Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
[Bill Davis] “you owe it to yourself to investigate Michael Quinion’s
World Wide Words site “I have not heard of it, but thanks for the tip. I’ll check it out.
-
Bill, in the world I work, if you want to mix, you still need a room with adequate monitors to do so. If you want to seriously color grade, you still need a properly lit room and a properly calibrated monitor to do so on. If you are recording ADR and foley and music, you still need a stage that is quiet enough to record on. If you are working on a show with a half a dozen other editors, you still need adjacent bays and office space and a kitchenette.
I have a very portable rig built around a Macbook Pro that has decent portable monitor speakers, 2nd computer monitor, broadcast monitor, and RAIDed storage. I can set it up in 20 minutes. Or I can just use the laptop. Or I can work on my 8 Core, in a nice bay environment. Or I can work in one of the many seats around LA, when needed. As I said, Its been this way for me for a number of years. What does any of this have to do with FCP X?
-
[Richard Johnson] “Maybe I am the cat calling the kettle black but I don’t think so.”
I don’t think I’ve ever heard that variation before. I’m used to pot/kettle. Was that a slip, or is it colloquial to where you are from? Serious question, btw; I’m always interested in language.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “As a side note, Chris. I thought you weren’t going to give FCPX a shot. Just out of my own curiosity, what happened for you to change your mind?
“I not quite sure how to respond to that. I haven’t changed my mind at all. I’ve stated many, many times that with some alterations, I might find a use for FCP X. I’ve even started threads about it. My primary objection has always been that there was no physical way to create stems, and no xml/edl support. These are things that made it ineligible to do my job. While the XML version is exotic, some converter tool for it might soon make it useful for me.
Now, I’m not interested in using it as my primary NLE. There are many things I don’t like about it. Those may change over time, they may not, and frankly, at this point, I don’t care if they do or don’t. FCS is dead, though I still use it regularly (and will for at least a year), and, I’m in the process of sliding over to MC. I like lots of windows, on big monitors, and a lot more freeform interaction than FCP X wants to give, and, of course, i/o. I wish that MC were as customizable as FCS, but it has its charms. I also like tracks. They make sense to me, and I see no need for me to not have them. Tracks, alone, are enough reason for me to switch NLEs.
So, FCP X for me? It is now as cheap as a plug-in, and when I think about it on its own instead of a replacement for FCP 7 I can see ways that I might use it. The coming generation of MB Airs, for instance, is supposed to have more compatible gfx cards. I can see FCP X being very useful on one of those; I can easily see making a select reel on the go, for instance. Since I’m in promos, select reels are a huge part of what I do. Quickly breaking a film or TV show down to a palette of its most useable minutes is generally the first step when working on finished shows. With edl support, I can move to my main NLE
in minutes.This isn’t something new for me. I’ve said this a number of times. I haven’t completely decided yet, hence the trial. (I did work with it for a while when it first came out, but got my money back. Of course, then, I was comparing it to FCS.) Ironically, I probably would not be giving X as much of a chance, if I hadn’t been such a devoted user of FCS.
-
[Richard Johnson] “Thanks for the response Marvin. “
I’m not Marvin, but I suppose you can call me that if you want to.
[Richard Johnson] “I didn’t necessarily mean that protools would adopt FCPXML but simply give it support. I’m not exactly sure how these things work and why Apple didn’t simply release an XML that was already a standard and compatible with other software. Really though, I don’t know much at all about XML protocols so it may not have been an option. “
I’m guessing they didn’t release old xml because it is most likely completely incompatible with FCP X. If they had been able to, they would probably also have been able to import FCS project files. Remember, though there is OMF.
Logic is pretty transparent as a DAW. Unless Logic X gets super weird, I’m pretty certain it will keep tracks. I think a trackless DAW would be beyond freaky. Of course, I thought the same thing about an NLE.
-
[Craig Seeman] “Maybe I’m seeing it different but I can go to the timeline index and select what I want to find and it’ll highlight and take me to the location. I can select the Role or the specific clip.
“Craig, that’s interesting. I think, when I have a second, I’ll focus a little more on the index working in conjunction with Roles.
I’ve gone ahead and downloaded the new version, and a little later next week, when I have a moment, I’ll play. I know that I prefer tracks–my thinking is very much like David and Simon’s–but that doesn’t mean I can’t use Roles.
-
Richard, I hear what you are saying.
If you’ll forgive a change of subject–have you given Roles a try? I’d like to hear your feelings about it when you do. I believe you do quite a bit of DAWing, and I’d like to know how the workaround feels for you.
-
[Richard Johnson] “What are the chances ProTools will jump on the FCPXML bandwagon or will there be a conflict of interest with Media Composer?”
Richard, my guess is that Protools won’t jump unless it becomes a standard flavor of XML, but you already have existing OMF support should you wish to pay for it. I DO wonder if Logic X will allow easy i/o. For me, that would be something of real interest.
And, of course, with Roles you do have stems. Not ideal, I know, but something.
-
[Bill Davis] “I totally understand your defense of Towers, RAM and big assed hard drives. But it’s going to mean NOTHING when the client EXPECTS you to show up on set and load, edit and display how shot 007b2 cuts against 009c3. If you can’t deliver on that that request because you’re stuck on the system “back in the office” heaven help you. And the moment the shooter in the field discovers that he or she can actually FINISH a cut at the client’s deskside, then they’re going to start thinking “Why do I need those guys back in the office working so hard to amortize that big iron. The work is getting done right here. I’m right here doing it. So why shouldn’t I just do it myself and forgo the hassle of the costly edit suite.”
Editing skills are moving from being centered around SHOPS to being centered around individual BRAINS. If you can’t see that, good luck with all the expensive hardware. (Suggest you look into depreciating it according to IRS Section 179 because at this rate, it’s gonna be worth ZIP faster than you can believe.
That changes everything. Period.
“There is nothing new about this. Everything you are talking about here has been happening for years. YEARS. Half a decade. I was doing the most of the stuff you are describing in 2004/5 on G4 17 with FCP, and all of the stuff by 2007. For Broadcast. Constantly. That doesn’t mean that I don’t still use towers or enjoy 4 monitors plus broadcast out. You are talking about history as if it were the future.
-
[Bill Davis] “Yes Herb.”
I’m guessing, Bill, that you are addressing me and not Herb.
[Bill Davis] “You’ve been consistent to the point of dogmatic in your view about FCP-X.
It’s also clear that you are as hardened in your thinking as I am in the opposing view that this continues to be software that is new, interesting, and increasingly useful.
“This is demonstrably untrue. While I have expressed great dissatisfaction with the loss of FCS, I have shown a fair interest in FCP X, acknowledged its potential usefulness on many occasions, and have stated numerous times that–while it would not be my main editing tool–I could find a place for it in my arsenal with a few minor adjustments, such as EDL export.
[Bill Davis] “I am curious as to your continued coming back to a place about a topic you appear to have decided is fatally flawed and unworthy of your time. That confuses me. When I assess something as unworthy of my time, I leave it behind and go concentrate on things that I DO find worthy of my attention. “
Again, if you’d bothered to pay any attention to my posts, you would see that over the last few months, I have often shown interest in FCP X’s potential. I’ve started threads about it–Roles, for instance–because I am generally curious about what advantages FCP X might offer me. When I started that serious and positive thread about Roles, all you did was belittle me for starting it. Instead of having a positive conversation, all youu did was make a series of roll/role jokes.
[Bill Davis] “In fact, I think you might be the the guy who used the term “Pollyanna” a while back to describe my view.
I’m totally OK with that, btw.
“Nope. Not me. Maybe you mean Herb, who I am also not.
[Bill Davis] “You’re against FCP-X and I’m for it. I get it. As does everybody else here.
We should move along.
“Again, wrong. There are things I don’t like about FCP X, though it may soon become useful enough for me to own. You feel free to move along. I plan to continue to examine and debate the usefulness of FCP X for some time to come.
By the way, do you ever actually talk about the specifics of the program? I’m not sure I’ve ever seen that.