Charlie Austin
Forum Replies Created
-
Charlie Austin
October 21, 2013 at 7:36 pm in reply to: Title slate from my latest FCP-X home movie!Needs more particles. 😉
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
Charlie Austin
October 21, 2013 at 7:34 pm in reply to: FCPX is not used by professionals and only suitable for editing home movies![TImothy Auld] “You really need to review your Latin.
“Illegitimi non carborundum
🙂
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Chris Harlan] “I don’t need to see the core all the time, and would probably totally dig switching into canvas mode.”
One of the reasons I like the magnetic timeline, and this is totally subjective, is the fact that I can (mostly) see all my clips on screen while i’m cutting. Despite the fact that I’ve always been a huge proponent of an organized timeline – former mixer and all that – in actual day to day work in “score based” NLE’s, I was never much concerned with where a specific element went, just that it fit in the “window” I could see without needing to scroll the timeline up and down. I hate vertical scrolling when I’m cutting. And, since I generally have dozens of layered audio elements, clumping them all together with as little empty space as possible is my goal. I might have 48 or more tracks when it’s all split out for finishing, but when i’m cutting it’s all crammed into 24 so I can work with it. X does that for me. And I never have to split it out for a mix, I just let X2pro do it for me. It’s kinda awesome… 😉
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Chris Harlan] “We always come back to this somehow, don’t we? I wonder if this is actually one of the principal aesthetic dividing lines in X preference. I know it is for David Lawrence, and I’m pretty sure it is for me, but I wonder how true that holds up across the board?”
You may be on to something… Nice thread here, insults and esoteric theories. 🙂
How cool would it be to have a “sort” menu for the timeline. Want a “score”? Click a button and boom! it’s all split out. Turn it off if you don’t want it and use the canvas style “blob”. (my current preference). The exciting thing is that I think this is probably quite possible…
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Chris Harlan] “For me, its like looking at a score, and I can see things in the composition. And, this is undoubtedly a personal preference, but I like that there is a consistent geography that becomes part of muscle memory. Music is down, dialog is up, SFX are in between. I start heading in that direction before I’m even looking. As I think about it, that sense of location may be the reason that I will always continue to prefer tracks.”
I totally get that, it’s exactly how I look at a timeline in Legacy or Pr etc. I guess all I’m saying is that, using X as my main axe on a daily basis lately, I actually find it easier, in many ways, to “read” a timeline now. Roles, Clip index, clip skimming, clear waveforms and clip names, all come together in a way I wouldn’t have expected when i first got into it. I hope it’ll improve. some sort of vertical sorting order, and maybe user color coding (though I feel that’s less necessary now), will make this thing second to none in that regard. IMO of course. 😉
I guess it’s like reading anything. English (Fixed Tracks) makes perfect sense, and I can at least sound out other languages that use the same alphabet. Arabic, Hebrew or Chinese (FCP X) looks like total gibberish. But once you get familiar with what all the squiggles mean, it’s as easy to read as anything else.
That’s my tortured analogy of the day. You’re welcome. 😉
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
Charlie Austin
October 21, 2013 at 6:49 pm in reply to: FCPX is not used by professionals and only suitable for editing home movies![Herb Sevush] “I take it that your not one of those “cushies”, so you must be an unsuccessful editor with no money, no time, no patience and no ability to handle technical intricacies. And we’re supposed to care about your opinion because …”
That’s helpful. :eye roll: C’mon Herb, you know that X is only useful for home movies, why take the bait? 😉
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
Charlie Austin
October 21, 2013 at 6:47 pm in reply to: FCPX is not used by professionals and only suitable for editing home movies![Andy Branner] “I don’t know how many times it’s become painfully apparent that (especially the “seasoned”) pros are just plain miffed at nothing other than the fact that Apple had the audacity to take away their elitist status (literally saying “Apple betrayed us”! :D) and NOT continue the trodden path of cushiness they came to enjoy. To dare to (considerably help) make away with the days where being “an editor” meant being a part of a very small crowd with a LOT of money and the time and patience to deal with the amazing technical intricacies that video or even film production posed. 80% of that now gone.”
Honestly, while that may be true for a small subset of our small subset, I think the biggest problem “pro’s” had with X was:
No ability to open legacy projects
No ability to talk to online/finishing systems. (no EDL’s, OMF/AAF etc)
Convoluted and confusing collaborative workflow
No mixing/roundtripping capability
No tracks. 😉Honestly, when X was released I was horrified. But after a few versions I gave it another shot and now I don’t like cutting in anything else. I can, but I prefer not to. Some people don’t like it… no biggie. It’ll either catch on in our rarified world or not. I hope it does, ‘cuz I like it. 😉
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Chris Harlan] “The problem is consistency–the ability to instantly find, among the SFX, the three tracks of foley, as opposed to the other five tracks of SFX, as opposed to the dialog tracks, as opposed to the temp music score, etc. “
While I agree that the X timeline needs stronger organizational options, I actually find that – if you set your roles properly on import – doing what you say above is actually easier than with track layout. Just select the Role/Subrole in the index and it’s instantly visible in the timeline. I actually find it easier to pick out little clips than using tracks.
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
Charlie Austin
October 21, 2013 at 6:18 pm in reply to: FCPX is not used by professionals and only suitable for editing home movies![Chris Harlan] ” the transition to Premiere is a pretty soft learning curve, but the transition to Media Composer, depending on how you used FCP, is every bit a steep as going to X. “
Indeed, and there are quite a few folks who learned to cut on FCP that are in a bit of a pickle because of this.
[Chris Harlan] “but that’s because I like the interface better, not because I think you’re wrong in wanting to use X.”
Is there a +1 button around here? 😉 I feel the same abut the X interface, but I don’t feel the need to tell folks who don’t that their NLE choice is somehow substandard. (not that you’ve ever done that Chris, but I’m pretty sure some people have. lol)
It is unfortunately easy to get defensive when people, often in a backhanded way, impugn your professional credibility based on software preferences though… 😉 “Let’s see your reel” and “Get an IMDB credit and then we’ll talk” comments are kind of insulting. On the flip side, so are the “learn it!” comments.
Can’t we all just get along? After all, the biggest problem we all face, regardless of NLE, is our damn clients! 😀
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
Charlie Austin
October 20, 2013 at 8:47 pm in reply to: FCPX is not used by professionals and only suitable for editing home movies![Chris Harlan] ” But, I don’t want to further interrupt the glee you are all having from burning him at the stake, so please continue. Sorry for the interruption.”
🙂 People do tend to get worked up when someone attacks the tools of their trade huh? I fall into it every now and again.;-)
Other than the stuff I said in the other thread, it really doesn’t matter to me. He’s entitled to his opinion, even if it’s wrong. lol The timing sure is interesting though. Hold on while I adjust my tinfoil hat….
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~