Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
Steve, I totally believe it is faster for you. I’m not doubting you at all. But when I try to work the equation of how it can be faster for me, I don’t see it. It is not a religious thing. Or a pride thing. Or even a habit thing. Really.
Maybe someday. I mean, I can’t even use it now, but maybe someday. I’m open. But not enough to jump off a cliff with it. But, I do believe you.
-
Shane, I definitely second what you are saying here.
-
Exactly, Walter. Well said!
Also, I don’t understand why PH doesn’t think I don’t have equally “instant” access to photos and sfx through the OS X file system. I often build sfx bins dragging and dropping from outside FCP. I can easily preview gunshots in finder from gun folders and dropped them into a bin.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “[Chris Harlan] “Not PPro. But I’ve been a paid editor on almost all other NLEs. Some still exist. Some do not.”
But have you taken a look around recently or has it been all FCP7 all the time? Just wondering, not judging. I work with FCP7 most of the time, too. FCPX is still in testing for us at this point, but I do try and kick the tires every day if I can. I just added PPro to the list as well, alas there’s only so much time in the day!
“No. Media Composer every now-and-then. And now, I’m beefing up my skills there so that I can transition to that more exclusively over the next couple of years. FWIW, I’d be interested in PPro if agencies ever take it to heart. Also, if the brightest projections for FCP X do come about, I could see moving back that way. I’d probably be interested in Smoke, if it weren’t unjustifiable overkill for what I do. But, if the right project comes…
[Jeremy Garchow] “Yes, but it’s much much better than FCP7. FCP7 without effects/text is fine, once you start adding even the little effects, things get much slower. FCPX offers much more real time support, and I might get some flak for this, but sometimes it feels like sketching. Also, green screen work is pretty damn sweet in FCPX, even if it’s just for an offline. Doing this in FCP7 is a chore. Straight editing in FCP7 with ProRes files is fine, though.
“Definitely, effects can slow things on the Macbook Pro. The MacPro, however, seems to be pretty agile at sweating the small stuff. I hear green screen is great. I always do mine in Motion, so–yeah–that would be slower.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Chris Harlan] “The very fact that it lacks tracks, bins to organize, no way to have multiple sequences open make it much, much slower for many people. ”
Well, it certainly works differently. It does take some getting used to, no question. There are ways to do everything you mentioned here, but there are no bins or tabbed sequences, yet there are functions to mimic those very things. I am not saying it’s perfect or works the same, but you can’t expect FCPX to work like FCP7 because it doesn’t. I can understand if people don’t want to get used to that fact. It’s a big point of contention, and some people like the new UI, some don’t.
In my younger days, people used to say that M100 works “the way I think” when compared to FCP the younger (version 2 and 3). Well, in certain ways, FCPX does this for me, especially in the organizational phase. Of course, it won’t work for everyone that way, and Philip Hodgetts says that X is not for everyone either.
“Pretty much agreed. Frankly, Jeremy, I generally find your tempered assessment of FCP X’s virtues far more insightful and useful than PH’s. No disrespect to PH; I just think he’s gotten himself caught up in a whirlwind as an evangelist/apologist, and it is perhaps difficult for him to get perspective.
-
[Oliver Peters] “Chris Harlan] “There aren’t that many Corps. that get away with “you’re holding it wrong,” and have the faithful respond with, “oh, pardon me.””
True, but there’s nothing inherently wrong with a company defending its product designs or points-of-view. And “antenna-gate” really isn’t a great example (though it provides great fodder for levity), because Apple got plenty of push-back. They offered a remedy and subsequently altered the design.”
All true. I just can’t resist now and then. Frankly, I didn’t think anything of it until I read the bio (I still had my 3GS) So it is still a bit fresh for me.
-
[Oliver Peters] “Sure, you’ve got as point. I think it’s silly in both directions, whether coming from customers (pro and con) or whether it’s coming from internal marketing spin (aka “the reality distortion field”).
“There aren’t that many Corps. that get away with “you’re holding it wrong,” and have the faithful respond with, “oh, pardon me.”
-
Jeremy, I’m certainly not trying to debate that FCP X is not faster or better for some things. I have no doubt that it is. Sorry if you took it that way. My concern is mostly that PH is making statements about Industry work, and that the example he gives–access to SFX libraries, for instance– can all been done as quickly and easily in FCP 7. But, hey–I’ll answer your questions:
[Jeremy Garchow] “How much have you played with FCPX at this point? How about PPro or any other NLE?
“FCP X? Only a little at this point, and just out of curiosity. I just can’t justify the time until someone makes a good argument about how it will fit successfully into my work flow. I’m also not convinced of its future, yet. When I am, I will either pretty much split from this forum, or will spend a whole lot more time on the techniques forum.
[Jeremy Garchow] ” How about PPro or any other NLE?”
Not PPro. But I’ve been a paid editor on almost all other NLEs. Some still exist. Some do not.
[Jeremy Garchow] “let’s be realistic, fcp7 is not a very fast NLE, “
I know that others seem to feel that way, but I don’t understand it, at least from my perspective. I find it relatively responsive on my laptop, and very responsive on my 8 Core. Just for reference, the CODECs and flavors I use most often are ProRes HQ @1080 (in all fps), uncompressed 10 bit in SD, and sometimes DVCpro HD. I do occasional Sizzle reels that mix everything from AVI files to ProRes HQ.
One thing I should say is that I do use long developed editorial practices and procedures–for instance, turning bugs or certain filters off while editing, or leaving items I’m not working on un-rendered–but from what I’m reading in the the Techniques forum, background rendering and gfx creep seem to be adding their own bug-a-boos to FCP X.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Sure, if you have a few supported .movs to import, that’s one thing.
But tens of hours of tapeless formats that must be transcoded is another. “
I agree completely. And this is definitely one of the areas–that if I were working in–I would be much more interested in either FCP X and/or Premiere right now. My work generally does come to me taplessly–I don’t think I’ve had to capture for over two years now–but they are in the relatively few supported formats I mentioned above.
[Jeremy Garchow] “There are certain areas in which FCPX falls flat on its face (which all stem mostly around interchnage), but as a self contained editor where you don’t need much interaction with the outside world, it is much much faster than legacy feature for feature. “
Jeremy, that may be true for you–and many others–but it certainly isn’t true for everybody. If I’m working on a trailer with a heavy deadline, I can cut from locked picture off of an Avid dump on DVCproHD, and than easily replace it with final picture using almost every other existing NLE, except FCP X.
And you say it is “much, much faster… feature for feature”–what on earth does that mean? You might find it so, but a lot of people don’t. The very fact that it lacks tracks, bins to organize, no way to have multiple sequences open make it much, much slower for many people.
Here’s the thing, man. I’m happy if it is faster for you. If it ever turns out to be faster for me, I’ll be happy too.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Just curious Chris, but do you ever start from zero on any projects? Meaning, you are given a hard drive of 500GBs of raw footage and audio that you need to prep and organize?”
Yes, I do. All the time. If you mean from absolute scratch, then:
Not as often as I like, because I seem to have become niched and highly specialized, which has its rewards but also its distinct drawbacks. I’ve got a documentary I’m working on right now–right now being a relative term, in that it is a long process–about NC, Andrew, and Jaimie Wyeth. I also start occasional film promos from dailies or dumps of dailies.
Of course scratch can mean something else, as well:
My current promo project takes up a little under 3 TB in source, not including access to my SFX library (made up of four other full libraries). I expect this to get a bit larger, though not by much–maybe another TB at most. There are only about 400-500 source files in the project–not including SFX–so the number is small, but 40-50 of those files are 42+ Min long, and need to be prepped by removing unnecessary audio channels and then converted into multiple selects timelines that act as bins. So, what I lose in sheer number, I make up for in time and attention.
So, the answer is yes in both respects.
Again, Jeremy, I do not doubt that FCP X has its advantages. I don’t doubt that there are many people for whom it is the best choice. I only take exception because PH seemed to be arguing that FCP X was a better solution for the world I work in, and–to me–that is clearly not the case.
-
I definitely have to cut fast. No question. I work in an extremely deadline driven business. What I don’t get from reading Hodgetts’ article is how FCP X will make my work go faster. The only thing I really get from reading his article is that he might not fully understand how to optimize FCP 7 for speed.
-
Nick, I’ve been to the far edges of LA. One side is water. The other is sand. To say that there is anything else beyond is the stuff of myth. There are the old stories of whole peoples beyond–out there–but the wisest of us know that such tales are the province of the feeble-minded and poorly educated.
-
[Carsten Orlt] “It will not make anybody a better editor, but it will make a technical problem way easier to handle.”
I think the problem is that it might make “technical problem way easier to handle” to a point. Once you pass that point, however, you don’t have the tools available to easily deal with more complicated issues, and then those issues become far more difficult to handle.