Andrew Kimery
Forum Replies Created
-
[Tim Wilson] “The only other guy in this category is Fincher, who’s admittedly not as publicly philosophical about such things. He moved from Final Cut to Premiere, but the danger in invoking both him and Murch to ratify one’s own choices — “See? I was right! FCPX really IS straight legit for high-level film work” — is yes, true, but the thing that neither Walter nor Fincher feels is legit is sticking with the same thing just because it worked last time.”
Fincher was also on the early side of using digital cameras. I believe Zodiac in 2007 was his first time using the Viper. At a panel discussion I was at a few years ago one of the panelists was an AE that has worked on a number of Fincher’s films and he talked about how the workflow is always evolving as new tech comes out. Going back to one of your points, PPro for Fincher (and Murch) certainly won’t be the last NLE they use.
-
[Scott Witthaus] “Why do we care what he edits on or thinks about other NLE’s?
Just asking, because it makes not a bit of difference to me and my work.
“Some people like discussing/learning things even if those things might not be directly related to their own work/workflow. Discussing what other people use is kinda the gist of this Debate forum don’t you think?
I assume Focus and the recent OJ doc make a difference to you and your work?
-
[David Lawrence] “We had a nice conversation about this in 2011 ;)”
Will the Davids (Lawrence and Roth Weiss) please stop showing off by pointing out they were talking about these things years ago. 😉
-
[David Roth Weiss] “You have nothing to worry about in terms of X bring EOL’d, because I don’t use it. Typically, the only software that gets killed off is that which I become expert using, then build my company around,”
Sounds like you should start your own protection racket. Nothing like gettin’ paid for *not* using software. 😉
-
[Oliver Peters] “The underlying thought is that FCPX has a 10-year expiration date of which we are half-way through. What next, if anything? Why hitch your horse to that wagon?”
As has been talked about before, any program from any company can disappear w/o notice but there certainly does seem to be more worry about Apple than others (probably because Apple is infamous for yanking products/features off the market). Given how far in advance they announced the EOL of Aperture I wonder if they learned a lesson from the X launch?
-Andrew
-
[Tim Wilson] “But to Walter, the entirely revolutionary, altogether unprecedented thing is Adobe’s responsiveness to the requests of editors.
“Any guesses on what the Coen Arrow is (or whatever Much called the feature that the Coen’s requested)?
[Tim Wilson] “But to Walter, the entirely revolutionary, altogether unprecedented thing is Adobe’s responsiveness to the requests of editors. “
Basically with Apple you get what they give and that’s been in it’s DNA since Day 1 when Jobs and Woz made the Apple I. Jobs basically wanted a sealed box that no one could open and Woz wanted something totally open and available that anyone could modify (at one point I think Woz was actually selling the schematics for the Apple I until someone mentioned that that’s not good for business). Obviously that business model has worked out very well for Apple, but it’s not always the best experience for users that need specific solutions to specific problems.
As much as has changed with X since it launched in 2011 (both in terms of features as well as real world usage and perception) I’m actually more intrigued by what has changed for PPro. Premiere, in some version, has been around since the early 90’s but it’s only been in the last 2-3 years that it hasn’t been an also-ran in the NLE world. That’s a lot of baggage to lose in a very short amount of time. Sure, it took the death of FCP 7 to give PPro an opening but the PPro team has done a great job exploiting that opportunity.
-
Considering the number of ‘firsts’ in Murch’s career it’s always interesting to get his POV, but a bit to David’s point, the basics of what he said were as a few years ago as they are today. I do think it’s interesting that seemingly the biggest reason he didn’t use PPro on “Tomorrowland” was because he didn’t think he could find enough people with both high level movie experience and high level PPro experience to handle what sounded like a very demanding workflow (even by Hollywood standards). He mentioned the Coen’s using PPro on “Hail, Caesar!” and you can also add Marvel’s new movie “Deadpool” to that list as well. Still solidly an ‘Avid world’ world though for scripted movies and ‘TV’ shows. I put TV in quotes because many original shows on Amazon, Netflix and Hulu are also being cut on Avid (call them TV-style shows?).
To flesh out a bit more about his audio comment, it’s not just the number (PPro being able to do more than Avid) but also the fact that there are still tracks. Murch spoke at Adobe’s booth at IBC and it was semi-live Tweeted and, which his audio background, he pre-mixes a lot in the NLE and having tracks is not just familiar from his NLE experience but also from his DAW experience.
FCP.co’s blurb about the interview is more provocative than anything Murch said, but I guess they wanted to do something to drum up more clicks. 😉
-
[Thomas Frank] “Maybe it has something to with stubbornness?”
Growing up in the US I learned to drive on the righthand side of the road with the stick for the manual transmission in my right hand and four-way stops at intersections. When I visited England and drove a rental car I was now driving on the left hand side of the road with the stick in my left hand and roundabouts were common at intersections.
My struggles were most certainly not rooted in stubbornness because I had a strong desire not to injure, kill or maim myself or those around me. 😉
EDIT: grammar (sure there are more mistakes I missed).
-
[Bill Davis] “(And I’m still not convinced that whether she’d strung her bass with flat-wound or round-wound strings would have made that huge hit more or less of a huge hit.)”
Fun to blather about it, tho.
I don’t think Joseph is trying to convince you one way or the other, but just trying to illustrate that the debate itself exists. That’s basically this musical digression in a nutshell. There is never going to be 100% agreement on anything subjective but some people will still argue about it as if their opinion is somehow more valid than the differing opinion of the person across from them. Musicians, editors, IT professionals, mechanics… it doesn’t matter. Splintering into different camps and vying for a winner just seems to be part of human nature. Or at least a deep part of American culture that thrives on definitive outcomes (black/white, good/bad, winners/losers). The ambiguity of a tie (or of not ranking things at but just enjoying them each on their own merits) doesn’t seem to sit well with a lot of people.
-Andrew
-
[Bill Davis] “Strong opinions about gear, sure. But I’ve never heard or read about somebody arguing that a great lick could have been “better” if only Les Paul or Rodrigo y Gabrialla had used a different brand.”
Isn’t that the root cause of people having strong opinions about gear though? The firm belief that certain gear makes the end product, and/or the process by which the end product is created, significantly better. Even if everyone agrees that the end result is awesome the supporters will say the gear played a role in enabling the awesomeness to happen while the detractors will say the awesomeness was achieved in spite of the gear being used.