Aindreas Gallagher
Forum Replies Created
-
just cow tipping back in one time to say – that’s some passing. As a personal aside – at one completely forgettable point I made a series of incredibly stupid posts around one of his presentations on what would turn out to be the film Focus – drawing one idiot’s conclusions after the other. It was embarrassing stupidity.
I’m genuinely sorry he won’t be running his NAB interviews anymore, if he chooses not to. When I first found them, I used to be annoyed he ran them as drilled radio interviews, but then you’d realise the care and genuine respect he gave to radio. Not to oversell Jordan, but the man has a near Terry Wogan knack for drilling to the nugget inside a warm conversational space.
Last bit – a friend who is a way way better editor than me, who edits for Vice and bits of the BBC, does actually swear to the internally transformative moment she had watching Jordan edit briefly in anger as part of a presentation some years ago in London. She kept referring to it, and she kept referring to the speed of decision she saw. She duly stole and internalised the utter hell out of it. He’s a class act.
https://ogallchoir.prosite.com/
producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Walter Soyka] ” The emotional penalty for friction in a creative application is certainly high”
But isn’t this exactly what Apple tried to remedy? Their constant actions – including visually auto linking elements – is more or less themselves made handmaiden for editing. They kind of are the second editor on the timeline. I always thought that was a bridge too far.
On the notion of flow – having that much of a ghost in the machine operating and reacting to your decisions – I’m not sure how that’s good at all in that regard. If you are regularly mitigating and re-arranging connection points set by apple software in order to make your next edit decision, what exactly are you doing? Playing bad computer chess?
https://ogallchoir.prosite.com/
producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Simon Ubsdell] “most efficient way to use pancaked timelines though is copy and paste. Which is why pancaking is an even greater advantage over tabbing.”
I’ve decided drag and drop from the pancake vs copy makes no odds – half the time I’ll even go to the source monitor?
That goes the whole pre-editing in string outs. I find the biggest thing maybe, in short form, is having a sense of the pace of the piece, so that the stuff you cut into the string out to drop in is already at something like the same clip length gallop as the destination – that you have it your head and you pre-triage so the shot decision isn’t a mile off requirements. I’ll usually repeat the proposed track or a temp under the stringout at some point just to noodle with or get a sense of the footage reaction to pace. – *Edit* that doesn’t go to sync, it’s another ball of wax – I like a radio edit base me – but shortform has a ton of footage / gfx derived narrative.
the idea that performing a very different action in the browser where you make massive amounts of favourites and keywording that might be of any length – again horses for courses – but it feels cart before horse in terms of effort.
Arguing that a lot of this stuff can happen in a hermetically sealed keywording / favourites / rejects scenario in the browser makes next to no sense to me. Surely the whole game is apprehending the footage against what it could be in the context of the final piece quite quickly – in short form. String outs are designed to do that – the footage is exposed to juxtaposition and timing issues. While a shot is cool, it is tragically at least two seconds too long. You need to know that as quickly as possible. You’re not going to get that gurning with keywords in the browser for hours. It’s wasted time. *edit* but i’d revise that all again – often times in extremity everyone goes back to every clip marker and bin like a madman – in that context I’d wish PPro hoverscrub worked anywhere close to X scrubbing. It is easily the biggest Apple software chops statement. I’ll present a PPro bin with two inch thumbnails and basically die with the scrubbing lag. X stands alone in that respect. It is surreal how well they made that work.
Again – I’m only making this argument in terms of fairly dynamic short form. I’m sure X has many sweet spots. Also X was used for the titles for Focus – which was a serious demonstration of the new Chrome 3D bevelled title tool. I thought that was quite seriously impressive.
https://ogallchoir.prosite.com/
producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “I do know FCP X pretty well actually. I use it all the time and I’m fairly certain that I was up to speed on FCP X before you had even opened it up for the first time, if I recall correctly.
“
https://ogallchoir.prosite.com/
producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Jeremy Garchow] “This way of working is still available in X, minus the pancakes, and minus the tabs, but it still works. “
I’ll have the Chicken salad sandwich. Wait – Hold the salad. Actually – hold the bread too.
That is no chicken salad sandwich my friend.
https://ogallchoir.prosite.com/
producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
I think FCPX is constricted. I think there are less rooms. I think there aren’t enough places to slot enough different constructs of footage to hand, given the monolithic single process brick interface workflow.
I have lots of problems with X, but I mostly reject the lack of available constructed mental squirrel holes. You need string out tabs to scan, sometimes you need scattered floating bins at the edge, and pancake timelines – while oversold, can be serious business sometimes. Each case is very real, they all have worth, and none are available to you in X. They all represent messy opportunities for critical lateral decisions, which is a speed of its own at the business end when you’re scrabbling.
In a way I wonder what we’re talking about here with this notion of speed. Is it a mechanistic predetermined edit assembly flow? Is that the X magic sauce? Are X editors juiced by slavishly following the apple editing heuristic flow bible? Are they simply secondary storyline conditioned automatons bred to produce content?
I feel terrible saying it. Is that what this is? That seems such an awful irresponsible thing to have said. Well now I feel bad.
https://ogallchoir.prosite.com/
producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Scott Witthaus] “you can simply grab a dissolve and move it where it works best at the transition point.”
just don’t call it an asymmetrical dissolve whatever you do. Then everything goes mad.
https://ogallchoir.prosite.com/
producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Joe Marler] “people on Premiere CS6”
er, you’re asking this in relation to CS6?
PPRO CC can cut 4K AVCHD coming off a GH4 like, you know, butter – on a three year old laptop. it did for me.
PPRO CC works as well or better, with more formats, than FCPX, on older hardware. I think most people on here who use both would agree on that.
https://ogallchoir.prosite.com/
producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
Hang on. The entire Avid effects interface is an utter joke tho? the ludicrous nesting, arcane process, highlighting the pink/red keyframe icon in the monitor to be able to alter a number entry – isn’t it an open industry joke at this point how Avid, particularly in its effects architecture, is built not to be understandable in order to support an invested clientele?
You’d almost swear Avid is in Quarkxpress territory.
https://ogallchoir.prosite.com/
producer/editor.grading/motion graphics