-
More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
-
[Walter Soyka] “In reading the comments here, I wonder if the majority of the posters in this thread have missed Simon’s point entirely. It’s right in the title: Always Be Editing. “
Well Walter, I just don’t see this point as consistent with sculpturalists acknowledge that when I started talking about making precision edits inside my event browser some six years ago – what I was doing was an equally valuable form of l “always be editing.” – just in a form more consistent with my desire not to LEAVE the benefits of reproducible decisions behind whilst doing it.
Perhaps I’m mistaken, but if one just dumps everything on a Timeline and then goes all sculptural – EVERYTIME you make a removal choice, you can’t really easily reconsider. You have to go out and get the whole chunk you’ve sculpted from – and start all over with it.
Which, in a sense, it’s kinda willfully adding destructive alongside reductive isn’t it?
Oh well. The sculptor is the ARTIST because he or she must COMMIT, don’t you know.
But of course, silly me in thinking I was building ACTUAL useful constructions before I entered my storyline – not sculpting like the big boys – so I suppose I must remain, merely a bricklayer.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
Bill –
Have you tried Simon’s method?
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
[Oliver Peters] “Where the communications break down in this discussion is that the folks that advocate for only X’s approach don’t want to acknowledge that others have also been using X for 6 years and come to a different conclusion. That’s why it’s unproductive to frame this as an X versus others discussion.”
Well, theres’ actually another equally valid interpretation of this thread.
That the original post “as written” was pretty rude.
And NOT because it was about FCP X.
It was rude on a level beyond that.
The reasoning would be that it artificially divided people who are working editors – into distinct classes (whatever those classes might have been) and offered a clear implication that one of those classes of people was “better” than the other.
If the opinion expressed had been was ONLY those who cut on AVID are trimming “sculptors” and if someone elects to trim in Premiere that makes them a dismissible trimming “bricklayer” – wouldn’t that have been just as rude a concept to express in a professional editing forum?
Rude because if you simply ACCEPT that as true, you would be implying that an entire class of editors is less worthy of esteem than another not by virtue of their skill, but exclusively by virtue of their professional tool choice.
And publicly implying that type of thing is kinda what rude means, doesn’t it?
I’m just asking.
????
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Simon Ubsdell] “And apologies to everyone for my clumsy bricklayer metaphor. I have great respect for bricklayers of all kinds whether real or metaphorical.
“So sculptors and painters then, bricklayers are out? 😉
Edit: Sculptors and Stone Masons, maybe?
-
As if we need another perspective… ????
“…subtractive editing can rarely do more than shorten the ordeal of watching the result.
Genuine video editing is not subtractive, but additive. Starting with nothing, you purposefully select and place one shot after another until they add up to a program. Notice that you don’t select what to take out but what to put in.”
https://www.personal.kent.edu/~lhanson/whatisediting.htm
-
[Bill Davis] “That the original post “as written” was pretty rude.
And NOT because it was about FCP X. “
I think there’s been an attempt by a sub-group of folks within this thread to emphasize that the debate isn’t really about the edit systems and instead it’s about the overall approach to the editorial process.
What seems to be getting lost in all of this is the fact that the tools used to craft visual stories are ever-changing. For me, my NLE experience began on a media100 system and then I migrated to Avid, then to FCP and now Premiere and on occasion FCPX. And over the years the tools have always just been a means to an end. The most important things I’ve learned from other editors are stylistic items related to how to most effectively tell a visual story.
It’s good to learn technical tricks with each toolset but since the tools are ever-changing, developing solid storytelling skills are much more important in becoming a good editor.
Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
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) -
[Bill Davis] “And publicly implying that type of thing is kinda what rude means, doesn’t it? “
I think you are reading an intention into the article that wasn’t there. But it is about mindset and I do agree that editors fall into one camp or the other, but not necessarily always. I see that from personal observation of other editors that I work along side. Some editors shift between these modes, dependent on the stage of a project or type of project. No value judgement attached.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Michael Hancock] “I know which NLE you use. ☺”
Maybe next time go ahead a skip this part then “Which NLE are you using?” : )
[Michael Hancock] “My comment was more to illustrate how Avid and Premiere seem more adept at the stringout method because of FCPXs handling of sequences. “
Probably because if you are using X the way it was designed to be used you wouldn’t need string-outs.
[Michael Hancock] “It’s less than ideal”
Have you cut a doc using this method as a director or producer?
-
[Walter Soyka] “But I don’t think enough people have thought the ABE method through “
So you just can’t imagine somebody looking at this and not agreeing with YOU. They must not be thinking right.
[Walter Soyka] “or heaven forbid, actually tried it!”
Have YOU tried it?
[Walter Soyka] ” yet a number of folks have been very quick to do just that with Simon’s NLE-agnostic approach.”
I just asked people to explain how it’s more efficient then using the browser. If they feel it’s not, they can just say that.
[Walter Soyka] “Consider ABE with the same open-mindedness that you needed to adopt FCPX in the first place “
I didn’t like X at first, until I found it was more efficient than the way I was working before. Maybe this way could be.
Are you working this way on docs Walter” If so how long have you been doing it?
-
[Oliver Peters] “Simply go back to the earlier version of the duped sequence/snapshot and look. Same as you would do in X, once you delete a clip from a project (sequence) in X.”
Doesn’t sound more efficient than favorites.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up