Woah. This time it’s not me. It’s the filmmaking team from Focus…

[Shane Ross]

Yet it still took them 8 months or so to cut this. Same amount of time as on Avid. I guess they then have the ability to cut and recut scenes more times than they would on Avid? Instead of “how about this…or this…or this?” It’s “How about this, or this, or this, or this, maybe this, or try this, how about this?” More time to look at options.

FCX always advertised that you could do all that swapping faster.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Shane Ross]

Which…BTW…was the big selling point of Avid originally. The ability to make changes to a scene more quickly. It took FOREVER to do it when you cut film. Want to know how long?

Damn..I can’t find that Modern Romance clip with Bruno Kirby and Albert Brooks anymore…it’s like it’s vanished…

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Bill Davis]

Its out there Shane.

Last I saw it was just a few months ago linked to someone’s post.

Reminded me of the days flying to LA to sit in a coffeeshop outside PhotoKem while they did the Rank Transfer of my 35mm film for some commercial spots.

The good old days.

Actually, the story was most interesting to me by virtue of the value John Requa put on working with the final resolution files at EVERY stage of the workflow. That and the “moviemaking team” aspects where the lines between job responsibilities are more than a little bit blurred.

Things are definitely changing out there.

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.

[Shane Ross]

I’ve worked full res for years…nearing a decade now. About time they caught up. The only time I DON’T work full res is when I cut shows with multiple editors and TONS of footage…like docu-reality. Or full doc series where all the footage needs to be accessed for every episode. Barring that, I’ve been working full res on many shows, and have been since 2006. Feature film catching up to that I see.

Although now with the practice of shooting and shooting and shooting because it’s not FILM, does tend to add to the footage, and the hours needed to watch it. And now store it.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Neil Goodman]

[Bill Davis] “Glenn Ficarra “I could cut at least twice as fast if not three times as fast on Final Cut Pro X as I could on Avid.””

I hear this quite a bit – its faster, its faster, its faster..

No one ever says specifically what made it faster ?

Was it all the front end prep, was it the the actual timeline? What specifically?

It also makes me wonder because he says he had to do a lot less clicking around but in my experience you do way more mousing and clicking in FCPX than any other NLE.

Not trying to argue, but genuinely curious – whats so much faster?

[Trevor Asquerthian]

[Neil Goodman] “whats so much faster”

I’d guess quite a bit of it would be audio moving WITH video, without even thinking about it.

Linked selections don’t work so well everywhere else, once you get beyond very rough assemblies.

[Charlie Austin]

[Neil Goodman] “No one ever says specifically what made it faster ?

Was it all the front end prep, was it the the actual timeline? What specifically? “

For me, it’s never having to leave the “creative” mindset and think about anything technical, patching, collisions, am i selecting the right group of clips etc. Hard to explain but it really is different.

[Neil Goodman] “but in my experience you do way more mousing and clicking in FCPX than any other NLE. “

MC probably gives you more KB control, especially if you’re good at it, but I click way less in X than I do in 7 or Pr. Honestly, using the skimmer negates the need to ever hold down the mouse button to scroll, scrub, repo the playhead in the timeline etc. it’s a huge time/click saver.

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Timothy Auld]

I move audio and video together all the time without even thinking about it. What’s the big deal here? This guy can edit 2 to 3 times faster? Measured against what? This is completely marketing eyewash. No other way to characterize it.

Tim

[Charlie Austin]

[TImothy Auld] “This is completely marketing eyewash. No other way to characterize it.”

I’d characterize it as someone’s subjective feeling about how they perceive their performance working in one NLE vs. another. Why do people (not specifically you Timothy…) get so worked up when they hear stuff like this?

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Michael Gissing]

Without a doubt the most significant thing that allows for speed is accuracy and comfort. And the best way to do this has always been for software to be smart but more importantly is the ergonomics of the edit. By this I mean control and comfort.

I do not believe for a minute that software alone makes as much difference as the means of control and the user comfort. Seating, control surfaces, ambient noise, interruptions to flow all make the real difference. I find the work I do on NLEs there is the major slow down of flow as keyboard & mouse based control is poor compared to a dedicated control surface. It is also software familiarity as I switch between Fairlight, Legend, Pr & Resolve.

Yes software matters but if X made it three times faster without any consideration given to ergonomics & control then the editor must have been really slow on any other NLE which defies logic.

Speed isn’t the only arbiter of course, especially on a feature with a languid eight months to edit. On news sure. So if X really is the fastest gun, how is its news and current affairs penetration where that is a prime consideration?