Aindreas Gallagher
Forum Replies Created
-
[Andy Neil] “You don’t have to look at the connecting anchors. Go to the timeline display options (button in bottom right of project window). Uncheck the Show Connections box.”
that, as they say, was a deliberate conversational trap. I said default. i’m well aware of the fake neat view. it doesn’t do much of anything – worse, it hides the reality.
why would I hide the underlying lunatic reality? I have less clue what zany linked stuff is going on at that point surely.
Do you commonly edit with all the interesting connection points turned off? Isn’t that like blind man’s bluff?[Andy Neil] ” It only works on a single clip, but it works fine.”
Is that an advertisement? I have a stack of three connected b-roll clips say – what do I do now? oh right – i go into a new modality, a secondary storyline. or perhaps everything disappears into a compound nest. that’s always a fantastic workaround.
I get it works – i just can’t believe people think it works.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
minor rant: I would like to target and overwrite a connected clip. I can’t – new entrants outside the primary are indestructible entries – until you nominate and produce a secondary storyline.
it’s a form of lunacy. there is far too much unbreakable hierarchy, and way too much confused modality between connected, secondary and primary, given they are all identical V/A objects entering the timeline.
completely personally, the X timeline is pre-structured with a degree of meccano intention that I actually can’t stand. it’s close to nails on a blackboard.
also there are all these default lines connecting everything to the primary. has anyone noticed that? why in the sweet christ am I having to look at that.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
you’re not wrong – I personally think the timeline itself is utterly ridiculous, but it has many practitioners and everyone is polite about it at this point.
go to premiere: all else aside, its where the wind is blowing.
FCPX is a total mess of apple’s best practise thinking about the OS and application structure. Including saving. It’s basically irretrievable.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
there’s a place in london that has invested heavily in anywhere to allow it to function for commercial material across multiple sites on different continents. They’re on for it, and the workflow financial knock on benefits at scale are sizeable – but its a bit like buying a mclaren, in that you get mclaren/adobe engineering workflow people turning up in force to discuss and break down implementation. right now its super expensive big iron stuff. hence the adobe butlers. They’re going after top end systems media production cash.
for all that adobe pooh pooh generating yet another intermediate codec, there is a custom adobe codec sitting very privately in the middle of anywhere.its funny because people investing in it then become incredibly curious about whether adobe has a fit for purpose video legaliser in the actual edit system itself for instance.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
there’s also the fact that pro apps are currently grossing nearly as much for apple as itunes music sales.
that would make X, which realistically has to be the lions share, something other than a pro nostalgia leftover at cupertino.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Erik Lindahl] “You speak the truth. Sadly to an end-consumer it’s easier selling 4K”
the thing is I think they really can’t. Without any large market broadcasters or film (and there is zero probability of them getting on board) they’re just a bunch of far east commodity 1080P screen manufacturers stupidly trying to sell consumers a 4K LCD monitor that effectively means nothing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pubd-spHN-0
there is absolutely no logical basis or support for a 4K pipeline to the consumer, given they can’t tell it when they see it –
its not happening. as the phrase goes, Asian manufacturers – stop trying to make fetch happen.https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Bret Williams] ” Or, for that matter, the video they hand you without having to run it through a converter.”
yes I suppose, but it stills feels slightly mucky to be basing an entire project on the kinds of computational mathematics in an avchd file. if 4K – that joke we’re supposed to care about, that people can’t perceptually see from an average viewing distance relative to 1080P, takes hold, then in acquisition terms, we’re looking at some variant of h265, which makes everything worse in triplicate.
H265 takes three times as long to encode to a delivery codec, they are hammering the colour space, and unlike the shift to HD – there is no appreciable benefit to the viewer. in standard seated settings, they can’t tell the difference. also the compression degradation negates the fact that they’ve got a threadbare larger raster.
HD made appreciable sense because it was transformative to the viewer. 4K makes absolutely no such sense. the viewer can’t resolve the difference relative to 1080P at standard viewing distances – particularly after its been hammered by the kinds of compression required to make it function for delivery.
It feels like snake oil being sold by a large group of desperate parties on the production end. yes its nice to have blow up – and that was the truth of HD while it was mostly backend, but given that 4K means nothing to consumers, and will resolutely continue to mean nothing to consumers as their films measure less than 1080P vertically, and they can’t even tell the difference between 4K and 1080P, nevermind 1080P and 720P – 720P which benefits from lower compression..
4K just feels a bit like bullsh*t.
If the sole justification for a massively expensive backend re-ordering is the ability to mindlessly blow up shots, which kind of really never works past 20-30 odd percent anyway no matter what.. is that the justification for an entire jump in magnitude for production? so we can scale stuff up?
is that actually the logic for this incredibly expensive proposed shift? because god knows film and television aren’t touching it with a barge pole.
again: that minor point – current (and you’d better believe for the long term), digital cinema packages measure less than 1080P vertically. They’ve done their perceptual math. Cinemas are going to sit on that one off digital delivery investment for an incredibly long time.what are we doing? why are we entertaining this? why aren’t we pushing for end to end 1080P 10/12bit per channel production to delivery –
given 1080P is an apple retina display in the living room/cinema context?why is anyone buying all this 4K bullsh*t?
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Loren Risker] “being able to use all 16gigs of ram.”
ok thats hard to argue with.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Loren Risker] “I love it, and use it primarily for multicam and documentary work. I would never go back to FCP7 or even consider Premiere. If you’re still using FCP7 I’m guessing performance isn’t your number one issue. It really depends on what you use your NLE for mostly.”
i always thought that was a hilarious quote about FCP7 and performance. given a native timeline it stills performs just fine.
even for a project off a split xsan in auntie beeb, cutting top gear promo.last I checked we were cutting video. never mind screaming about 8K monitors, FCPX and the tubes to run them.
that was always total bulls**t. even the ripple guys acknowledge that top flight colorists for monitoring are operating 1080P BVMs.
given the result is below it even for delivery – day of the doctor measured below 1080P horizontally. so do most current hollywood digital cinema packages.
It’s wider horizontally and lower vertically than HD.4K monitoring and that whole gig is a carny joke.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
Yes- It was 15 cinematographers actually, and 21 editors.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics