-
The Real Menace of FCP X
The original promise of FCP X was great. Here was an approach that offered us a set of interesting new concepts and consequently some different ways of thinking about editing.
I for one never had an argument with that. Anything that helps us broaden our horizons, adopt a different perspective, see things with fresh eyes, is intrinsically heathy.
What has happened over the years however is that an army of FCP X adherents has driven something altogether opposite. (Not all of them – there are honourable exceptions.)
Instead of FCP X being a means of expanding our options, it has actually led many to narrow them down dramatically.
So far from broadening horizons, FCP X editing has become fossilised around a much narrower set of editing concepts.
In the process there has been a concerted campaign to actively invalidate many existing editing strategies that happen not to be catered for by the FCP X model, precisely because they are not catered for by the FCP X model.
If FCP X doesn’t facilitate it, then it can’t be a strategy worth using.
If an editor advances a stragegy that doesn’t fit perfectly with FCP X, his/her opinion must be dismissed as worthless, the more insultingly the better, regardless of pedigree, as happened the other day (shamefully) with Alan Bell.
FCP X must be seen to be the only possible answer to every editing situation and no rival solution can be allowed to offer anything of any value whatsoever.
Every thread on this forum ends with this same deadening message drowning out every other.
Editing is about adaptability and inventiveness. It’s about asking why you are doing what you are doing and whether you can come up with a better way. It’s about questioning whether the solution you used yesterday can be bettered today, and whether it can be improved upon tomorrow.
But nothing ever needs to be discarded. There is no hierarchy that says a new idea is automatically better than an old one. Everything is possible – all ideas are (potentially) good ideas.
It is about growth, evolution, the endless quest for something that can never be reached. It has no room for certainties.
FCP X has become the opposite of all that.
It has become the thing it always railed against: an obdurate, ossified obstacle to originality.
It has become the enemy of choice.
Instead of ideas, it has given us doctrine. Instead of emancipation, it has given us serfdom.
It is totalitarian and repressive. It has become pernicious. It is not the victim, it is the abuser.
It has also, to my mind, all but killed what was worthwhile in this forum, which at its best has hosted some outstandingly good discussions – conversations that grew out of a shared appreciation of the endlessly fascinating plurality of the world, conversations that are strangled at birth by the tyranny of a single dominant ideology.
Time to join Aindreas. He had the right idea a long time ago.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
42 Replies
-
One of the things that irks me alot in this forum and other FCPX forums – is when people say – X inst designed to work that way ie; your holding it wrong.
I’m positive I use Media Composer and Premiere in ways that weren’t part of its initial workflows and technique. Part of that came from experimenting, part I picked up from other users.
I still use stringouts in X, some would call me a heathen – it still works for me and helps me create the way I want to – not the way some dude selling tutorials wants me to because he says thats the fastest way.
I’ve said it before – I dont want to go faster – Speed is not something I advertise in my skill set although I’ve proven to be fast enough to compete in broadcast and theatrical marketing which is has blazingly fast turnarounds. I just want to create and be creative and have tools that help me facilitate that – lucky for us – no matter what road you head down, there’s plenty of tools available.
-
p.s. this should be a good one ????
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “Instead of FCP X being a means of expanding our options, it has actually led many to narrow them down dramatically.
So far from broadening horizons, FCP X editing has become fossilised around a much narrower set of editing concepts.
In the process there has been a concerted campaign to actively invalidate many existing editing strategies that happen not to be catered for by the FCP X model, precisely because they are not catered for by the FCP X model.
“There’s a statement about FCPX which doesn’t seem to be substantiated and it concludes with a statement which may say more about some users than FCPX itself.
I don’t see FCPX fossilized around specific editing concepts anymore so than any other NLE. They each have different foundational principles they build on. The foundation impacts design going forward. That’s the case for any NLE.
-
Wow,
From “isn’t important and nobody will EVER use this POS.”
To the “dangerous scourge of all things righteous in editing …”
Now it’s a “MENACE?” Holy Heck.
In 7 short years. That’s some monster progress right there.
Hint: Last time I looked, nobody here was forcing anyone to use this tool. If you don’t like (or, maybe irrationally fear?) X – Don’t use it.
See how simple that is?
(I wonder if this was somewhat triggered by that modest thread about NBC using X in NY and LA. Are non-X editors scared that it might keep spreading in influence and leave them behind? Relax. It’s not THAT hard to learn should doneone ever decide their attitude toward it might have been a bit – misguided.)
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
Surely you can’t be serious. ????
-
Clearly you didn’t even read the post.
On top of that – everyone in this forum is an X editor to some degree, so the whole NON X people feeling threatened doesnt work anymore.
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “It has also, to my mind, all but killed what was worthwhile in this forum, which at its best has hosted some outstandingly good discussions – conversations that grew out of a shared appreciation of the endlessly fascinating plurality of the world, conversations that are strangled at birth by the tyranny of a single dominant ideology.”
Those that continue to be obsessed with spouting endlessly about the greatness of one NLE over another are losing sight of the forest for the trees. Editing is all about the craft of storytelling and so whatever device allows one to tell a great story is the right device.
I also agree that speed is not the end goal. Putting video pieces together takes time. Not because the equipment used is slow but rather because you need to look through the material over and over and over to get a feel for what it is you want to build. Then you have to revise and revise and revise to make it good. This takes time and it’s ok. I don’t judge my success on how many pieces I edit in a year. I want the pieces I do cut to be as compelling to a viewer as possible because if they aren’t then I haven’t done my job very well.
Many editors who don’t use FCPX as their main edit tool at least respect that it has a lot of to offer. End of story.
Now back to the real thing that we do as professionals – tell stories. A conversation about how folks approach building story arcs and how they assemble pieces for maximum impact on the viewer is about a thousand times more interesting and relevant to me than which NLE they use to create that story.
Windows 10 Pro | i7-5820k CPU | 64 gigs RAM | NvidiaGeForceGTX970 | Blackmagic Decklink 4k Mini Monitor |
Adobe CC 2018 |Renders/cache: Samsung SSD 950 Pro x2 in Raid 0 | Media: Samsung SSD 960 PRO PCIe NVMe M.2 2280 | Media: OWC Thunderbay 4 x 2 Raid 0 mirrored with FreeFileSync -
Agree about speed. First, speed is often just because you are used to something, you know the shortcuts, you’re comfortable. You don’t think two or three editors working on Avids to get “Gravity” finished in time are poking along because “Avid is slow.” They are flying and it’s not the software slowing them down, it’s the experimenting and doing complex things. Two, MANY people like to work in a deliberate manner. Think of a filmmaker like Woody Allen; he cranked out a movie every year, for about 30 years straight. He writes his scripts in longhand on a yellow pad. Because he’s thinking it up as he does it. Editing with string-outs and “selects” and alternate sequences … that is the kind of deliberate thinking that often goes into documentary editing. Sometimes, just fussing around with the material … moving it, removing it, renaming it, shuffling it … is how you get to really know the material. You cannot skip that step and push the “fast & good” button and magically the app adds in “reflection” with a dose of “good ideas” and applies a “brilliance” filter! DOING the work is HOW creativity works!
Doug D
-
Agree, Greg. This is what I was trying to say in agreeing with Neil.
Doug D
-
I agree with you, Simon.
___________________________________________________
Alexandre Gollner,
Editor, Zone 2-North West, Londonalex4d on twitter, facebook, .wordpress.com & .com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up