-
So long, and thanks for all the fish
-
[Daniel Frome] “I’ll just add my own personal story that Edius is indeed a monster. It rips through anything, faster than any other NLE. “
From the reports I’ve read it seems like a great NLE, why hasn’t it achieved broader acceptance in the industry?
Steve Connor
“FCPX Agitator”
Adrenalin Television -
[Steve Connor] “From the reports I’ve read it seems like a great NLE, why hasn’t it achieved broader acceptance in the industry?”
Well, I’ll pick my own nose here: because for years and years I didn’t really look beyond FCP and the Mac; happily repeating the mantra of crash prone Windows, Blu-screen of death etc. etc. Until I had to use Windows for jobs I couldn’t do on a Mac, and then X came along. It just seriously changed my outlook and gave way to a ton of possibilities.
I just take this as an opportunity to really evaluate things left right and forth. Some more, also for paid work, some just for fun. Most of the stuff is available as a trial so there is no reason to play around with it. And when there is a liking and I feel it suits my workflow in better ways than other apps I explore it deeper.
Next week or so I want to install Edius on one of my production machines and give is a thorough try because it’s seems pretty perfect for some of the things I have to do on a daily basis. -
Fast’s original 601 was magnificent from day one but never seemed to be taken seriously. Well not until Avid bought the Liquid line, to kill it, many manifestations later.
Alan
FlashXDR,XDcamHD,XDcamEX,D9 etc
FCS,AE,Combustion,LiquidSilver,Vegas,Edius,
G5,MBP,Vista64,XP -
[Bernard Newnham] “And Mr Sanders says –
“I really can’t believe that almost a year later we’re still having this basic argument.”
It’s because people still can’t believe they’ve been so betrayed by a company they relied on, even believed in, in some cases. Simple as that.”
Bernard,
Sorry but you are selectively quoting – or maybe I didn’t make myself clear. My point was I can’t believe that after almost a year since FCP X was released we are still seeing people slam it without having used it. It’s not like you even now have to pay for it to play with it!
[Bernard Newnham] “And that’s the thing about NLEs – after a time of trying out various ways of doing things, everyone settled down to a common way of working. Not much is different between one screen and another. A bit like cars with the accelerator pedal on the right – it works so don’t screw around with it. Anyone, even Apple, change things at their peril. Ir’s an amazingly arrogant thing to do.”
Or you could say: “Congratulations, Good on them” Thank heavens for the people who set out to try out something new, who want to innovate and see what they can come up with. Thank you to the people who say: “Well how could we do this differently with the tools (hardware, OS, software) we’ve got now”. TV’s all file based, everything is in clips – how can we make sorting and finding stuff easier. Because that’s half the battle sometime.
And so what if they fail, we in TV (especially in reference to the BBC) spend so much of our time saying there’s no room to failure, everything must be tested and focus grouped so everything defaults to a formula and there’s no innovation. I don’t want to live in that world. I want people to try and find new ways of working and doing better.
Not everyone thinks that the old track based way of work was the best way and at least now we have an alternative.
Personally, I say kudos to Apple and Randy for giving it a go.
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
Just a short follow up to my earlier post.
The demo version of Edius does not come with the additional third party FX that are supplied with the full version. Of these, I find the Mercalli stabilising software the most valuable; it only stabilises the selected part of the clip, is incredibly fast and is one of the best that I have used.
Wipes are found in the SMPTE section of filters.
A software bridge provides access to After Effects Plug-Ins.
I think that the FCP X chroma inlay is perhaps a little easier/better than that of Edius, but that is not to say Edius’s is unusable and there is a very good third part plug-in available (can’t remember the name, offhand).
Edius’s audio capabilities may be limited for some, but you can export XML.
Its multi cam editing is very good.
And finally,
I remember editing video tape with Ferrofluid and a razor blade, so that dates me!!
Geoff
-
Edius does have a small but stable footprint in the news industry. As for why it didn’t grow bigger? I think it does over all have a little less capability then FCP7 or Avid. Back when I used it it will didn’t have 10bit support… but that’s been solved now. I’m not really sure to be honest.
-
First Michael, let me just say, not to put you down BTW, but you’re a bit late to the party here, everything you’re saying has already been discussed, argued, debated, and reiterated hundreds of times on this forum.
[Michael Sanders] “I still regularly meet editors who happily pronounce FCP X as “the most utter piece of crap ever” – despite never having used it, or in most cases actually played with it.”
There you go, that’s an argument that’s been bandied about here forever. To which I’ve responded over and over by asking, “do you actually have to jump off a bridge to know the fall is not going to be good for your well-being?”
More to the point however, there are many who may not have tried it and many who may have only used it sparingly, but there are also many admirers of X here who have dug quite deeply into the app since day one, but who have just recently expressed their frustration with some of the most basic tenets of the new paradigm. So, please, don’t use that tired generalization here try to support your side of the argument, it’s been tried over and over again here and it really infuriates a lot of people now.
[Michael Sanders] “Actually thinking about it the fact that I bothered to investigate FCP X so deeply I think is testament to my professionalism – what would it say about me if I said to my clients, “Oh, people told me FCP X is crap so I haven’t bothered””
No one said you were a bad guy for trying X or even using it. Knock yourself out if it works for you… But, if you can’t understand why it doesn’t work for others, or even why they just don’t like it, then perhaps you don’t fully understand collaborative and mission critical workflows, and you might consider reading more posts here, because some pretty smart people have explained their issues with X unemotionally and very precisely.
[Michael Sanders] “One last thing, just don’t tell my clients I’m doing it faster on FCP X – or they will expect lower bills!”
You’re not the first to say this one either Michael, and frankly I’ve begun to wonder who’s actually saving time with X. Picture cutting may well be faster, and as a cameraman that might explain why X works well for you. However, most non-fiction, unscripted, and reality-based projects are built upon an audio bed or “radio cut” first, and several editors who have thoroughly explored X have expressed a great deal of frustration with the magnetic timeline and it’s lack of precision, claiming that instead of saving them time, they’ve had quite the opposite experience.
Of course, there are also instabilities and other issues to consider as well with what is really just beta software at this point. Not to mention, there’s a learning curve that requires users to wrap their heads around a completely new workflow and new ways of just approaching what might otherwise be a simple edit. That can take up a lot of valuable time that some people may not have or may not want to spend until they’re completely satisfied that FCPX will be useful in their own editing ecosystem.
David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.com
http://www.ProMax.comDavid is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.
-
David,
I know its all been said before – I’ve said it here and other places over and over again. So in that we are in agreement.
As for your comments on editing, cutting etc.
Perhaps I’m being a bit unfair to myself as to be honest I’ve cut plenty of material over my 23 yrs in the industry (I know that’s not a huge amount really). This includes a vast number of hour long doc’s, news segments, current affairs programmes, a bit of drama and a lot of corporate talking heads and the odd high end corporate.
So I do understand why people don’t like it and I have no problem with them. Its the people who haven’t bothered to try it who irk me, I think there’s an awful amount of difference between a bridge fall and trying a new piece of software. Which, yes does mean relearning how to do things – but that’s not the worst that can happen to a person.
As I’ve said over and over again, now we have a choice, and if track based editing works better on your programme then great, Avid and PP are there for you. I know people are pissed at Apple for what they’ve done. I was at first but I know think they are very brave for trying something new and innovative.
And FWIW there are a few project’s I’ve done recently where I sat down afterwards and thought it would be quicker on a track based editor. So I haven’t totally drunk the Kool Aid!
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
[Geoff Addis] “Its multi cam editing is very good.”
It’s very good if your cutting a simple music piece, or anything where you merely want to be able to change camera angles, but it’s totally inefficient if your looking to cut with any degree of complexity. Wish it wasn’t so, I would absolutely give it a look if it’s multicam were more capable.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
Herb,can you explain a bit please. I’m not an experienced editor but you imply that multicam can do more than effectively operating as a ‘live’ switcher to recorded clips. What am I missing here?
Cheers Alan
FlashXDR,XDcamHD,XDcamEX,D9 etc
FCS,AE,Combustion,LiquidSilver,Vegas,Edius,
G5,MBP,Vista64,XP
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up