Aindreas Gallagher
Forum Replies Created
-
yeah, I was always a rabid fan of Mac products, argued for them and stuff, but I always bought myself PCs from WinNT4 on – liked to do bits of 3DSMAX as well as AE, but then i started to get more and more into the FCP editing side at work, hence my current streak of apple land.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
ah yeah sure I mean look – on some level I’m just looking at that thing, I played with that thing, and I don’t buy it; I don’t think my lack of perception or understanding of the proposed methodology is the issue here – I have a brain in place, it is moist and functioning, I think i Grok at this point where FCPX wants to go with it, and, on a fundamental level, I don’t buy it. I look at the editing system that preceeded it, the editing systems around it then I look at FCPX and I just don’t buy it. Its a consumer app. Even if the methodology in it has within in it the potential for a generational quantum leap in the art of editing, a blinding set of insights that bounded fully formed from the mind of Randy Ubillos alone, with about four testers or whatever (do we all think there were enough betatesters for this system?) even if I’m fundamentally wrong, even if I don’t get it, I don’t think it matters – I think this software is toast professionally – I know Chris Kenny is going to jump up and down on my brainpan now for spreading FUD..
But: Nobody is going to buy what Randy is selling, because they are going to be pretty convinced, as I am, that he made this software for consumers. FCP7 will be gone from all broadcast environments it currenty resides in within the next 12 months. They are not going to replace it with FCPX, no way josé, no way no how, that would be like buying your car from a crazy guy who tells you he might have to take it back at some future point without warning. Its not going to happen. FCP7 is EOL – FCPX is unfit for purpose – Apple have shown themselves to a crazily unreliable software vendor = FCP is toast.And would you look for gods sake I ranted again – I should go back up to asking stupid questions about premiere – which doesn’t look half bad actually. weirdly close to FCP really, the timeline is the spitting image of it. It has a viewer!
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
okedoke – i like his style of writing tho, really fluid ranty, but nice and light and conversational at the same time. Also, I personally find many of his observations pretty compelling and I pretty much agree with him
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
Nah I figured that was an apple lock in alright. It’s no mad biggie. In theory there’s crazy space savings there – I did a cut of a behind the scenes thing of a music video, they’d shot tons on a pair of 5Ds, the same suite where i was picking up the material was throwing around piles of prores from the Arri like for the main shoot thing – so if I was on premiere I could really just grab all that 5D avchd and just start bashing away with it? no transcoding for Andy – its totally Kosher to stay native with the camera format? Even FCPX basically wants to transcode everything it sees, it just doesn’t tell you its doing it, you can stop it, but it wants to.. annnyway – so when you’re outputting say, and its going out to an Avid or something or even back onto an FCP suite god help us all, what do you initially send out of premiere? lossless or animation or something? And then encode it to prores in compressor or something? I know the transcoding is bit and all that. Am I being very stupid about codecs? I’ve been mindlessly selecting ProRes for a long time now.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
Mate you’re having a laugh – there’s no shagging FCP to run back to. There’s a big purple Barney in the editsuite waving his arms around going
“Immm mmmagnnnetic! Looiikkee theee iPPad!!! Puurrllayyy witthhh meee!!!” And then I just back out of the edit suite screaming. Apple have mind raped me basically.http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
yeah, but Jeffrey has made some pretty good points too – this one below is a bit holistic as it relates to apple’s overall decision to make a trackless magnetic timeline, but it rings pretty true to me:
One of the new features Apple’s touting is what they’re calling the “Magnetic Timeline,” which they describe as an improvement over “traditional, track-based timelines.” Well Apple, love you guys, but we use traditional, track-based timelines for a reason. Ever had a project so organizationally complex you needed twenty tracks of video just to keep it straight? I have. So’s every editor who’s ever done even a reasonable-sized project. And it’s not just organizational convenience, either. Those “traditional tracks” Apple thinks are such dinosaurs map directly onto physical tracks. We need to be able to put music on tracks one and two, VO on three and foley and effects on four through eight. We require the ability to assign different tracks to different output channels, so the tape master that goes to the network meets their delivery specs.
The lack of tracks on the timeline isn’t an omission. It’s another choice. It’s another thing Apple had to sit down, think through, and decide to do. And it’s another way in which Apple’s created a product that’s literally unusable for commercial post.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
i still just want tracks. I don’t care if I’m thick and I don’t get it. I want assignable mappable tracks that i can mute, disable, set as paste destinations. everything. oh look, honestly, I want the viewer too. I’m not on board the future land glow in the dark GUI editing choo choo.
ecchhhhhhh. oy vey. I’m nearly listless at this point. I think I’m at stage five.http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
Do not underestimate my stupidity.
a few Qs…
Native editing should be your first choice
erm, just checking – what do we mean here – like the codec that walked in the door? it has been drilled into my head that it is a sin under god to edit with say H264/AVCHD given the kinds of temporal compression it employs etc etc. I think I would need to go to confession if I edited a H264 timeline. Is it really OK?Intermediate. Actually in PP you can choose your intermediate codec. It can be ProRes, DNxHD, Cineform.
I thought apple.. Im thick as bricks – I’ve been FCP since birth – I thought ProRes was somehow exclusive to FCP? So if I just transcode the rushes with compressor or something first – I’m off to the races with ProRes QTs in PPro? They’ll render out? Or is that the output itself just can’t be encoded as ProRes?I would ask more, but then I would start to look dangerously stupid.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
Jesus Christ. Well that sounds.. reasonably effective. that’s good.
Ok – think of five things you proper dislike in premiere – what are they? top of your head any order –
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
Yeah I’d like to second that – its obvious from the pending lag on signatures that a fair deal of QC is going on with this petition – I’ve myself picked a stack of random names out and googled them, they’re just editors and wee creative pros like the rest of us.
I haven’t come across Coppola, although I’d dearly love to see a Murch up there – that signature alone, verified, would be ten frothing cats among screaming Apple PR pigeons. That would be real press. Sorry – fantasising away there.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics