clips, and rate it appropriately.”
But surely finding the clip visually is non-trivial with the huge amounts of footage that tagging helps most with?
I think the bigger problem is not so much something tagged wrongly versus something wrongly untagged.
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[Shane Ross] “The fact that FCX was used in this case is no different.”
I disagree Shane.
Avid has been out there for a long time during his career. He could have gotten more involved with the process then.
But he didn’t until now.
If you jump around and talk about other directors you miss the point. You have to stick with this one guy and see how HIS behavior was changed and why.
-
[Scott Witthaus] ” I find this far less a puff piece than almost every Avid press release”
Funny. I think they are all about equal, except Apple’s have a more gushing tone (to me at least). But in the end, they are there to push one or more products, and as such, aren’t very instructive if you want detail.
[Scott Witthaus] “Yes, Avid still holds the vast vast majority of that niche but it’s getting bit around the edges. “
I doubt it in the area of big budget film and TV. Indie film and the commercial/corporate world, sure. In fact, if the Oscars and other awards are to be a yardstick, this has been a stronger year for Avid than in the past, since the only big non-Avid film (“Gone Girl”) wasn’t in the running. If anything, right now Premiere is on the rise, not X, looking at the large increase of Sundance entries that were cut on Premiere.
[Scott Witthaus] “You can be Hollywood with a computer and the App Store. “
Of course that’s complete baloney. Look at the list of tools they used, such as Nuke. Not exactly your kid with a Mac and some software. But yes, from an aspirational POV, it’s certainly true and the real point that Apple is promoting.
[Scott Witthaus] “It’s down to PP and X at this point for my students. I think it’s PS and AE that keeps folks I teach on PP, not the editing tool itself. X is the preferred editor where I teach.”
As we’ve discussed many times, my view is the diametrical opposite. Right now, I’m in the middle of my annual edit workshop. These are college students learning film technology to fill a wide range of below-the-line jobs. My little portion is a few weeks of editing – both lecture and hands on lab. Because of scheduling, this year I split the class in half (alphabetically) and did group 1 on Premiere and group 2 on FCP X. Each group had about 20-25 total hours of hands on to cut 3 commercials and 2 short long-form clips over 5 days (a short film and a scene from a film). Prior editing experience is none or very, very little. So this is a fly-by-the-seat-of-year-pants, boot camp approach.
I asked for a show of hands for prior experience. About 3/4 had some experience – mostly FCP 7 or Premiere. A few (3 or 4 per group) were “other” – Vegas, iMovie, etc. Mac/PC split was probably 50/50 at best or more PC. Sadly I see computer literacy among students declining over the years. They know Facebook and their smart phones, but actual computer ability is worse than before, IMHO.
So, as you can see – and I freely admit – these groups are pre-disposed towards a track-based system. The experience in the labs were that the group learning Premiere needed far less help from myself and my teaching assistant than I’ve ever experienced in the past. Conversely, the FCP X group really struggled at times with the concepts – including those with no prior experience. I think that if the classes were one month instead of one week, then the FCP X students would be doing well, but overall, I think both groups would be about even.
My assessment of what I’m seeing comes down to these three points:
1. A track layout is more logical to students. It’s better organized visually and each track has equal value. The whole primary vs. connected is confusing and the jumpiness of the magnetic timeline is problematic.
2. The elegance of the FCP X interface is also a curse. Because you can open and close panels as needed, students tend to be confused. With Premiere, it looks more daunting at first because of all the tabs, yet it’s easier to know where to go once you’ve been introduced to what each tab tells you.
3. The FCP X behavior is unpredictable and finicky. Students tend to drag clips to the timeline, no matter how much you tell them not to. By doing this, sometimes things fall into the primary storyline and sometimes as a connected clip, just because you weren’t accurate about how you pulled in down. Doing this with tracks works more reliably and there’s a more direct correlation between hand action and results on the timeline. As students move clips around on the timeline, things jump up or down to avoid clip collision. Students don’t really comprehend why it happens, even when you explain it to them.
When I discussed options before deciding, I got plenty of visceral negative responses to using FCP X and Macs, in general. And yes, along the lines of some of the posts that Bill posted. These were clearly in the minority, but it’s there. I honestly see those responses more among students than I do among pros, but I’m sure the students are effected by the chatter. However, when asking what they would have preferred me to teach (if the option would have been available) the overwhelming comment was Media Composer, when there was a preference.
[Robin S. Kurz] “So basically the exact same reaction *I* would have, if I sat down at the most recent incarnation of say AVID for the first time in about 8 years. No surprise there.”
I was actually talking about my experience with the students. See above.
Honestly for me, this story isn’t important because of FCP X, per se, but the overall workflow. Granted, a lot of that was facilitated by X – or at least the need for an external supporting ecosystem. Nevertheless, it’s those experiences that provide the learning, not the fact that a given NLE was used over another.
In both the case of “Gone Girl” and “Focus” the editorial teams went through quite a lot of testing to make sure they didn’t jeopardize the film. They provided valuable feedback to Adobe and Apple (I hope) that will benefit us all. That’s a good thing.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Andy Neil] “Be careful that you don’t equate experience with skill. Clearly Jan has the skill to cut a feature film. It was just not quantified (in IMDB credits). There’s no magic amulet required for cutting a film. The same skills are required for editing a good story whether it’s on TV, film, or the web. “
This is a truly extraordinary claim. Are you really saying that the “skill” of operating the kit is all that it actually takes to cut a feature film?
There is really nothing special that the top Hollywood editors bring to the table than an assistant working on a TV show wouldn’t be able to pull off?
I must have misunderstood you, surely? But what else am I to make of “There is no magic amulet required for cutting a feature film”?
[Andy Neil] “Your hypothetical is also flawed because no one (not myself nor the directors) is saying that FCPX is a “superior” NLE. Only that it was the best choice for their chosen workflow.”
OK, so what was so vital in terms of their workflow that meant it was so completely unachievable in Media Composer or Premiere that the only option was to hire a novice in order to be able to cut it in FCP X? I guess there are many things we don’t yet know but I’d be surprised to hear that there really was a deal-breaking factor. Beyond, of course, the desire of the directors to be extremely hands-on with the edit … which is quite another story.
[Andy Neil] “The unique element in this example is that FCPX is still a pretty new program comparatively, and with the resistance from the film editor community, they probably found it impossible to hire a veteran film editor who was willing or able to cut in FCPX. “
I’m not sure I believe this. I’m sure there are plenty of experienced editors who if approached would have agreed to get sufficiently familiar with X to be able to take on this job and do it very well. For my part, I’m always astonished that anyone thinks that X is that difficult or time-consuming to learn for an experienced and reasonably intelligent editor – it really isn’t, unless of course you have training to sell.
There is a desire on the part of X enthusiasts to claim that it is so ridiculously complex that it takes years of dedicated training to achieve anything like proficiency. I’m really not convinced by this. Experienced editors have adapted to many changes in their tools and while there are some that are resistant, there are plenty that are not.
The notion that all experienced editors are resistant to FCP X and therefore the only editors who can be employed to use X are those with assistant-level editing experience seems pretty far-fetched.
The reality us surely that Ficarra and Requa, whether rightly or wrongly, don’t believe that an experienced editor brings that much of value to the party.
Still, I wish them all the best with their movie and hope that the results prove they made the right choice.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com -
[Simon Ubsdell] “But am I really the only person who is a bit stunned that the technology was put before the talent in this case?
“Everybody has to have a first feature film. Why can’t this be this guy’s?
If people with more talent than him didn’t bother to learn the new technology who’s fault is that?
The only reason I learned X was because I didn’t want people to have that advantage over me.
Then I ended up liking it. -
[Walter Soyka] “But surely finding the clip visually is non-trivial with the huge amounts of footage that tagging helps most with?”
I guess it depends on what you mean by non trivial.
I can single click an event and speed through vast amounts of footage, or i can double click one clip at a time to load them in to a viewer and watch all the clips one by one in Legend.
X is faster and easier even when it’s wrongly tagged or untagged wrongly (which is a sort mechanism and easily rectified) than bins.
-
[tony west] “Everybody has to have a first feature film. Why can’t this be this guy’s?”
Agreed. But do check out his credits on imdb closely. This is a truly extraordinary leg-up.
And not just to cutting a small indie movie.
It’s a huge Will Smith movie with a big budget.
Something is definitely very unusual here.
I’ve got more feature film experience than he has and I can also use FCP X more than proficiently – nobody called me 😉
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up