-
what is editing speed ?
-
You’re appear to be content to NOT know what something is capable of AND simultaneously decide in advance that that it will NEVER benefit you.
I can emphatically state that learning a new editing paradigm when I am already well-versed in one that meets deadlines and makes money will never benefit me. Period.
I’m not suggesting for a moment that your paradigm is wrong for you, but it most certainly would be for me.
Basically, a judgement that the way you solve your professional challenges currently can not possibly improve.
Over the years of my professional life I have had to learn – by teaching myself mostly – many programs to solve my professional challenges, from Premiere Pro, Photoshop, After Effects, and Lightroom, to Maya and Lightwave 3D. I don’t have a problem learning new programs when I can clearly see the benefit of doing so. FCPX offers me nothing I can’t already do or don’t already have in Avid except new nomenclature and a trackless timeline. In my view, these are things designed to get iMovie users to upgrade more than they are to get working pros to toss everything they know about their current software and start a new learning curve in a completely new editing paradigm.
If you’ve embraced it, good for you! I’m sure you’re turning out absolutely killer work with it! But so am I while NOT using this “new” technology. I don’t need to learn a whole new way of doing things for cuts-only edits. That’s like getting a graduate level degree to play Mozart (to extend your music metaphor) when all I need is enough to play Chopsticks! And Chopsticks is all I will need to do for cutting basic news.
In the meantime, I’ll continue to play Chopin, Mozart, and even some Beethoven in Media Composer, which is where I feel most comfortable.
-
[Phil Lowe] “Well then I must be really confused about FCPX then, Oliver (and thank you for your reply) because everything I’ve read on these fora (mostly from Bill) indicates that you’re not really fast with it unless you use FCPX as it was meant to be used, that is by keywording every clip and range.
“This is a very important comment Bill
-
[Phil Lowe] ” I will have no use for it. Therefore, since I already own a Steinway Grand in Media Composer, I have no problem using FCPX like a cheap knock-off of the real thing, if that’s what it takes for me to use both. “
I think you’ll find FCPX is a modern Synthesiser, not a knock of of your old Steinway
-
[Steve Connor] “[Phil Lowe] ” I will have no use for it. Therefore, since I already own a Steinway Grand in Media Composer, I have no problem using FCPX like a cheap knock-off of the real thing, if that’s what it takes for me to use both. ”
I think you’ll find FCPX is a modern Synthesiser, not a knock of of your old Steinway”
Having tried to work with it for more than a month now, and having watched a number of tutorials on how to use it, I can honestly say I don’t like it. But then, I don’t care much for modern synthesizers, either.
I hate the trackless, magnetic timeline. I hate the audio controls (I much prefer Avid’s audio mixer), and I can’t stand skimming in the browser. But then, I don’t like the latter feature in Avid, either. I don’t like thumbnail view and rarely use it, even in FCP7. In short, there’s virtually nothing about the interface or controls I like. Having remapped the keyboard to match my Media Composer settings has made basic editing tolerable, but only so. For basic editing, that’s all I need. Going any further with FCPX, quite frankly, doesn’t interest me in the least.
I will do FCPX for my employer because it’s required. I will do Avid for my own work because I am fast with it and I enjoy it.
-
[Phil Lowe] “I hate the trackless, magnetic timeline. I hate the audio controls (I much prefer Avid’s audio mixer), and I can’t stand skimming in the browser. But then, I don’t like the latter feature in Avid, either. I don’t like thumbnail view and rarely use it, even in FCP7. In short, there’s virtually nothing about the interface or controls I like. Having remapped the keyboard to match my Media Composer settings has made basic editing tolerable, but only so. For basic editing, that’s all I need. Going any further with FCPX, quite frankly, doesn’t interest me in the least.”
You really should have lead with that
-
Better late than never. 😉
One other thing I found that I really dislike about it: the default keyboard layout assigns keys (inconsistently) mnemonically: P for position, S for skimming, E for append, etc. Inconsistently, I say, because select is A, Q is connect, and D is overwrite???
To make things easier, I mapped the position tool (P) to Option-A, in keeping with all my other Avid shortcuts that sit under my left hand.
I’ll only add that I hate the fidgeting you have to do with simple dissolves just to change their starting placement. The quick effect key (backslash) in Avid is both easier to use and more precise out of the gate, and it works for audio without having to break sync!. Dragging handles on a simple effect simply should not take as long as it does, and this is something I despise in Premiere Pro, too.
-
[Phil Lowe] “…I hate the trackless, magnetic timeline. I hate the audio controls…I can’t stand skimming in the browser…I don’t like thumbnail view and rarely use it…In short, there’s virtually nothing about the interface or controls I like…Going any further with FCPX, quite frankly, doesn’t interest me in the least.”
You are not the first to feel this way. Mike Matzdorff, assistant director of the Will Smith movie “Focus”, had a very difficult transition from Avid to FCP X. Early on he said “FCPX is utterly unusable”.
His first attempt to use FCPX was editing a little video interview for his wife. He figured it would be a piece of cake for him — a professional Hollywood film editor. He struggled for a long time, gave up and had to finish the video in FCP 7. He was so angry he asked for a refund from Apple.
But he didn’t give up, ultimately edited that feature film using FCPX and wrote a popular book about it:
https://amzn.com/B00UO2NA8IIn this interview, Matzdorff said once he stopped trying to make FCPX work like Avid he made good progress. His described it as “you…have to bend your mind a little bit, and when you do it’s fast and it’s cool and it works”.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmHwME_sK30Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
I’ve come to understand that over time Steve. I have tended to focus on the elements of X that are unique to X – and in doing so, expect I have left the impression that unless an editor fully utilized those parts of the program ALL the time, it’s inefficient. Obviously nothing could be farther from the truth – but I acknowledge my error there. The challenge has always been that without the emphasis on the need to change some thinking – the traditionally trained editor gets stuck trying to simply re-create their old habits in the new environment – and cheat themselves out of some or even all of the potential benefits of the new thinking. I’ve lost track of the editors who have talked of wanting initially to lock X in Position mode so it feels more comfortable. It’s just REALLY hard to see how that’s going to help them in the long run. But I do see that it’s my fault for not being clever enough to know how to say “You don’t need to change to efficiently use X” while still sending out the message that you do.
Oh well.Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
[Joe Marler] “In this interview, Matzdorff said once he stopped trying to make FCPX work like Avid he made good progress. His described it as “you…have to bend your mind a little bit, and when you do it’s fast and it’s cool and it works”.”
Bingo. I am not sure why anyone would try to bend FCPX to work like Avid or Premiere. If that’s your goal, stick with Avid and avoid the frustration. I went through some of the same frustration in the early Softimage|DS days, but once I stopped trying to make it work like Media Composer and work as it was designed, it became very fast and powerful. Granted DS, like Avid, FCP7 and Pr are all traditional track based editors, so there are many things that are similar. But to really find out what any software can do, work with it as it was designed. Then you can make an informed decision. But to complain “it doesn’t work like my Avid” invites the answer, “yeah, its not supposed to”….
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
[Scott Witthaus] “I am not sure why anyone would try to bend FCPX to work like Avid or Premiere.”
Which is why I never map a keyboard to emulate another applications actions. When I started in Ppro I did not use their FCP7 keyboard layout — I prefer full immersion into whatever I’m working with. On the other hand this might be why I find it so difficult to work on several different NLEs at the same time – maybe the secret to that skill is having a strong base in one system and forcing other systems to adapt to that? Would love to hear from the non-manogomous editors out there how they manage to remember what keystrokes to use as they move from ap to ap.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up