Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
Oh dear, Bill.
This nice fellow’s post has been sitting here for a day without a single negative boo, and here you are promising that torch bearers will soon be upon him to se fire to his roof. What’s that say?
Anyway, Daniel, I’m glad it is working out for you. I, and I’m sure others, would be happy to hear of your further experiences with X. Please post ’em when you’ve got ’em.
-
[Bill Davis] “The more insidious and disingenuous tactic, IMO is to try to “re-frame” the argument by establishing that the only rules worthy to govern the game are “your” rules. That’s not only presumptuous, it’s insulting.
“and
[Bill Davis] “But seriously, attempting to to exercise control of the rules is ALWAYS the first glaring sign of someone who can’t compete in the game as it’s already being played.
“I certainly don’t see how what Franz has said in anyway constitutes an example of what you are accusing him of here. I think it is a fair observation about the sloppiness of argument on this site, which you can agree with or not, or take to heart or not. Saying that he is “attempting to to exercise control of the rules” could be seen as an “insidious and disingenuous tactic” “to try to “re-frame” the argument by establishing that the only rules worthy to govern the game are “your” rules.” I don’t see it that way though; I think we mostly just get caught up in our own rhetoric, and dig our own rumbling baritones.
I share Franz’s taste for good, clean logic, though I do enjoy a tasty analogy that is properly illustrative of the presented argument. My guess is that Franz is just fine with that as well. The problem arises when an analogy is used–innocently or otherwise–to mask any fallacies present in an argument. It becomes a powerful tool in the hands of con men, talking heads, politicians, and sales folk. You know, sort of a verbal version of the shell game, or many a magic trick that works off of mis-direction.
Bill, I’m pretty certain that you can find it in yourself to understand that Franz was not trying to set up rules, but was instead complaining about the magical misdirection he seems to think takes place here on occasion. By the way, is this your card?
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “Comparisons and analogies are a natural part of everyday argument; philosophers have used them as far back as Plato. Educators love them because they help students understand complicated concepts. But propagandists and ideologues also love them, because it is easy to hide a flawed argument inside of an analogy. … So how do we distinguish good analogies from bad? In this article, we look at the different ways in which analogies are used in arguments. By understanding why people use analogies, we can come up with some informal guidelines for using them properly.
“Sounds good to me. I looked at your link, and what is described there is elementary Logic. I, too, despair when folks analogize to paste over fallacious reasoning.
-
[Bill Davis] “And as someone who’s edited as much in Marriott rooms as in my fixed studio these past few months, I’m thinking that this is a reflection of new realities that I’ve got to get a handle on”
Bill, you keep going back to this like it is somehow new. I’ve been doing the same thing for five or six years. This weekend I had to work, but I also need a breather, so I got a room up in San Simeon, brought my laptop with a Glyph drive, a tablet, and a good pair of Beyerdynamics, and worked on both Avid and 7 with my feet up, while gazing occasionally out at the Pacific. I’ve been doing stuff like that for years. And, I’m sure happy about it. I just don’t see it as particularly new.
-
[David Lawrence] “I still wonder about this as well. The fact that it’s still in there is strange. I figure it’s one of two things:
a) a forgotten relic from an abandoned development path. “
Its bizarre, but this is actually what I think of, when I think of that icon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWPUJG4ojw4
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
Good and fair article. I look forward to reading more.
-
[Bill Davis] “I’m simply saying that after this long, those remaining fixated on what Legacy “used to be” are in danger of getting stuck in the past. “
Bill, just my opinion here, but I’d really like it if you’d stop telling people how “fixated” they are. You are constantly turning people’s grumblings about X into some sort of psychological issue that has deep, broad evolutionary implications. Most of us are just trying to work. Most of the people on this board are experimenters, and always have been. A good 87.5% of us are completely “New gizmo? Bring it on!” You’re dealing with people who regularly Beta-test, write plug-ins, and snap up the newest interfaces and i/o devices to play with and see “what if?” Yet, you keep talking to us like we’re a bunch of trogs who are about to end up in History’s scrap heap because our stodgy habits keep us from receiving Jesus.
Bill, I’m glad you like X and find some joy in it. I enjoyed reading your piece the other day, and in general I enjoy reading about your positive experiences with X. I still enjoy 7, which I do not like to call Legacy, because I still see another year of life in it in my immediate work environment. At the end of that time, I’m guessing I will be 70% Avid, 20% 7, and a little room for Premiere (and maybe more, depending on where CS 6 goes) I doubt there will be any X, but if there is I’ll make room for it. It’d be cool if there were.
I should also add that I think you make very good points about who X is right for. And, you’ve convinced me–on a number of occasions–to take a closer, second look. I think you have terrific things to say, even when I disagree with them. I’m just not so crazy about the “fixated” part.
-
[Shane Ross] “David, the movie would still have won if it was cut on an Avid. However, if it was cut by other editors, it might not have won
“Shane, we all know that. The point is more along the lines of one of those commercials where a pickup truck is pulling an outrageously massive load–like, say, an airplane–just to demonstrate that it can do it, though you–yourself–may never be required to actually do so.
And, while FCP X may someday be able to pull an airplane, it currently is not. Nor is it the choice of people who do pull airplanes.
-
[Frank Gothmann] “Totally agree. I never understood the argument that it’s a 1.0 release and it took years for classic FCP to mature. If a new car model comes out nobody compares it with the first model from 15 years ago but with the one the came before it.”
Really! Right? It took the Model T how many years to get turn indicators? It took cars how many years to get airbags? The notion that you can introduce a new car without either of these items and expect them to grow in later is ludicrous. This whole 1.0 argument seems to stem from nervous Sales talk at the time of NAB to folks like Larry Jordan who were nervous about what they were seeing. Its never been anything more than an excuse.
-
Lance, I’m in complete agreement with what you are saying here. The changes you outline would get me right off the fence. The one thing off the top of my head that I would add to your list are sync monitors in both the timeline and as an overlay.