Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
[Jules bowman] “Yes 🙂
Honestly, I already feel like i’ve added 2 years and 3 months onto my life by simply making that decision. It’s a beautiful thing.
“I think that I need to learn how.
-
You got me! I did the whole “No! What?!” routine in my head before scrolling down. The survey was just buggy enough as I was taking it that I thought it might be a possibility.
-
[Jamie Franklin] “Pure white noise Bill…not one word relates to me. At all. And I find your post complete rot. In fact, I don’t think you have actually read a thing I wrote and have gone totally off the rails. But it isn’t the first time
“He’s a trip. He was hurling out invective at me last night, too. The thing that always blows me away about Bill’s posts is how willing he is to make things up and put them in your mouth, and then to chastise you for saying them.
-
[Bill Davis] “No, because you have a single focus and point of view in these discussions. You purport to represent the “hollywood industrial view” and you do so consistently and clearly by your own writing.
“That’s a lie, Bill. The only thing I’ve ever purported to represent is my own personal work experience. I’ve never claimed to represent anybody’s pov other than the people I work with or talk to. You do the exact same thing, in fact far more so than I do. Aren’t you always cutting something in some client’s lobby.
[Bill Davis] “You’re the one who invoked AFI seminars and unionization as part of your foundational construct of what constitutes “professional” editing.”
Are you crazy? Are you drunk? How did you even get to that? Invoked? Foundational construct? How is mentioning AFI or the fact that two nasty labor disputes were centered on digital/Internet delivery issues of any significance? Is it name-dropping to you? Well, you just spent weeks detailing your experiences at NAB. What is it that makes you able to throw that name around?
[Bill Davis] “You used that as a bit of a cudgel to try to make my initial post seem like it was coming from someone who didn’t “get” the fact that what I’m arguing for is already so widely incorporated in global editing that X’s propagation of it in a low priced tool is dismissible.”
Again, huh? You were going on about “elephant’s in the room,” and “studios” and “broadcast.” I was simply making the point that is was NOT an elephant in the room, and hasn’t been for a long time. As far as YOU accusing me of accusing someone of not getting it, that’s got to be the biggest joke of the week. I know of no one else, Bill, who throws around that “you’re just too out of it to get it” meme as often as you.
[Bill Davis] “I think you’re dead wrong in that assessment and it’s evidence that you’re out of touch with other editing requirements that don’t dovetail with your parochial experience in Hollywood.
“I’m certainly less familiar with the requirements and/or demands of things that aren’t part of my work routine. Isn’t everybody? Aren’t you?
[Bill Davis] “So it’s completely fair for me to point out that your thinking might be every bit as skewed as the thinking of someone like me who isn’t saddled with the “industry town” mindset that you espouse.
“How completely fair of you to judge yourself as being completely fair.
[Bill Davis] “I’m suggesting readers here consider how new tools like FCP-X might impact an editor who works in the larger arena. You’re often trashing it as “not a big deal” largely because you elevate workflows in which it doesn’t excel (primarily precisely those large company workflows that hollywood values) and thereby skewing the discussion away form what may well be more universal concerns for working editors in a larger and more ecumenical pool.
“No. I’m often a one-man band, and I like tools that let me easily deliver the things that I’m required to deliver. BTW, for someone who drones on and on about their super-big time corporate clients, tv spots, and national campaigns, how exactly do YOU become Mr. Ecumenical?
[Bill Davis] ” believe that’s a completely fair criticism of your posts above.
“Okay. And I believe that your head is in a place that, if you were wearing a headlamp, you’d have a clear view of your lower intestines.
[Bill Davis] “The readership here will determine for themselves whether my points are valid and whether their experiences better match mine or yours.
“Okay. As to commenting on the rest? What’s the point? I think you’re fighting your own demons here, Bill, and you just stuck my face on ’em.
-
[Bill Davis] “Geez, dude. Your slip may not be, but you’re arrogance is showing.”
What? Because I went to film school? Because I edit for a living? Because I engage in continued education?
[Bill Davis] “In your world the only editor worth listening to is one who can drop by an AFI “new media convergence seminar” at the drop of a hat. Or for whom unionization is a functional issue. “
THAT conclusion is completely in your head, not from anything I said. I can’t even figure out how you’ve arrived at it. And, yeah, film and television production is one of our local industries? Is that somehow a problem for you?
[Bill Davis] “News flash. Over the globe, that’s a fraction of a fraction of the people who edit for money. Some for a LOT of money.”
Yeah, but News Flash, pal. YOU were the one who was talking about the broadcast industry. You brought it up. So don’t get all “news flash” when all I’m doing is responding to you. Maybe YOU should stop fixating on it so much.
[Bill Davis] “And for sure, let’s not tell the poor folks outside LA, NY, Chicago, and London that they’re just dismissible rubes – might make them feel like their editing isn’t REAL editing, okay?
“Again–totally out of context, and completely unfair, like many of your posts. That’s horrible cr@p to put in my mouth, and doesn’t reflect anything that I’ve said. Now or ever on this site.
[Bill Davis] “Well Chris, if you’re correct and what’s happening in editing is “just ain’t that special” – then this whole forum is a waste of time. Isn’t it.
“Again, no relation to what I was talking about or what I said. This forum has been very useful to me and a lot of other people. I was simply addressing the fact the you seem rather convinced that FCP X has some sort of secret sauce for the next generation of editors, and that I don’t see it. It’s FCP X that “ain’t that special,” not what’s happening in editing.
[Bill Davis] “We’ve spent a year talking about what X and it’s competitors strategies might be for the future -and what that might mean to ALL editors. Not just those who have Broadcast Engineering sitting on the coffee table in the waiting room of their stand-alone production building.
“I don’t even know what this means, or what it has to do with me. Again, YOU broached the subject.
[Bill Davis] “You actually amaze me with your single-minded focus that all “worthwhile” editing must be what’s done by people just like you.
“Again, your projection from your head. You don’t have to look any further than this actual thread to find evidence that your assessment of me isn’t true. Just read my earlier response to Carsten, and you’ll see how completely out of line you are.
[Bill Davis] “And screw the poor saps working everywhere else. Anything that meets their needs, but not yours is crap. I get it now.”
Wow. I think what’s particularly funny about your method, is that you have no compunction what-so-ever about making statements up and attributing them to me. That way I don’t actually have to say something you loathe, you can just put the words in my mouth and growl away at me.
[Bill Davis] “I’ll get right to work on a new T-shirt for you. “If you don’t cut in LA, you don’t really count.’
I’m sure you’ll wear it with tremendous pride.
“Oh, dude; go to bed.
-
[Bill Davis] “That’s the elephant in the room. “
Bill, its not an elephant in the room. It IS the room. And figuring out how to best use that room has been occupying studio and network minds for at least a decade and a half. I don’t know why you think big media people aren’t paying attention to this. I was going to AFI new media convergence seminars back in the last century. You may or may not have noticed but our two most recent labor disputes were over issues related to this very subject. You constantly talk as if we in film and television are somehow oblivious to the Internet. That might have had some cachet in 1993, but trust me, we’ve moved on.
And you keep talking about how X is somehow key to this whole thing. I don’t get that. I mean other than classifying it as wishful thinking on your part. It just ain’t that special.
-
LOL. Now, THAT was worth the price of admission!
-
If you are going to stick around, you also need to figure out how not to double post.
-
Kid–because I assume you are one–slamming other people’s work is just not the way to go. I also want to point out that its pretty clear from your comments that you have a rather naive and incomplete view of heavy production demands. I sympathize with you for wanting to stand up for Carsten, but why exactly you’d want to use to a greater degree the same tactics you are complaining about, and aim them at a party who has had little part in this conversation is beyond me.
I see that you just joined to make this one brash comment. Are you that impassioned? Or are you hiding behind a faux account? Either way, your comments are childish.
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “I see – perhaps everyone should put down the whiskey glasses and the strange smelling cigarettes. Or, well, maybe not really.
Carry on.”Whiskey glasses? I think its probably an example of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy.