-
Smarter and Faster
-
[Neil Goodman] “I just really want to edit slower to be honest – all this fast fast fast stuff – I’m over here like my client gave 5 days to cut this trailer, I’m going to take all 5 days. Your not getting a cut from me early that’s for sure. If I have extra time – I experiment and come up with alts which are always appreciated by the client and my creative directors. “
And then there are those of us whose edit sessions are measured in hours, not days. And working through hours of footage to do it. It’s those scenarios that FCP X really shines. I’d also say it shines in large documentaries with tons of footage.
It also sounds like your clientele is not very price sensitive. Which is great for you. But I’d say pretty rare.
It really sort of proves my theory that the Hollywood world is sort of unique in the video world. Time and price are not as critical in project prioritization. I work in social media where time is the most critical factor. Pristine quality, meaning that extra last 5% improvement, is really largely inconsequential.
Different jobs. Different tools.
-
[Tony West] “You are not making the argument that X isn’t faster moving huge sections, you are just saying YOU don’t do it very often.
For folks that do it often, that’s huge.
“exactly – not part of my usual process but yes super beneficial for those that do.
-
So you would blamed FCP legacy for its $1000 price point because Avid was tens of thousands of dollars or would you blame Media 100 because it was thousands compared to Avid’s tens of thousands of dollars?
Or do you blame that digital video because it was significantly cheaper than 35mm film (or even 16mm film for news and indies)?
Or perhaps CMX was the problem?
I think the lower prices created more jobs and, apparently software only companies are still finding viable business models.
-
[Brett Sherman] “It also sounds like your clientele is not very price sensitive. Which is great for you. But I’d say pretty rare.
“As far as I know they pay the agency a flat fee for the first 5 versions, and then anything after that is extra. The budgets might be bigger than some other stuff for sure but even big clients are looking to save $ wherever they can, you wont believe how many times I have to replace music and sfx once a client gets the cue sheets. In general though there are willing to pay good money because they know there are going to get something cool but deadlines are pretty aggressive.
Its not easy to do a Trailer in 5 days. It really isnt – especially if your cutting from dailies.
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “he’s only showing how you don’t have to let it slow you down unnecessarily.”
I just don’t think this is that hard to understand. In travel (and indeed light passing through multiple mediums) a straight line is not the fastest route. The fastest route is to travel on a highway that may take you slightly out of your way. But because you’ve gone faster for that portion of the trip it outweighs the slower last portion of the trip.
And I’m not even conceding that these techniques are that slow. My guess is the difference between this and typical NLE timeline editing is pretty small.
-
[Brett Sherman] “It really sort of proves my theory that the Hollywood world is sort of unique in the video world.”
Well, Alot of these shows and movies have marketing budgets that range from the tens of thousands all the way up to tens of millions and beyond. So yea theres alot of money at play.
I mean when I client does a trailer or tv spots – they are usually paying multiple agencies to work on the same piece of content and they only pick one. Everyone gets paid though. So yea they have money to burn obviously.
-
It seems to me that what gets lost in these “speed” arguments is the prep that goes into the demo, which has wow’ed folks.
In order to move around big chunks in X with a lot of connected clips, you first have to adjust where the clips are actually connected, otherwise they won’t travel along correctly. This stage is usually skipped in the demo, because it was prepped beforehand. As a result, the process looks faster than it actually is.
I would argue that to do the equivalent function in a track-based NLE takes more keystrokes, but isn’t inherently slower. I’m not accounting for which one a given editor might perceive as more “fun”. Just that on face value, the end result will be about the same from start to finish.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Oliver Peters] “I’m not accounting for which one a given editor might perceive as more “fun””
mmm “snarky” 🙂
-
[Oliver Peters] “In order to move around big chunks in X with a lot of connected clips, you first have to adjust where the clips are actually connected, otherwise they won’t travel along correctly.”
Not necessarily. Just depends on what you are trying to do in the timeline. I move chunks all the time without adjusting where clips are connected.
Not to mention that when you get there stuff moves out of the way.
-
[Oliver Peters] “I would argue that to do the equivalent function in a track-based NLE takes more keystrokes, but isn’t inherently slower.”
It always surprises me to hear people make such a big deal out of this.
Did they really have so much difficulty doing this in other NLEs? How did they ever get anything done?
It makes you wonder whether they had in fact mastered all the different ways of achieving this result in those other NLEs (to borrow an argument that FCP X enthusiasts are fond of employing when championing its way of doing things).
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up