Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
[Alex Hawkins] “Yeah Chris I agree with that but I guess I just don’t end up “getting” it.
“Hey, I hear ya. I have a hard time relating to the entire X metaphor. A year and a half ago, if I were to make up a list of several hundred things that were problematic about NLEs, “clip collision” would never have occurred to me. I didn’t even know there was a term for when ‘some of this’ covered up ‘some of that’ when pasting or overwriting. All this time later, I still don’t get the big deal. I like lassoing better.
But, I’m convinced that there are people who really like it; that it fits their style and their thought processes and their workflow. It doesn’t fit mine, and I’m very glad I’m not alone in that. I’m really grateful that both MC 6 and Pr 6 are continuing in direction I can easily relate to, and that I don’t HAVE to go the X route. Frankly, seeing the new Pr has been quite a relief.
-
[Alex Hawkins] “After reading Jeremy’s post above yours I just keep asking myself, why? Why do they bother? His whole post just demonstrates to me that the fundamental design is just plain wrong.
“I don’t know. I think Jeremy does a pretty good job of explaining what he likes and dislikes about X. And, I think he bothers because there are parts of the program that he really likes. FWIW, I generally find his arguments compelling and well reasoned, even when I don’t share his POV.
-
[Oliver Peters] “I want to be clear that in no way do I consider this a “nightmare”. It’s pretty much what every editor deals with when variables are introduced. I don’t expect aclient to understand the issues they introduce when they make a request. Changes result when they see the product they asked for. They have the right to ask for adjustments when it wasn’t what they thought it would be in their mind’s eye. It’s our job to be the experts and accomplish the goal. It’s the software’s job to get out of the way.”
Agreed. You’re just describing business as usual as far as I’m concerned. And changes and versions are just part of the normal process.
-
[Oliver Peters] “I’d be willing to bet that any one of us could sit over Randy’s shoulder and “play client” and turn that demo into a mess in 10 minutes or less 😉
“Ya think? 😉
-
[David Lawrence] “some sort of object collision avoidance behavior “
I think, for me, the thing of it is that when I have any kind of collision its usually because I have two things that are fighting for a space that only one of them belongs in. So, one of them has to go anyway. I just really don’t understand the fracas over clip collision at all. It seems to me that it is mostly the same amount of editing whatever you do. The sfx of the hand grenade pin being pulled still has to be cut and placed back where it was taken from to rest under the transition that precedes the clip you just pulled. The mother-in-law’s scream still needs to be trimmed back and faded out so that it is not continuing into the turtle race that comes after where you are inserting in to. The humming nuns from the clip just prior will also need to be trimmed back and faded. Everything still needs to healed a bit, doesn’t it?
-
[Jules bowman] “At what point will there be a unanimous call of ‘yep, trackless was a mistake’.
Personally i think there’s nothing wrong with trying stuff and even less wrong with going ‘ok, a circle is the correct shape for a wheel.’
“Part of it is that for a number of people, its not a mistake. It really does offer a faster way for them to do what they do. That’s certainly not the case for me. I’m very rhythm oriented, I do a lot of complicated sound work, and precision timing is essential. Tracks are clearly he best choice for me. But I also have to acknowledge that there are a large number of people for whom the timeline is not the heartbeat of the piece.
[Jules bowman] ” but ultimately wasn’t it designed on Randy’s ideas of how to cut his home movies?”
That might be a little harsh, but after watching his Antarctica jaunt, I have to say the thought has occurred to me. It also occurred to me that X seems to be very photographer friendly.
[Jules bowman] “Apple are a consumer company now that make toys for the middle classes.”
But they is great toys!
-
I often cut sizzles like this. The only difference is mine tend to max out at about half the length, but with a similar number of shots. I also have a heavy added sfx layer. I can’t even begin to imagine how to judiciously deal with something like this in X. I’d be willing to listen, though.
-
Well, here’s the deal. The specs you are pointing out have a slightly less powerful CPU and a potentially significantly less powerful GPU then the specs I said are working for me. But, you have double the RAM. Given the variety of programs you want to run, I personally, would not worry as much about the RAM and more about upgrading the video card. Adobe wants 1 GB vRAM for Mercury Playback on the gfx cards. The card you mention is currently sold via Apple with only half of that.
Also, I–along with most editors I know–am not a fan of the glossy screen, but if it doesn’t bother you, that’s your biz.
XDCAM, on an external RAID, should be just fine. I don’t use it much, but it has a fairly low bit rate. As to h.264, I seldom use it as source material. When I do, I generally transcode. The system you’ve spec-ed is adequate for many uses. Others, not so much. I, personally, would get the better gfx card, faster processor, and anti-glare. Will it be enough at that point? It would for my uses, but for me it is also a second machine.
-
[Bobby Cullipher] “Sorry… this question is following the same thread. To be used for video editing with FCP 6.6/7/X, as well as Adobe After FX and Premiere Pro 6.”
I get that Bobby. But I think you need to spend more time looking around at other threads. And, even in this thread. The short answer is that the computer you spec-ed out is fine for all of the above, but maybe not the best choice in all instances. You need to be more forthcoming about the demands your work puts on a system, before anyone can tell you if your system will live up to the demands. Below is an example I gave you earlier. Before anyone can answer your questions, you need to give us the same kind of information.
Hey Bobby!
I have the newest 17″ Macbook Pro with the faster processor and 8 gigs. When I’m using it, my media usually resides on either an eSATA 2 platter RAID or a 2 TB Little Big Disk, all connected through thunderbolt. No SSDs. My source materials are mainly ProResHQ 1080, 23.98, 25, 60i. I find editing in FCS and Avid VERY smooth, and in many ways comparable or slightly better than my 2008 8 core. Where the 8 core still clearly wins, are big renders. I’ve played some with Premiere, and it seems okay too, though I’ve not used it enough to say definitively.
-
[Bobby Cullipher] “My biggest concern is the video card… was told I needed an NVIDIA Quadro 2000 or better.
“You need that for what? The Quadro is just not an option on a Macbook Pro.