New Walter Murch FCPX interview (from macvideo)

[Bill Davis]

I don’t have to “research” much at all.

Here’s an example in your own text from the top of this thread above.

[Bill Davis] ”

What has Walter Murch said in this video that many here, myself included, haven’t been telling you all along right here?

Please, just name one thing?

However, if you can hear the words better, because they come from Murch’s mouth, then so much the better.”

You took a post of mine, and instead of concentrating on WHAT I said, you spun it toward WHO said it. You took ME personally to task for it, trying your best to paint me as someone to dense to “get it.” about Walter’s opinions (in this specific case)

You (and everyone else here) can clearly see the personal pronoun “you” (referring to me as an individual) appearing twice in the exchange above.

At issue here is that YOU clearly tend to focus your wrath (Roth wrath?) on individuals who annoy you rather than their ideas.

When *I* do that (and I’ve certainly been guilty of it, at times, myself) I do my best to step back and apologize when I realize that I’m dismissing the PERSON rather than arguing their ideas.

You probably don’t even realize that you consistently do what you did above.

Simple as that.

“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

[Scott Sheriff]

I watched theis a couple of times, and I have to agree with DRW, in that Walter Murch really just said what many of us have been saying all along. I wonder if the ‘occupyfinalcut’ crowd will pull out their bullhorns and shout him (Murch) down with talking points for not liking it. Or if he will draw a bunch of criticism for repeatedly using terms like “pro” and “professional” in the interview.

I also agree with those that thought there was a large amount of skepticism, with hints of sarcasm in his thoughts of the future of FCP and apple for professional use, as well as some of the features and ‘workarounds’ like using the pointing tool to lock audio clips. You would have to expect a guy in his position to be a bit more PC then some of us, but it was still clear he had a lot of disdain for X in it’s current form for professional use.

The one thing that really struck me is that Murch was so underwhelmed with X that he didn’t even bother (so far) to personally try it out. Here is a guy that has always been interested in new techniques and edits really big projects. But all the background rendering, 64 bit and all the metadata on the planet doesn’t seem to make up for the lack of tracks and traditional two screen setup. He had people explain it to him, and observed demo’s, and obviously was up to speed on the latest versions new features. But yet he wasn’t interested enough to pick up the mouse and try it out for himself on even a small project. I think that has ‘it sucks’ written all over it.

Scott Sheriff
Director
https://www.sstdigitalmedia.com

“If you think it’s expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.” —Red Adair

Where were you on 6/21?

[Thomas Frank]

[Jamie Franklin] “If you’ve spent a decade using a multi-track and like roles, I won’t understand it, but there it is. You do…I think roles are not an acceptable replacement in my opinion. Maybe for projects that are exceedingly simple. But even still, meh…”

Or you don’t want to adjust, I use to hear this from many After Effect users how horrible Shake was with it’s Node editor. Yeah…

[Jamie Franklin] “When the leading editor of the Final Cut legacy says ick and adobe crew are posting in the Final Cut X forums with a smirk…yes, somethings dying all right…

Some of us are in denial of course ;)”

Your right but again this has happened before with Final Cut Pro 3… and wash’t there a Editor called… Walter Murch… oh yeah.

Here is quote back in the day when I decided to go with FCP3 instead with Avid. “It’s for hobbyist and wedding-grapher. Now look at it.

I will stay optimistic with FCPX and in fact we are seeing a increase of use in our shop. The only problem we have it it is the option to send a signal out to a broadcast monitor. But we went with the old paradigm and let the colorist do his job after the edit was done in FCPX. 😉

[Jamie Franklin]

[Thomas Frank] “Or you don’t want to adjust”

You’re right. I don’t. I want to stick with a *better* way of control, sharing, fades, handles and placing it where I want without an annoying number of forced shenanigans…

I will keep repeating this as it never gets tired for those not tired of passing judgement on the whole “you don’t want to adjust” snark. There is nothing wrong with *adding* a feature or improving one. Wiping away a standard that works is not an improvement, doesn’t help bridge a laundry list of issues when dramatically restructuring a toolset.

This canard of early final cut versions being a comparison is a terrible waste of grey matter. And re-treading another tired old argument. Build on a decade of standards, truths and expressions. Don’t throw them out and defend their iMovie legacy import ability sillyness….