Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
[Oliver Peters] “That has more to do with how Avid was pricing and marketing Adrenaline hardware than with the software itself. More an issue of FCP+Kona versus MC+Adrenaline, I think.
OTOH, if you talk to broadcast news editors or film editors, they probably could care less. Plus, lots of folks were still on 2.8 even after Avid was long past that in version numbers.
“That’s undoubtedly true, but in the promo world, at least, there was visible frustration about MC’s inflexibility. In that sphere, FCP 5.1, 6, & 7 ran circles around MC. Something as simple as easy panning and scanning of HD in an SD delivery, back when most of the TV world was still 4:3, made FCP a no-brainer over the center-cut only world of media composer.
-
[Walter Soyka] “FCPX is unique, and FCPX has enormous potential — but that is not the same as saying that FCPX is unique in that it has enormous potential.
“Now that line just dances!
-
[Oliver Peters] “For the most part Avid users have typically been happy with the product and never saw any reason to change. “
I don’t know. There was a period of time around the later days of MC 2.8 when the frustration with the lack of development seemed fairly palpable. Not everyone felt that way, of course, but I’d say there was a fair amount of discontent.
-
[Bret Williams] “I don’t see a retina TV at all. But I do see a decently priced TV that will work with the digital hub seamlessly, as well as with the phones, internet, etc. much better than any other TV out there.
I have a nice 42” Vizio with all the internet apps built in. But when I got an AppleTV and hooked it up, I never again touched the clumsy interface of the Vizio. It was night and day. Throw in that EVERY aspect of the TV will be immensely more thought out, including a remote, and you’ve got a winner I think.
“I agree. No Retina TV. Not even remotely likely. Or even currently plausible at 55″. And, what would anyone do with that? A screen that large is meant to be seen from a distance, so why would a Retina screen matter?
But yeah, the newest iteration of the AppleTV works really well. Though I personally like the idea of keeping the device separate from my TV, I can see a more advanced version of it being implemented in a TV. If they do, though, I hope they keep selling the box as well, as that would be my choice.
I DO wonder though; other than having less clutter–which admittedly is a big deal for some folk–what the value would be over the current version.
-
[David Cherniack] “In the upper part of each strip you can add about 20, I think. The plugins area may still have a drop down switch on the left side of the mixer. “
Found them! That’s fantastic. Thank you! It would have taken me a long while to bump into that toggle button. I just kept clicking in the area you’d click in my various DAWS, and saying to myself, “dang, there should be sends and plug-ins here. Oh, well.” Again, thanks!
[David Cherniack] ” Third party 64 bit VSTs that work with Pr are hard to find but those that work, work well”
I would guess. Of the few VST I have, none are showing up.
Two quick questions: A) do you know if I can keyframe a plug-in that I drop in on the mixer? B) Is there any way I’m missing to change the channel output of a track to multichannel from stereo once the track is created?
Thanks again!
-
[David Lawrence] “The other new tool in CS6 I’m super excited about is Audition. This is new for us Mac people. Audition looks like all kinds of awesome. Just the spectral tools alone are making me drool. I’ve barely cracked the surface and can’t wait to really dig in. Suddenly losing Soundtrack Pro doesn’t feel so bad…”
I just took the spot I finished this afternoon and spent a couple of hours messing with it in Audition. I have to say, I like it. Its a stripped-down DAW that fits very nicely with video. The built in EQ strip on each track and all of the buses is fun and easy to use. Its close enough to Pr’s own internal mixer that it just feels like a more robust version of the same. I wouldn’t be surprised if Pr 7 has Audition fully integrated as its mixer. After playing for a while, I’m pretty certain this is how I will mix Pr spots. I wish Protools and MC were this tight.
-
[Chris Conlee] “You know why? Because it’s been doing high end film and video work for 20+ years and doesn’t need a “reimagining,” despite Apples’ feelings to the contrary. Honestly, I’ve used probably a dozen NLEs over the years, including MovieShop and Toaster Flyer on the Amiga, and D/Vision Pro on a 486. Speed Razor, Premiere Pro, Incite, Avid, Final Cut Pro, Lightworks, you name it. There isn’t an NLE out there that’s faster, in my opinion. Once you know what you’re doing, it as well designed as any editor I’ve used. Everything is right at your fingertips.
It may not be new and flashy looking, but after you understand it, you’ll never say it’s slow again.”
I agree. Its a great editor. I’m having a lot of fun getting back into it. About the only things I see that I would like improved–and there have been so many improvements since I was last aboard–are a slight reworking of the audio (I’d like more realtime tracks, and a master track for the mixer that could take assignable plugins) and I would like AMA to be a little faster. I’m very happy with it and glad I picked up a couple of seats while the picking was good.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “David, Chris,
Thanks – I have to say I am still in the sceptics’ camp on this one though to hear such positive things is encouraging. I’m really dragging my feet on trying out PPro (I’ve only spent a few hours in it) (not least because of the Matrox driver / FCP7 / PPro issue).
“I just finished something with 14 tracks of audio, with multiple audio configuration exports. So, here’s my take a little more specifically. I really like that I can edit audio at both the clip level and the track level. Its nice to be able to adjust dialog and and sfx as I go, and then come along and rubber-band everything as I mix. I very much like the new mixer, and love having sends to sub-mixes. It is also nice to have a master track that can be key-framed. I’m still getting used to the approach that Pr6 takes to multichannel, and it seems a bit convoluted compared to the way FCPL worked, but that may be me.
Things I’d like to see: More flexible Sends, Plugin implementation at track level, Plugin implementation on the mixer, and Channel output control from the mixer that also can be altered after the timeline is created.
I still have more to learn, so that’s it for now. As to Audition, I like it, but haven’t messed around enough with it yet. My gut tells me I’ll still probably use Logic or ProTools, but I haven’t really given it a chance.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “David,
… sidetracking (and I think I’ve asked you this before) but I’ll ask anyway:
How was your experience with audio work in PPro?
Franz.
“
Mine has been pretty darn good. It’s the best audio implementation I’ve seen so far. I’m using it right now to clean up Final Delivery elements and its a pleasure.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “[Chris Harlan] “Of course there is also option 3, but I’m not certain that porn actually has titles anymore.”
At first glance, I read “titles” as something totally different. I will let you use your imagination.
Those are real quotes, not air quotes.
“Oh, it definitely still has those.