Aindreas Gallagher
Forum Replies Created
-
ah sure lets leave pogue out of it -I actually think he’s a fundamentally decent guy, he’s written up revised positions twice now – the last one is pretty measured, critical of apple ultimately, and is probably the last we’ll hear from him on professional editing systems for some years to come.
https://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/24/the-quarrel-over-final-cut-continues/
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
Oh yes for sure Chris, the logic of your argument is impeccable, because things that walk and talk like ducks very rarely turn out to be ducks.
It’s iMovie Chris. It walks like iMovie, talks like iMovie, looks like iMovie, has many of the same limitations as iMovie, bears no resemblance whatsoever to FCP – it’s a souped up iMovie with some bells on. It’s a consumer application. They’ve killed FCP.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
there’s no longer any way to re-link media, apple “does all the work for you” if material is listed offline, there is no way to tell where that material originated, you have to just plug in drives until FCPX sees it and then it stops being offline – it doesn’t tell you the material is back online – I haven’t actually tested the last bit myself, but that’s my understanding.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Chris Kenny] “import all your raw footage, then quickly skim through, keywording, organizing, marking as good or rejecting, and finally building a rough edit.”
yeah chris, that’s the upper left of FCPX and iMovie, it doesn’t cover tracks, or the viewer – firstcut refers to event area more or less – the decisions randy took when crafting iMovie 08 – a single track of video in a trackless space, a single viewer, there were decisions made necessary because he was preparing a video application for the casual consumer, so therefore he had to remove complexity – he did – iMovie is far less complicated than FCP7 – with me so far?
Good. Because here comes the tricky bit – I want you to boot up FCPX if you have it to hand, then I want you to boot up iMovie if you have it installed,
then I want you to tab cycle between the applications – (maybe best to arrange iMovie as the kid in the video has) just keep tabbing between them. One is a free install consumer app for hobbyists, the other one is the intended replacement for a mainstay professional powerhouse editing application.Now. The thing you should be noting is that they are unnervingly similar – the tonka toy software for consumers that comes free on every Mac, and the thing that’s supposed to replace FCP share near identical workflow, media management and overall GUI layout.
Is this a good thing?
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
no no that’s all wrong: firstcut only referred to the tagging and organisational aspects of the skimmer – and the author was surmising that from a brief conversation with randy, that some of that thinking Randy was pursuing in his head with firstcut went into the tagging and skimming behaviour of iMovie 08
the real meat of iMovie08 – which we now agree is effectively the previous version of FCPX – all the real decisions taken there by Randy are completely independent to the specifics of what the author referred to in the piece – in this I am referring to randy’s descision to – yes you know it – greatly simplify the interface – a single track of video sitting in a trackless space, a single viewer, a completely revised storage system, which has carried over as the event viewer (did you know the import dialogue box in FCPX and iMovie 08 are virtually identical?)
These are decisions Randy took when crafting consumer software for a consumer market – these are decisions carried forward directly into the application known as FCPX.
It’s consumer software – Apple no longer produce professional editing software, they lied to our faces, laughed and canned FCP.
that’s why we’re all really angry with them.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
SSh – thats my secret debating technique, you’re letting the cat out of the bag.
OK – so lets try a thought experiment shall we – you are the proverbial visitor from mars, you land and the first thing you are asked to do is look at three applications, you agree –
the first application they show is FCPX (but nothing has names) then they show you FCP and iMovie, then they ask you to guess which of them is the previous version of the application.
mm?
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
ah no chris, I’ll move happily enough and chris, its not the only way I set in and out points, sure of course the joy of FCP was that you had a multiplicity of approaches but sure never mind.
I gave you that use case to show you that there is a fundamental validity to the viewer – it’s a deeply functional part of the craft of editing, to have that second space, that is my contention, but well, not according to the moron of the decade Randy Ubillos, who could not wait to share his vision of iMovie with the professional world, so instead of re-coding FCP he gave us iMovieX 64bit, and let me do a quick check – yep, iMovie has no viewer.
look at the video below chris: you’re cutting on a tricked out iMovie. The thought that went into devising dumbed down consumer editing has been handed to us, lovingly, by randy – we’re holding a turd sandwich.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TISkPbLlb04&feature=player_embedded
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
yeah but chris – the dediated viewer was capable – the dedicated viewer is very important. When I’m in an edit, and I’ve got a clip and little bit of black, and I hit F and I’m scrolling through that clip and looking at other shots while I’m looking at the last frame of the edit and thinking what will go where and how will it move in relation to the speed of the last shot – that is a key edit operation – it’s not a specific feature – it’s a critical part of the basic mental operation of editing – I would argue that the dedicated viewer, the ability to call up material in conjunction with output, not replacing it is a key part of the mental practise of editing – that that viewer is waiting there to show me things I want to think about – that it is a different thing, than output, similar to my argument for gaps that are true gaps, as opposed to slugs – the knowledge that if you delete the slug things will slam closed on some level affects my perception of control as an editor. Amongst all the other raging complaints – that apple saw fit to throw the viewer out the window is just, I said it before, it’s blackboard fingernail scraping annoying.
Randy Ubillos was an arsehole for thinking he needed to completely reinvent the practise and mental approach to editing. He’s even more of an arsehole for coming to the conclusion that the answer was iMovie.
Famous quote from PT Barnum:
“Randy Ubillos, you day old elephant dung, FCP7 wasn’t a multitrack editor, editing is a multitrack operation, editing software is intended to be an expression of that truth.”http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
nono chris I know enough, and I’ve played with it enough to speak on this forum as an invested professional thank you. You take care of your position and I’ll take care of mine.
FCP had assignable tracks, two up display with viewer and canvas, a wealth of import and export abilities, amongst a million other things
iMovie had none of these things because, as a consumer application, none of these things were appropriate, and would only serve to confuse the casual consumer.
FCPX has no assignable tracks, no viewer, crippled import and export, Christ Chris FCPX IS iMovie – stop telling me that there is a world of subtle kung fu under its moron iMovie exterior
Chris – they took away the viewer, not because its a fuddy duddy convention and surplus to professional needs, they took away the viewer because there is no viewer in iMovie, there are no assignable tracks in iMovie there is one track for johnny to play with – well that is what we have now too. they’ve glommed on some second story bullsh*t, but at its core, at its heart it is a 1V 2A edit application – that is what the 50% of post currently holding FCP licenses are supposed to use.
It’s bullsh*t
Famous quote from George Washington:
“Randy Ubillos, you worthless, worthless ass, FCP7 wasn’t a multitrack editor, editing is a multitrack operation, editing software is intended to be an expression of that truth.”http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
I read the same article at dvcreator – I’m not talking about who wrote the code for where, I’m talking about functionality – look at FCP7, then look at iMovie, then look at FCPX, if you had to pick a name for FCPX what would you pick – iMovieX or FCPX?
That application is not FCP – its a beefed up iMovie, but all the key methodogy is purely intended for consumer use – the methodology of FCPX is the methodology of iMovie. It is the approach apple have taken when giving video editing capabilities to consumers – greatly simplified, dumbed down operation. That is directly the methodology and approach they have applied to FCPX. It shares almost precisely the GUI and methodology of a piece of software designed by apple for teenagers to use in their bedroom.
That we can’t quite see this yet, is partly because most of us are still in shock at the shafting we’ve just gotten from apple.
It’s not fit for professional use, Apple know that, and they couldn’t give a shite.
I mean, who cares about the craft of professional editing right?here’s to the crazy ones. You assholes Apple.
Famous quote from FDR:
“Randy Ubillos, you malformed buffoon, FCP7 wasn’t a multitrack editor, editing is a multitrack operation, editing software is intended to be an expression of that truth.”http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics