-
The Question – An Update On My Choices In NLEs
-
[Chris Harlan] ” I was using proRes, which Avid works with really, really well.”
If every camera shot a version of Pro Res wouldn’t life be grand?
David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.comSales | Integration | Support
David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.
-
My old piece of advice still seems, IMO, to hold up: the best NLE (for you) is the one you are most comfortable with; the one you love learning and working with daily to the point of mastery. Mastery of a slower, less-capable machine often matches or beats a faster machine with an operator who only knows the basics. Choose based on what you need it to do, obviously, but also on how well it matches the way YOU want to work. because you will spend so many hours chained to the thing, you really want to pick one that keeps you happy and works the way YOU like to work.
I’ve had FCP7 for many years at work, but can’t ever say I feel I’ve “mastered” it, having never had real, formalized training in it. I still learn things I didn’t know about 7 on a weekly basis, by following you folks on the COW. I knew 4 linear edit systems and 2 previous NLE systems (Postbox, Discreet Edit*6), and with those in my experience base, did OJT learning of FCP6 and 7 in the course of daily work. Am I fast in FCP7 now? I think so, fast enough to work at about the speed i can think, but probably not as fast as many more of you out there.
Then I did formal training on FCP-X, before really getting my hands on it. I had some trepidation about X and avoided it for a long time. That training made a huge difference, in that, when I did finally start cutting a project, there was very little of what I call “guess-and-press”. That, plus the transcoding in the background, made the first project come together with surprising speed. Granted, I didn’t ask for too much compositing or complicated graphics. Still, it seemed spooky-fast to me. I no longer fear it. Now I choose between working in 7 and x based on the needs of a particular project and not because of habit or phobias.
And I think that confirms my opening thesis: it’s about familiarity with the interface, and being comfortable with a way of working. Then re-enfoircing that training with regular practice, and pushing a little harder each time, trying one new little trick, each time you work on something. It’s to a large point, psychological, as much as it may be technological.
-
[David Roth Weiss] “If every camera shot a version of Pro Res wouldn’t life be grand?”
If ProRes were an open standard, yes. I’m not comfortable with the degree of industry reliance on proprietary Apple technology.
In other news, GoPro’s CineForm is now SMPTE VC-5.
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[David Roth Weiss] “So, while you and others might find X faster for short form projects, many may argue that it’s not necessarily so fast when working on long form projects, such as feature films.”
The design of X is meant to cull through massive amounts footage. The more footage a project has the better X is at doing what X does.
In no way does this entail anyone has to use it for their work or that anyone must like the design.
I would be curious why folks think it is not faster for a feature or a documentary.
-
[Richard Herd] “The design of X is meant to cull through massive amounts footage.”
Richard,
It’s generally true that NLEs are designed with this in mind.
[Richard Herd] I would be curious why folks think it is not faster for a feature or a documentary.”
The inverse question is at least as interesting – why do you think other systems would not be faster?
Franz.
-
It kind of seems like the market place would determine speed, at some point.
If a client is paying by the hour, and they are paying more because a editor is using a program that is not 64 bit, seems like they would complain. Or just go someplace else.
I can see if they don’t have anything to compare it to, but at this point there are plenty of houses with choices.
-
[David Roth Weiss] “If every camera shot a version of Pro Res wouldn’t life be grand?”
Or DNx. I do get h.264 from time to time, but that’s usually for the sake on high capacity Internet delivery, and its something I always transcode to whatever I’m natively working in. But, yeah.
-
[Walter Soyka] “In other news, GoPro’s CineForm is now SMPTE VC-5.”
Cool!
-
[Walter Soyka] “In other news, GoPro’s CineForm is now SMPTE VC-5.”
Great news. CineForm is awesome.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
https://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums -
[Franz Bieberkopf] “[Richard Herd] “The design of X is meant to cull through massive amounts footage.”
Richard,
It’s generally true that NLEs are designed with this in mind.
[Richard Herd] I would be curious why folks think it is not faster for a feature or a documentary.”
The inverse question is at least as interesting – why do you think other systems would not be faster?
Franz.”
It’s impolite to answer a question with a question 🙂
What I said has nothing to do with any other NLE: The more footage a project has the better X is at doing what X does. The argument that “X is for small projects and therefore large post projects should avoid it” is the last bit of the older argument that X is not for pro work. My bit of negation here is the more footage you throw at X the better X is and therefore it can be used on large projects.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up