-
what is editing speed ?
-
[Charlie Austin] “Honestly, I feel that in general things here are much more civil than in the past. The civil discourse still gets derailed by the same people who’ve always derailed it. I try to ignore them. 🙂
“That’s sage advice for us all
-
[Tim Wilson] “…we were mostly talking about speed…The context for our conversation was their work on-set, where they were not just cutting, but roughing out VFX… and audio…Glenn’s feeling is that the speed…of FCPX enabled them to save big money on set, which is where the biggest savings often are. “
Hearing about how FCPX is used in upper-echelon scripted feature films is interesting; it improves the product. It’s fun to discuss. However it is only partially related to the kind of work many of us do.
Those guys are (understandably) very focused on high-end VFX and audio turnovers, on concurrent collaborative editing by a large team, etc. Every second of on-set time is expensive. Their use of FCPX’s keywording and metadata is aligned with a scripted production — references to page numbers, scene numbers, etc.
I would like to see similar workflow stories from a medium or large documentary team. It would be more relevant to those of us doing doc work and even some types of event, investigative news and corporate work. With docs the exact story may not be scripted but is often discovered during the editorial process. There is less urgency about on-set production cost, since much is shot in the field without a big crew. This places different emphasis on how the editing software is used. E.g, shooting ratio is usually higher for docs, program length shorter, more diverse material is incorporated, often lots of stills, etc.
Speed is still important but the various software features may be used differently than a scripted narrative because of the dissimilar production and post-production workflows. E.g, If Ken Burns edited a documentary today using FCPX, what would that workflow look like and how would it differ from Focus?
Have there been any behind-the-scenes accounts of FCPX being used in docs?
-
[Joe Marler] “Have there been any behind-the-scenes accounts of FCPX being used in docs?”
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Tim Wilson] “The context for our conversation was their work on-set, where they were not just cutting, but roughing out VFX (shoutout to CoreMelt Track X in particular)”
I am looking forward to hearing more about this!
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[Joe Marler] “Speed is still important but the various software features may be used differently than a scripted narrative because of the dissimilar production and post-production workflows. E.g, If Ken Burns edited a documentary today using FCPX, what would that workflow look like and how would it differ from Focus?”
I’ve got not one but TWO stories about low-budget indie documentaries underway, Joe.
I should mention that I couldn’t agree with you more about the actual APPLICABILITY of some of these feature film editing stories to non-feature film editing, eg, there isn’t any. LOL In practice, a story about how they edited Star Wars will be less *applicable* to ME than a story about how they did makeup on Star Wars, because I no longer edit movies, but I do still wear makeup. LOL
-
[Tim Wilson]”Glenn’s feeling is that the speed (what’s that you say? SPEED) of FCPX enabled them to save big money on set, which is where the biggest savings often are.”
Finally in a thread about speed we get some tangible info about X rather than the usual suspects beating war drums. I will be very interested to read those articles.
Details on keystrokes are not where speed is to be found but total workflows. My view that the operator experience and familiarity is more important than the software seems to be borne out by comments so far. And fun. Nothing makes something slower than lack of fun.
-
[Steve Connor] “Do the very experienced Editors go on any of these “other” Forums.”
Generally “A-list” directors, editors, DPs, colorists, mixers, etc. do not participate in forums like this or any other, except maybe to lurk. Some dabble a bit in Facebook and Twitter. I’m on several different Avid and FCL “legacy” lists and I never see any of the big guns there either.
There are probably several reasons for this. First of all they are busy and dealing with forum interchanges can be a big timesuck. Plus, most of them cannot discuss anything they are working on at the time they are on a project, so staying away from posting is just a safer way not to get engaged into a discussion that you shouldn’t.
One of the rare exceptions is Roger Deakins, who runs his own online forum and interacts with posters when he’s not tied up with a film.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Michael Gissing] “Details on keystrokes are not where speed is to be found but total workflows. My view that the operator experience and familiarity is more important than the software seems to be borne out by comments so far. “
In agreeing with you, I’m going to simultaneously invoke Scott Witthaus, Duane Allmann, Jeremy Garchow, and Walter Soyka.
==> Paraphrasing both Scott and Duane, the idea is that eventually, the “feature set” of Duane Allmann and his guitar were indistinguishable
==> Back in 2012 or so, when we were wondering if Apple was ever going to release a new workstation (and on another thread, we may be debating whether or not they yet have), Jeremy observed that it didn’t matter how much faster an HP Z820 was, because Jeremy didn’t want to use Windows, and he speculated would lose more time in the transition than he would ever recover from the increased speed.
Jeremy’s long, visible transition to X underscores that he’s neither a “stick with the old thing because it works” nor “go to the new thing because it’s APPLE and because it’s NEW” kinda guy….
==> The experience of people like Walter Soyka suggests that the transition of adding Windows was both far easier than expected AND fun…
ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLL of which raises the question: is changing ANY of this worth the trouble?
Since the answer can obviously be yes for some people, the other question becomes, is it worth the trouble to FIGHT switching, because things really MIGHT be faster on the other side, the answer is equally obviously, YES, it CAN be worth the effort to fight the switch.
Especially as we’re honest about the fact that Apple never intended to make X work equally well with every workflow. There really are workflows that X was never intended to work with, meaning that TRYING to make X work is by DEFINITION “holding it the wrong way.”
So, in a way, letting X be X is both the fastest way to adopt X, and the fastest way to see that adopting is X for one’s own specific situation is somewhere in the neighborhood of impractical and impossible. If you were to truly understand X, you’d stop trying to use it!
Because in the end, these objective sounding words like “workflow” are part of the problem. “I LIKE IT” is a feature. LOL If you have a choice, choose something fun.
Which brings me back around to Glenn F, and how much FUN he’s having with X. I was trying to come up with some kind of elegant, journalistical-sounding way to end the interview….but I’m clearly not a journalist. LOL Not that I needed to remind any of you. LOL I like to talk, and that’s about it.
So I got to the end of Glenn’s very, very generous time with me, and after a pause, I gave up on playing journalist, and just started laughing, and said it had been a long time since I’d spoken to anybody so genuinely excited about something like this. He agreed. He’s loving it, and not at all in a “new toy” kind of way. In a creative possibilities kind of way, and for Glenn, it’s very much rooted in speed.
I think that’s pretty damn cool.
I’ll add that I do think that Glenn as a director talking about FCPX as an on-set tool for rough editing/vfx/sound is 1000000% legit, btw, because X’s chops for picture, fx, and sound turn into creative tools for HIM — and hey, a ton a y’all are directing too, so even though his story is in fact most applicable to feature-esque production, he’s also pushing the question of speed: the place that speed REALLY makes a difference on a movie is on the SET.
Meaning that in addition to asking WHAT is editing speed, we can also ask WHERE, WHEN, and FOR WHOM is editing speed, and learn that the answer with the biggest bang for time and money with FCPX is “for the director, on the set, a few hours before the rushes hit post.”
Right? LOL
-
[Tim Wilson] “Meaning that in addition to asking WHAT is editing speed, we can also ask WHERE, WHEN, and FOR WHOM is editing speed, and learn that the answer with the biggest bang for time and money with FCPX is “for the director, on the set, a few hours before the rushes hit post.”
Right? LOL”
Maybe, Tim.
I keep getting confused.
People ask about (and vociferously questioning) the EDITING speed claims of some of us who have seen real gains in the type of work we do daily.
I too LOVE hearing about how X saved the pros like Mr. Ficarra time and effort in their feature film work. And yes, Glenn F is also most certainly qualified to speak on editing speed as well, as he is an editor too. But his focus as co-director would be on on overall workflow including on-set dynamics, dailies, and turnover no? –
But isn’t the central focus HERE on how X works as an EDITORIAL engine? Isn’t everyone here arguing about whether it’s faster (or not) at editing? And if so, when? And if not why?
Seems to me that the most authoritative voices on that would be… editors – who have used it for the various types of work that are being discussed?
I’ve had multiple talks with Jan Kovac and Mike Matzdorff, as well as more recently David Tillman and Patrick Southern who did the OJ Speaks Documentary for Chuck Braverman and A&E. I’ve also had lots of conversations with guys all over the world who cut Network level TV and Broadcast News, A class Ad Agency work and large facility corporate content. They ALL seem to note how FAST it lets them work. The EDITORS.
I wonder if that isn’t what the others here who are laser focused on Editing (with a capital E) want to know in these discussions.?
That Mr. Ficarra felt that in other critical areas that surround the editing like dailies production and EFX turnover X rocked is great. But the central core of the discussion here is editing. And speed. And editing speed.
Again, this takes nothing away from the creatives and execs that are just as responsible for getting stuff on the air and driving business results.
It just seems to me that the opinions of the working “editors” who have used it would be the most germane to the editors who come here trying to determine if it might be useful to them?
But maybe I’m wrong. Wouldn’t’ be the first time!
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.
-
[Bill Davis] “It just seems to me that the opinions of the working “editors” who have used it would be the most germane to the editors who come here trying to determine if it might be useful to them”
Hey, germane is in the eye of the beholder. LOL I think the forthcoming article is newsworthy, and to Steve’s point, will be FUN, but I heartily encourage everyone to avoid reading my articles as studiously as they avoid reading my entire posts. LOL
And I assure you that the article will be plainly labeled, to give anyone so inclined as many reasons to avoid reading about the editing speed of FCPX on a Hollywood feature as possible. LOL
Kidding aside, this is always a risk on a long thread, that we’re responding to different parts of a conversation. I think that’s the case here.
WHO’S ASKING?
My first problem with the part of your post that I quoted though is your certainty about who’s reading the threads and who’s not. Likely not high-end editors, because we’re not very high on their list of places to visit. And apparently not directors either?
My FIRST point in relation to Glenn and Focus in particular was in response to the query of “How’d it go for them, and what are they doing next?” The answer is that I spoke to ’em, it went great, Glenn told me about the next project AND teased the one AFTER THAT.
Here’s why the germane-ity of my conversation with Glenn knocked me over. I’ve thought of myself primarily as an editor for 40 years now. I’ve edited thousands of hours of stuff in that long, long time….
…and I never once had the pleasure of working with a team of editors and a script.
Instead, for the majority of projects I worked on, I also did some combination of shooting, directing, finishing, graphics, writing, audio, etc etc., roughly in that order.
My ears perked right up when Glenn was talking because even though, no, I never directed a Hollywood feature, his experience as a director who touches every part of the process INCLUDING the shoot and the ENTIRE post process is VAAAAASTLY more similar to the concerns I had, and much more in keeping with the roles I played, than “just” an editor.
So if the question being posed is solely, “Can X be used on a blockbuster-scale feature by an editor whose historic chops are Avid?” then that’s one thing.
But the question is…..
“WHAT IS EDITING SPEED?”
Herb said, really, let’s stop talking about keystrokes and timelines, and talk about what we we MEAN by EDITING SPEED.
And if somebody says that the EDITING SPEED of FCPX is transforming the way that he produces, directs, shoots, and writes mainstream Hollywood entertainment….well, slap my bottom and powder me pink, NOW you’ve got me interested in hearing what you have to say about EDITING SPEED….
…because otherwise it’s just another thread about keystrokes and timelines, and we played that one out pretty quickly, yes?
[Bill Davis] “But isn’t the central focus HERE on how X works as an EDITORIAL engine?”
This has been my long way of saying, no, not to me.
Perhaps you and I can shake hands on “Not necessarily.”
I’m not the judge of what “speed” means. I’m not the judge of what “editing” means. If there was only one answer, we wouldn’t need this thread. We wouldn’t need this forum. We wouldn’t need ANY forum.
AND I’m not the judge of who’s asking
AND I’m not the judge of who has a stake in the answer.
The thing is, we have over 305,000 members here, and I’m willing to bet we might have at least, I don’t know, maybe SIX, maybe SEVEN, completely different answers to the question. LOL Who knows? Maybe MORE than six or seven answers.
Because, kidding aside, I think there are more than six or seven kinds of editors here.
Some of ’em aren’t JUST editors, even if, like me, they might be PRIMARILY editors.
So some editor’s answer to the question of “what is editing speed” might NEED to encompass a global network of shared storage of multiple features being simultaneously shot and posted (cue Media Composer on Mockingjay), or part of a graphics-intensive post process anchored by After Effects (cue Creative Cloud for Gone Girl), where FCPX would have been a mess.
Just as neither MC or CC would have met the needs of Focus or Whisky Tango Foxtrot (aka WTF) even barely as well as X did.
EDITORS ON EDITING
Not that I disagree about the intent of your question, Bill.
It’s why I’ve said many times that, as much as I enjoy Mr Murch’s movies, and as much as I enjoy hearing him think aloud about editing, I can’t say that any of it APPLIED to me any more when I first read interviews with him in 1975 about The Conversation (still my fave of his in many ways) than anything he’s said in the 40 years since then.
I mean, for that matter, it’s not like Cioni actually CUT these last couple of Fincher pictures, right? Nor for that matter did Fincher. But you better believe that when I see that either of these fellas has something to say to me about EDITING SPEED thanks to Adobe Creative Cloud (and, for that matter, Quantel Pablo), I’m going to stop what I’m doing and listen. Plenty germane for ME.
But I do get what you’re saying, Bill, and I agree. I really do.
That’s why when Joe M. and Herb both added the observation that, even if we shared an understanding of “editing” and “speed” — which we absolutely do not — that the relative values in the equation all shift when we move from features to docs….
…. that I mentioned that, indeed, two of said three upcoming X stories are about lower-budget, higher-volume indie documentaries that have production profiles very much more in keeping with the work that Joe in particular is wondering about X’s added value for.
Which is also why I keep asking people to be specific, and why I love threads like this so much. There’s a lot of people posting here, but they’re a mere fraction of the nearly 1.8 million people who came through here in the last 30 days as readers.
Some of ’em are editors.
Some of ’em are directors.
And some of ’em, I swear on a stack of Blonde on Blonde vinyl records, are gen-yooo-wine high end folks.
I’m just looking for a good story, by which, as often as not, I mean a story I haven’t heard before. I’m trying to get MORE people telling WIDER stories, not fewer people telling narrower ones. But hey, within that, the more specific, the better. HOW was it faster? What could you DO BECAUSE it was faster?
In other words, the EXACT the questions that you and I agree are ultimately the only germane ones. 🙂
So yeah, most of the THOUSANDS of editing stories here in the COW are by and about editors, full stop –but no matter how high end we climb, or how deep down we drill, if you have a story about editing, I want to hear it.
Yr pal,
TimmyTim Wilson
Editor-in-Chief*
Creative COW*They tried to give me the title Vice President once, and I said “Nope, I don’t want to be president of any such goings on.” Then after they explained to me what a vice president actually is, I said, “Okay, awesome, LOL thanks for clearing that up, but still, no thanks. I’m an editor.”
NOT THAT YOU CAN TELL FROM THESE FFFFGINK POSTS lol Aren’t editors supposed to make things SHORTER?
PS. I try really, really, really hard not to cross the streams between “a-hole with an opinion” and “a-hole who works for Creative COW,” so I appreciate your gracious latitude in allowing my opinions to be held separately.
Although one thing both roles share is a pretty loose understanding of the words “on topic.” LOL
PPS. Dude, check your email. I’ve been trying to write you all day. 🙂
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up