-
Why is Larry Jordan making up stories?
-
Sam thanks for clearing some things up in this thread. I never had doubt FCPX could be used to edit a major production. I know there are features especially in AVID that make sense for these guys, but the overall experience from dailies through the edit and all the way to XML-grading support is just unique in FCPX.
Having said that I understand there are a few details missing, but there are big chunks missing with the other NLEs just as well.
-
[Sam Mestman] “Anyway, here’s all I have left to say about the studio movie in terms of clarification. I’ve never seen the budget (not my department) so can’t officially sign off on a number, but based on the catering, cast, crew, and shooting schedule… it’s no indie, and is on the highest level of production. “
Cool – I’ll just say this – because Larry was selling hard on the stage, and he was positing FCPX as being the same as accepting the future, I just really noticed him headlining the fact that “A hundred Million dollar film being edited with FCPX”. And that it was one of the “major six studios.”
being honest, thats some headline right? The reason I went off on one was that I incorrectly presumed, given that he quoted you, and he quoted a hundred million dollar film, he was incorrectly quoting your article, on X’s involvement in that bulgaria hundred million dollar film.
Basically if you are going to get up in front of hundreds of professional editors, and close by outlining your training deals available, you should be right when you say “a hundred million dollar film, from one of the major six studios, being cut on FCPX.”
But that’s not right – as you say, you didn’t know the budget, so there was no way to tell larry that, and when I asked him, Larry replied to me that he decided it was a hundred million dollar film by looking at the cast list. (?)So without being coy about it: I think Larry got confused, as Shane suggested. I think Larry Jordan conflated the hundred million dollar film where X was cutting marketing materials with the other film where he knew nothing about the budget, where X was in fact being used to cut it.
Unless this other one is set on mars and stars brad pitt or something.I didn’t mean to make quite such a big deal out of this, its just that the supermeet is a bit of a sell, for the people presenting to some degree, and for the products represented – being able to attach both to “a hundred million dollar film being edited with FCPX” probably sounds awfully attractive, but maybe Larry shouldn’t have said that, because he wasn’t in a position to say it? Given neither you nor he actually know the film budget?
And that’s the last from me on this. Way more pot stirring from the cheap seats than I intended.
Larry should probably confirm the budget, or pull the hundred million dollar quote from his blog tho – it looks bad.https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
Well, Larry made up the budget – that’s pretty much for sure. he said in reply on the blog that he decided it was a hundred million dollar film by looking at the cast list, and in amsterdam, he doesn’t equivocate – its a hundred million dollar film.
he can’t say that because no one has told him what the budget is on this other film. Sam Mestman doesn’t know what the budget is.
Larry could say one of two things:
A hundred million dollar film where FCPX is producing marketing materials to great effect.
or
An upcoming studio film, being shot in the US, being edited primarily in FCPX.
you just can’t put the two together into one super sentence, which is kind of basically what Jordan did.
boom, crystal clear, you can’t handle the truth, just one more thing, you neeed me on that wall, you ordered a code red,
and so forth.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
Does it really matter exactly what the budget is?
-
no look, it really doesn’t and that’s not the point:
the point surely is that you can’t just decide to make up a budget that sounds cool when no one has told you the budget and repeat it in your presentations and stick it on your blog. tell me that’s not a little bit off.
Even on the 33 minute mark, he starts by saying that he talked to the FCPX editor for the film, and that they just started handling dallies, and that they were getting them synced and put together with philip hodgetts link software in twenty minutes, and that “the avid people had been working on it for a week and a half”.
What Avid people? I thought this was the US feature where its FCPX?
see there, larry is actually quoting from mestman’s article about the other film where FCPX is not editing it: from mestman’s article:in Sync N Link X… in one afternoon.. we got further ahead processing footage in FCP X than the entire Avid Unity department had gotten to that point in a week.
See what I mean? its pretty foggy no? he’s talking about speaking to the mystery US based FCPX editor about how fast the rushes are being processed, but he’s using examples from where mestman was just testing the ability to hypothetically do that in bulgaria , where FCPX was most definitely not editing the film.
Isn’t any of this a tiny bit, lets say, foggy?
One way or another Larry got pretty mixed up with two seperate things, to the point where when he talks about the workflow where X is in use on this other feature, he’s actually referring to workflow where it was only cutting marketing materials, it would seem?
anyhoo…
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[James Ewart] “Does it really matter exactly what the budget is?”
…. Really just how much the Editor using FCPX is getting paid. 😉
-
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
-
…and Aindreas aren’t you the guy who got all chippy and snotty with Craig Slattery when he was posting about his workflow with the Culture show for the BBC?
It was a pretty interesting development at the time. First broadcast show to use the software possibly.
Unless of course you re one of the people who has been shouting loudly from a mountain top that FCPX will never be fit for anything more than a video of Great Auntie’s 90’th birthday.
For my part I took the view that maybe those people at Apple aren’t so stupid and to watch and wait. For, as has been posted many times before, FCP versions 1 thru 3 were not fit for much and look what happened?
https://www.macworld.com/article/1028695/murch.html
million schmillion!
-
ha! good man. 🙂
Sure james, tell you what – next time I think Larry should really say that the film is a two hundred million dollar film, for proper impact, based on his analysis of the catering lets say, and the director, who he can’t name, is cutting the entire film, on FCPX, on his MBP.
that’ll rock the editing world to its foundations. it might be a tiny, tiny bit made up but – you know – zzzzzzzzzzz.Did you miss the part where Jordan admitted that he apparently decided on the budget number from looking at the cast list?
He came up with a very specific number.I’ll say it again – Larry got confused to the point where he was effectively making stuff up on that stage. Considering the amount of play it got, and the amount of people who were directed towards his training materials at the end of the demo, that’s kind of not on.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[James Ewart] ” chippy and snotty with Craig Slattery” yeah, I was a bit of a wanker there – plus you don’t see me cutting beeb docs – he got pretty high handed too tho. that was in the religious war phase mind you.
Seriously – go X – I’m all for it, it feels like nothing can touch that tagging system – besides, I’m just carping from the cheap seats. This forum was heaven sent for that.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up