Bill Davis
Forum Replies Created
-
[greg janza] “However, the proxy workflow overall is an inefficient use of an editor’s time.”
In what way?
For my work, the speed of working with proxies until the shape of the cut is determined – particularly knowing that I can play with scene order, juxtaposition and move things that “feel adjacent” into that type of adjacency on a whim, and instantly undo or re-rearrange them – seems like something I’d be very hard pressed to give up.
A solid proxy workflow encourages that type of experimentation.
I spent so many years seeing my timelines as assemblies tied to RENDER files that went offline if I moved anything out to place – to have the freedom to move anything anywhere without penalty is one of the greatest joys of modern editing.
That’s the way I see it anyway.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
Why? Editorial decision making has totally different requirements from VFX or design work.
Why not allow tens of thousands of the world’s editors to get to work efficiently on lower Rez proxies – particularly if re-connecting to your higher Rez footage pools for finishing is as easy as throwing a switch?
Needing to access and transport big full Rez datastreams for editorial purposes is becoming more and more an optional workflow – not a necessity.
The actual editing is expressing choices against image and sound flows. The image quality just has to be clean enough to make viable decisions – not so maximized that it requires throwing unnecessary money at every rig you buy.
Times have changed.
My 2 cents.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
The actual light generating instruments don’t have to be very sophisticated. Small cheap LEDs like the offshore Newer LEDs (the 216s for instance) put out a crazy volume of lumens at little cost.
But all of the efficient LEDs need significant diffusion since each lamp is basically a tiny spotlight.
So if you want a nice diffused, pretty, and even light field to use for flat paper, you should look at diffusion fabric, softboxes or bounce rigs to put between the lights and the content being shot.
An alternate approach would be to use color-balanced fluorescents that have a broader light emissive surface.
If your object is a foot square – you’d ideally want light emitting surface twice or more that size – set to send light from directly opposing angles into the shooting field.
One large overhead soft box would work as well, but leaves you with no place on-axis to put the camera that wouldn’t cast a shadow on the page.
That’s s decent place to start.
My 2 cents.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
I think Craig is on the right track.
In X, it helps to think think in Metadata FLOW. Metadata kinda flows from upstream to downstream along your workflow.
In EXTREMELY simplified terms: Import is stage A. Event browser work is stage B. Storyline operations are stage C. Export is stage D.You’re opening up a stage C asset – attempting to apply changes as if it was a stage B asset – thinking those changes will automatically re-flow into stage C. And in some specific cases the metadata flow will refresh. However, if you make a change to the stage B asset that confuses X – the result can easily be that your storyline can’t parse those changes anymore.
I’d look at the changes you made directly after the “open clip” request. Did you add 3rd party filters? Did you apply complex processes like noise reduction or global color grades that may need heavy processing to finish calculating?
I could see those types of things establishing revised metadata flow that doesn’t succeed in delivering the video frames downstream.
My initial thinking.
I hope you have good luck in tracking down where your data flow is getting blocked.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
Genius!
With so many hugely talented women working in editing today – appealing to their nostalgic side could be a massive marketing win.
As a male editor, of course, some might prefer a “Brony” edition.
RED pretty much copped the ALIENS aesthetic with their early cases and designs.
Now I’m looking really forward to this idea expanding.
Maybe having a PC delivered in a Snoopy’s doghouse or “Schroders piano” form factor.
How about a “Baywatch” case?
Our computers can become todays collectable lunchboxes.
Awesome.
Affinity cases FTW!
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
How do you want to define the “professional video world?”
How geographically constrained do you want the survey to be?
What type of editing are you interested in?And what type of editor?
Once upon a time (not that long ago) – a “professional editor” had to work for a relatively big enterprise – because very few individuals could afford the gear and infastructure to effectively edit. Only film studios or TV stations had the financial clout to play.
Today a hundred times the raw editing capability costs a hundredth the price – and most modern laptops can run capability rings around the state-of-the-art Hollywood tools of one or two generation ago.
For my money – many older editors (not all, but many) who came up in the celluloid or TV era are generally most comfortable with Premiere Pro since it’s based around the traditional track-based paradigm that has ruled the industry for 50 years. PPro doesn’t require editors to alter their workflows or thinking too much. It’s an evolutionary approach, largely. A good chunk of the commercial shop based pro editing industry, highly values that.
FCP X was basically created to challenge those traditions in search of greater editing efficiency – generally through new forms of metadata leverage and rethinking basic timeline behaviors. It’s more a revolutionary, than evolutionary approach. It’s adherants tend to be editors willing to tolerate greater change in a search for what many of us see as greater efficiency. (I’m one of those types, myself so I’m definitely biased toward that view!)
X has sold more seats globally than Premiere Pro -. but in many US edit shops – Premiere is far more common as experienced editors chose to stick with editing approaches they had more experience with and migrated to Premiere after Apple dumped and moved on from traditional fixed track-based editing.
Basically, if you want a gig in a traditional shop holding down a “seat” – PPro is still probably the smarter play.
If you are more interested in new media, forms like documentary where the database and search structures of X really shines – or learning a personal expression through video tool you can buy once and own forever, the arguably richer cohesive metadata focus of X is likely to force you into studying that more – via its tagging and internal search system – and turn out to be a stronger play for the future.
Both are fine tools and either will let you explore the actual central skill of editing. Sequencing audio and visual ideas in order to attract and satisfy an audience.
My 2 cents. Others will likely see it differently.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
For many and various personal reasons, I’m largely going to stay away from this thread.
Except, perhaps to note that those big ass blue backlit fans kinda remind me of that very first “prequel” year at NAB for RED, when everything looked like it came from a misplaced R. Geiger “Alien” sketchbook.
I wonder if a design and marketing aesthetic that looks to be aimed at teen gamers is any challenge when a company is trying to gain credibility in the sort of design space that Adobe and Apple were both born in? It’s kinda weird to see.
Then again, if the object is entirely to go fast – “Big Daddy” Don Garletts probably beats even a Lamborghini off the line.
Maybe someone will go full retro and we’ll see a “Rat Fink” flag flying over a booth at next years NAB promoting “ultimate hot rod” computing for video pros…
I can almost smell the nitro fumes!
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
Wow, such hostility.
If anyone wonders why the vast majority of the FCP X pro community has pretty much given up on participation here, this thread would be a pretty good example of why.
It’s a press release.
Not a statue banning handguns or requiring the forum to adopt Shari’a law, for heavens sake. ????
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Andrew Kimery] “Maybe I’m behind the times since I haven’t been using X that long, but is this a big deal because X couldn’t import third party LUTs before? Or X could, but Apple never really advertised that as much as now?”
Not sure it’s a LUT thing, in my view.
The only reason I noticed the reference to Denver’s site specifically was that with the new grading tools in 10.4 – I think there was some sense that it was a direct competitive shot at Finale, Colorista and of course, Resolve.
That CGC gets some love here directly from Apple PR seems contrary to that narrative.
That’s all.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
Sorry, I should have written “references” or “nods” –
Mentions in the official Apple release that will be seen by many, many eyes all around the planet.
I maybe need to hire a copy editor for my forum posts!
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.