Aindreas Gallagher
Forum Replies Created
-
[James Ewart] “How many years after the release of FCP1 was it before Cold Mountain? It’s the same story probably.
As predicted by many.
“well, sort of – I think its a little risky to draw comparisons to FCP 1.0 – that was completely different software, made for different reasons by a quite different company nearly a decade and a half ago.
Apple may well not want, need or seek a cold mountain moment – its very extensible software tho – i had problems with some of his claims, but larry jordans entire presentation was designed to prove that point.
You could argue that the software that desperately wanted a cold mountain mountain moment, that lobbied for it and got it – is premiere pro. Joel and Ethan Coen have stated that they are cutting their next feature on premiere. Thats a Cold Mountain moment. Stone cold classic film makers, and two of the best editors on the planet endorsing an editing system that does not – up to that point, feature at that level of editing – that matches up pretty well to Murch and Cold mountain ten years ago. You couldn’t miss the sheer joy and pride on Al Mooney’s face when he spoke about meeting the Coens.
I think at a core level apple feel they have designed something that could execute a feature absolutely no problem – but features weren’t the problem they set out to answer – what drove everyone crazy was that apple answered a different question about media and where it’s going in the midterm. the first thing you think of, or that I think of, about FCPX, is that its an incredibly strong digital assets management system amongst other things. It feels largely designed to allow single operators handle staggering amounts of media and edit extremely swiftly and fluidly, and there’s no reason that description doesn’t match a features editor.
But if it doesn’t end up doing so in practise, I doubt apple are going to lose much sleep over it.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
well says he –
I just spoke recently with a BBC media guy who would rather know – to my limited knowledge there are no real moves in that direction for FCPX as of yet – doesn’t mean it wont happen, but X basically wasn’t on his radar. He expressed polite interest and said he had heard there was an update coming.
I’m just after spending the last few weeks cutting a short film for BDA at BBC worldwide and well, like bloody everywhere – they are standing pat on FCP7 across over a half dozen suites currently – they have yet to make a decision (yay! FCP7 for evvvahh) but to my understanding FCPX realistically does not feature.On another note – the next major BBC nature series looks like it will be cut in PPro: on one of the previous ones, the offline work files consumed roughly one third again in storage off the master material. And that was an extremely large number. that said, in that context the master material was on LTO – now the full volume will be going to native live playback storage – so swings and roundabouts.
Its pretty widely acknowledged that PPro handles, say, red extremely well at this point, also the new colour engine is a bit of a boon applying seamless adjustment layer LUTS throughout the editing process. and it is a reliable cross platform editing system advancing, under Al Mooney, at an insane rate of knots – and this from a company that is not about to be de-listed from nasdaq (that one’s for you craig seeman – get in here and kick avid would you? I was busily badmouthing it to anyone who would listen to me in there, to probably greatly limited effect. As said – Avid is a mortal lock for the topline stuff.)
avid aside – anyone who doesn’t take a long look at the PPro that is now developing is kind of out of their minds. It matches and exceeds FCP in practise, and it is forcibly trying to eat avid heavy iron with anywhere etc. Adobe really are not messing around.
that spiel aside – Garchow’s point really is kind of the best one? – its basically impossible to deliver any kind of overarching statement relative to the beeb – its an impossibly big organisation. For instance – in retrospect – that purchase of the thousands of premiere licenses could look more like a late stage hedge against the failing digital management archive problems they got involved in.
Sky Branding and marketing, Associated Press London and Hogarth worldwide are all also settling on PPro. At this rate Adobe will figure they’re on a winner with subscriptions. so that’s great…
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
What the hell is this? Who is this?
Was I ever this bad? Were any of us? Jesus Christ this is annoying to read. Just surreally irritating.
What would this be like for a client?
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Andy Branner] “:-)))) … right. So you’re doing nearly 600MB/s on your internal bus. Mmmmh-hmmmm… gotcha. LOL
Yeah, that totally beats the Mac Pro’s internal 1+GB/s… you totally got me.
Oh, and next time maybe at least TRY to hide the fact that the clips are (at best) running at quarter-res… mind you, 4K ProRes is 66+MB/s…
:facepalm:
“it’s getting annoying – this has been an excellent thread.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
so that largely resolves music based edits then right?
seriously though – exactly how seductive is that tagging system? bins spontaneously made out of free form compound attribute phrases from recall?
are you kidding me?In a way – why aren’t more settled industry production participants (without anonymity and weird training aspects) simply and calmly putting FCPX obviously to work in visible uncontentious scenarios? Why aren’t they doing that? It’s easy to do and it affirms the software. below the line is everywhere.
Why isn’t it just being put selectively to work to analyse it? Isn’t anyone curious at all? Given it desperately needs the analysis?
if the industry keeps calling FCPX the red headed step child, and keep stomping, the entire red headed child is potentially likely to die.
bad, say hulk, that loss to all.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
I’m late at work – me me – I want a go at this. so maybe as early as 2006-2007?
https://isachin.com/2011/06/30/why-apple-built-final-cut-pro-x/
way, way back I used to post that link as something inflammatory – I’m not now – but it would make you think that apple were starting the initial intellectual shift surprisingly early – folklore (and god knows how many old posts) have it that the entire paradigm was accidentally first presented as a seed to steve jobs by randy ubillos (the FCP Jony Ives) as what he called ‘first cut’ – in late 2006.
it was sort of something like adobe prelude is now – as a wildly ahead of its time enhanced logger with editing assembly, database tagging stuff – this was before imovie 08. That’s basically the understood inception point.after the demo Jobs apparently turned around and told him to flatout make it the basis for broad scale video editing going forward. So ubillos did. It was first executed in imovie 08 –
thats where the “its imovie” stuff comes from. Basically Ubillos walked in with a thing and jobs made a taste call that it was a basis for something much broader.If you look back two years you will find absolutely no one on this forum going completely bonkers on the topic.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
Chris Kenny back in the house by god.
sure will we not start talking about first cut and that fateful presentation by ubillos to steve jobs all over again? 🙂
because somehow I don’t feel we fully covered that. ahem.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Shane Ross] “I am squinting.”
gag on my part there, I’m really not holding out hope –
continuing zapruder style – the video filmstrip with audio bar and the multicam setup he’s pointing at looks a lot like FCPX – but the interface looks to have the centre bar hidden. or incredibly narrow. forgetting the chrome – it basically takes up space:
https://i.imgur.com/1pyGlmI.png
that centre GUI chunk doesn’t look to be in the apple snapshot I reckon.
I do tend to kill all the playback buttons in PPro anytime I use it mind you.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
nothing wrong with a dab of the zapruder.
I’m certain there are tracks at the bottom. if you squint you can clearly see them.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
hodgetts makes a pretty good case – particularly given the kind of low grade spec of 4.2.0 8 bit being applied.
also H265 optimisation can’t nearly compensate for the fact that its an effective bandwidth quadrupling from 1080 – the forecast is 3-4% of US households accessing 4K by 2018. I mean come on.
nevermind that you need to be unrealistically close to a large monitor to realistically resolve the difference. there’s also the studies out there that 720p looks perceptually better than 1080p in most delivery use cases due to being afforded a better compression – that 8 bit banding and block compression error is only going to get worse if they start trying to wedge heavily compressed 4K source down the same line.
who doesn’t think that them sticking with 256 levels of grey per channel at this point is a bit of a joke. they’re not looking to improve the fundamental picture quality – they’re looking to gin up a domestic screen and producer hardware refresh cycle? 1080P is pretty robust picture quality – we’re all sitting on it – and apparently a lot of the panel manufacturers in asia are gnawing their shins – so says hodgetts.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics