-
X Sports
Just wanted to add a different perspective that I have not seen represented here. Major League Sports.
I’m a freelancer that started off in network news but most of my work these days comes from doing NFL, MLB, Hockey and the rest.
I can tell you first hand that when you see the opens that were built in the remote trucks, that stuff is all FCP or EVS (a system we use for replays)
FCP has long been the standard in sports.
The first time I saw a mac pro it was at an NFL game. I had not long owned my G5 and thought that the guy had one in the truck. He told me in a snarky way “that’s a mac pro, they
don’t make the g5 anymore”And if you have been watching the post season baseball this year……….yes FCP X
To keep it real, some guys hated it at first. They loved their 7 but after they started to work with X and
began to see what it could do, things have changed.I knew when I first started working with X it would take over certain markets.
One I figured would be sports. There are many reason but the speed and the way you can call any player up by name I knew would be key. No time wasted looking for a certain player making a certain play for the open. Just type it in.If you are not into sports that’s cool, but sports is big money, and it brings in big viewers.
We have some of the best editors in the country.
They don’t have to use X for the World Series, they could still use 7 if they wanted.
You wouldn’t know the difference when you watched.
That’s the thing, when you watch something on TV, most of the time you have no idea what they cut it on (unless they use a generic bkgd or trans). All that matters at the end of the day is what it looks like on air.
When you watch the open and you say “dang that looks good”……….THAT’S PRO and that’s all that matters when they are paying you, is can you get what they want on that screen.
They don’t want to be bothered with how you got it up there, they just want it up there.You can work on Avid, FCP or whatever but if you f-up the sound you won’t be working the next event.
Some wonder if X will be around in the future. When everyone is sitting around the
TV watching it on the Super Bowl, I kind of think it will be.BTW, I have really enjoyed reading the post form folks. I had never posted before, just read : )
Tony West
Videographer Editor -
37 Replies
-
Perhaps certain particular trees are beginning to emerge from the larger murky forest?
FWIW.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor
-
A buddy of mine runs a live sports event production company. Fcpx would be pretty ideal.
Needs video out, though.
-
“Needs video out, though”
That would help, but the EVS can be set up to take in .MOV files so that’s the option we use.
I would bet any money that whatever is missing in X, a third party group is working on right now.
That’s how you get paid in this country, find a need and fill it.
Tony West
-
Yes’ they use EVS sometimes too.
They would still need it, if only to go to scopes, other devices that aren’t file based, etc.
As far as third party, I’m fine with it. Some people are wary of it, it seems.
-
[tony west] “Some wonder if X will be around in the future. When everyone is sitting around the
TV watching it on the Super Bowl, I kind of think it will be.
“Tony,
Having at one time been an editor of sports opens myself, that often had to go up to “the bird” within seconds of a big play, there’s no doubt about it, FCPX is vastly superior to FCP 7 for creating short, template-based opens and highlight reels that need to go on-air almost instantly. In fact, I wish I’d had X when I was at Fox Sports.
However, while your sports scenario is in fact one of those that happens to be absolutely ideal for X, it doesn’t change or negate the fact that X is not at all ideal for many users and for many other types of editing. Your endorsement is terrific and 100% valid, but it’s not living proof or the last word that X is perfectly wonderful; it just shows that it is great for some, which is exactly what even X’s harshest critics have been saying all along.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.comDon’t miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing “The Whale” to the Big Screen:
https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfitandSuzanneChisholm/1POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.
-
Just to add a different perspective to Tonys experience.
I edit sports in the UK very regularly. For terrestrial broadcasters like BBC and ITV, for sports like soccer, cricket, boxing, golf, the recent Commonwealth Games, the current Rugby World Cup.
I also regularly work for a company that provides soccer coverage to over 100 countries 5 days a week as far apart as Singapore and Canada.Broadly tapeless editing (until it comes to archive for which there is still a massive library held on tapes.)
Without exception they use Avid, with Interplay and Unity linked to EVS and IP Director. For us FCP is far from the standard in that particular environment.
I do use FCP 7 on a weekly soccer show that is essentially cutting highlights, short packages of 2 or 3 mins. Clips are sent from IP director to FCP edited and then sent to EVS. It generally performs very well and is a pretty stable combination passing files back and forth.
Certainly in that scenario FCPX could be used quite well, however the current lack of any kind of meaningful monitoring rules it out.
best wishes
Neil
http://www.patience.tv -
You are right about that David.
There are going to be many who go a different way than X for many valid reasons.
The early debate on this product was that it couldn’t be used in high end broadcast or feature work.
I just wanted to let people know that it is being used in ways that they might not be aware of.
There are many people who are trying to decide if this is right for them and I would like to give them as much info as possible to help them decide.
There are so many ways to get paid in video these days it’s hard to keep track.
Web based video, corporate video, independent film projects you name it.
I’m pretty sure this product is going to fill many gaps.
When we started David there weren’t this many paths, but now………..it’s just different.
Tony West
-
I don’t work outside the States in sports so I will take your word on that side of the lake.
My focus was here and Fox Sports and TBS.“Certainly in that scenario FCPX could be used quite well, however the current lack of any kind of meaningful monitoring rules it out.”
The point is, it’s not being ruled out. We are using it now. It’s not a question of rather it can be used,
it IS being used.If you watch the WS tonight you will see it.
Tony West
-
Hi Tony
From hanging around the Cow for a while I certainly get the impression that FCP has a much larger following in the US compared to the UK in broadcast TV station environments. So its not that surprising that some US broadcasters are already testing the water with X.
My post was of course in the context of what I find working in the UK.
That’s not to say we don’t use FCP7 in broadcast here, we do and very successfully, it just Avid is the majority player in that particular area.
In my experience broadcasters especially are wary about jumping in with any new software, Avid, FCP or whatever really due to the potential of bugs causing failure.
They tend to run test rigs and let a few releases pass under the bridge before adopting it at all.
Despite increasing tapeless workflows the whole infrastructure is built around SDI video, monitors, scopes, video distribution etc etc with a fair amount of tape compatibility still needed especially on the archive side.So I was a bit surprised to see you are in there already running FCPX this early in it development in that particular environment, not doubting you for one moment though, you are clearly braver than we are.
best wishes
Neil
http://www.patience.tv -
[Neil Patience] “I was a bit surprised to see you are in there already running FCPX this early in it development in that particular environment, not doubting you for one moment though, you are clearly braver than we are.
“You know Neil, I’m frankly not surprised, and I also think that Tony may have hit upon upon something here, in the sense that FCPX might make a terrific “news editor.” In fact, I’m wondering if it shouldn’t have been called Final Cut News Editor 1.
The bottom line is, in a fast-paced environment like Tony’s, or in a newsroom, speed really is a huge part of the job. Ingesting quickly, chucking clips and highlights into pre-designated holes or drop zones, and spitting the work out ASAP, is just what the doctor ordered. So, it doesn’t seem that odd to me that long-term testing before jumping on X in a situation like this isn’t perhaps quite as necessary as it might be if your app has to be more “fully integrated” into a complete production environment.
And, since building reusable graphics packages and templates is also a big part of that job, maybe that’s why the new Motion was designed primarily as a template builder for use inside X.
So, maybe X really is best considered as app for short form, news, and sports?
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.comDon’t miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing “The Whale” to the Big Screen:
https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfitandSuzanneChisholm/1POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up